Why Punishment for Bullying is Ineffective and Sometimes Counterproductive
Traditional approaches to addressing bullying problems often rely on punitive consequences to compel the aggressor to change behavior. The use of punitive consequences is often based on the erroneous notion of “intent to harm” and that aggressive behavior may appear to be mean and cruel to an observer. But because punishment as a solution to bullying is based on a flawed understanding of the problem, punishment as a solution is likewise flawed and ineffective and often makes the problem worse. Please see related articles in the “Problems with Traditional Approaches” section of the Information Center for more on the problems with traditional definitions of bullying.
Punishment as a consequence for bullying is ineffective for the following reasons:
- Since aggressors are not using aggression to intentionally harm targets, a punitive consequence is viewed by the aggressor (and his parents) as unfair and unjust. An aggressor may legitimately (from his perspective) claim innocence, convince his parents of this fact, and enlist their support against the school’s administration.
- An aggressor who directs identical aggression at multiple individuals, including friends, or sees peers engaging in identical behaviors, views punishment as inconsistent and unreasonable.
- Punishment that is based on the word of the target makes the target responsible for the punishment and can result in retaliation by the aggressor and peers against the target.
- In a peer group with a high level of acceptance of aggression and where the target has been chronically bullied and aggression has been normalized, peers view the aggressor’s punishment as unjust and blame the target, causing a further reduction in status of the target and reinforcing any belief by the peers that the target deserves the aggression.
- Punishment can raise awareness of the bullying problem among the peer group, something the target wants to avoid since greater awareness can further reduce social status.
- Punishment of the aggressor can actually boost his social status, which provides an incentive to continue the aggression.
- Punishment serves as a very strong deterrent to reporting bullying problems because students know that reporting on a peer who then gets punished will result in retaliation or a social cost.
When punitive consequences are used to address bullying problems, no one in the process—aggressors, targets, parents, or educators—is satisfied with the result. Aggressors consider punishment an injustice. Targets, who have lost social status from bullying, experience an even greater reduction in status from getting a peer in trouble. Targets frequently suffer increased bullying when the aggressor and his friends retaliate for the punishment. Parents of the aggressor generally defend their children and view the punishment as an injustice. Parents of the target, who may feel initial relief for getting a measure of justice for their child, become frustrated that the bullying doesn’t stop or gets worse for their child. And educators are left to deal with a more complicated problem that is harder and more time-consuming to solve. In short, punitive consequences serve the needs of no one and make the problem worse for everyone.
The solution is to replace punitive consequences with constructive consequences, where the aggressor is given an opportunity to avoid any consequence if the behavior stops but gets a consequence that results in a loss of social status among peers if the behavior continues. Leveraging the driver of aggression to get it to stop is an effective approach that is satisfactory to everyone involved in the process. Please see the “Modern Strategies” section of the Information Center for more information on constructive consequences.
Updated: 12/7/23