Good morning
everyone – I am delighted to have been asked to come along here today and share
some thoughts with you and also to hear from some of the other speakers.
I will be
talking this morning about bullying and agency, covering the core theory that
underpins our anti-bullying work – in terms of how we recognise and how we
define bullying.
I will make
the link between this and today’s theme, resilience and lastly how this
influences our responses to bullying.
respectme is Scotland’s anti-bullying service –
we build confidence and capacity in adults to recognise and respond to
bullying. We provide training, policy guidance and support as well as campaign
and develop resources for parents, children and professionals.
I will not
be starting today by offering our definition of bullying, it is only once we
explore agency will the definition be worth sharing.
It is vital
that we understand that bullying is both behaviour and impact –never always one
and not the other. It is itself a relationship between certain behaviours and
particular type of impact.
Bullying is
not defined by persistence or intent. This is relevant because if you were to
look up definitions online and in peer reviewed articles, the vast majority of
these will refer to bullying as persistent and deliberate behaviour.
I would
argue that these are unhelpful criteria to apply to situations. So much time
can be lost trying to apply all the various factors, many of which are entirely
subjective.
Let’s look
at intent – if you tell me bullying must be deliberate and then accuse me of
bullying, what is my first response? -
That I didn’t mean it. Intent is difficult to prove. It can tie
situation up in knots and the focus on responding to what someone did and the
impact it had is lost.
Schools can
waste a lot of time trying to prove intent –I have been involved in examples
when intent is denied the adults are stumped.
It’s usually
deliberate not always – sometime children use language they hear at home and
have no idea of how offensive or inappropriate it is. We should not get caught
up in using this as qualifying criteria though – it’s too easily re-framed
Let us now
consider persistence – that the behaviour must be repeated before it can be
considered bullying – again this is something I do not agree with and neither
do most young people have I spoken to. Persistence is difficult to define and
also, who defines when it’s persistent enough? Me, the person it is happening
to or the intervening adult? Something need only happen once and the impact can
be severe; a child may not get on the bus in the morning again or get changed
for PE after this.
The fear of
repetition can be sustained through looks or perhaps threats or just the fear
of it happening again.
These two
factors are present in the majority of definitions of bullying across the
globe; both of which, we feel here in Scotland are unhelpful. What you do about
bullying is actually more important than how you define it.
The
questions we need to ask are;
What was the
behaviour?
What impact
did it have?
What do I
need to do about it?
Every
situation is unique. You might over hear some name calling in the corridor and
discover this is chat between to close friends who are ‘winding’ each other up;
it is not part of any power or dominance game.
What was the behaviour? Name calling
What impact did it have? None – made
them laugh
What do I need to do about it?
Nothing – perhaps remind them about language or being overheard
You may hear
the same name calling ten feet further on but the person on the receiving end
is upset and embarrassed in front of her peers.
What was the behaviour? Name calling
What impact did it have? Left someone
embarrassed and fearful – who ran off
What do I need to do about it? Help
this person get back into her routine, listen to how she feels and decide on
next steps – you will need to challenge the people who called her names and
look at possible consequences too
This does
not mean we only focus on the impact behaviour has – this means that if someone
shouts a homophobic or racist slur at someone and it bounces off them and they
don’t care –this does not mean you do not need to do anything about the
language used and the attempt to bully or dominate.
Just as not
all attempts to bully are successful, people can feel bullied but not be – it
is possible some people over react –you still need to deal with their reaction
and their feelings but you might not need to do much about the behaviour – A
useful workplace analogy might be a boss saying something as simple as – ‘you’re
a bit late today’ and the staff member over-reacts and assumes this is an attempt
to exert power and control and may then claim they are feeling bullied. They
may panic, become restless, loose sleep and this will have an impact on them
but the boss’ behaviour was perfectly legitimate and reasonable. This person needs
help to work through their response but they have not been bullied.
So when we
look at impact – things like feeling hurt, angry, scared, frightened, that knot
in your stomach- what is happening there? What do these reactions say to us?
Young people
reflect in a range of ways that they
feel unable to speak out and feel trapped – they draw pictures of themselves in
large rooms feeling caged and so on. This learning helped us articulate the notion
that bullying actually takes something away from people.
All of these
feelings which are regularly articulated reflect a loss of being in-charge of
yourself, of being capable of taking effective action, of making choices and of
being an effective actor or agent in your own life.
This is
where agency came into our thinking. Lister calls agents ‘autonomous,
purposeful actors, capable of a degree of choice’
Giddens
talks about how we have agency within structures and our agency is utilised
when we consciously alter our place in the structure’
Young people
get this notion - as it can be a bit if
a head scratcher the first time you hear it - though when you explain a
‘typical day’ of meeting friends, going to school, laughing, joining in and
knowing what is happening and how you’ll respond. Bullied children don’t feel
that. Someone else is in charge of how they feel, where they go even or how
they will participate.
The ‘structures’
this dynamic takes place in is schools and communities. When they can exercise
choice in what happens in these ‘structures’, they are utilising their agency.
The ability
to negotiate relationships and difficulties is something all children and young
people need to learn and develop – it is a life skill many adults still don’t
always get right
We learn from our past experiences,
from imagining what we would do in future similar situations and what is
happening to us now – these elements combine and enable us to make choices and
act – this is agency.
Managing
change and responding to challenges requires hope, a belief you can handle
things - and agency and these underpin resilience.
Bullying is not about just any kind of injury, nor just any
negative impact. It involves a particular kind of harm. It is aimed at
engendering a kind of helplessness, an inability to act, to do anything. It is
an assault on a person’s agency (Sercombe and Donnelly 2012)
It is not
even the establishment of dominance. The person bullying is not satisfied with
dominance. Bullying involves the attempt to deny another any settled place,
even a subordinate one. It goes beyond subjection. In bullying, the goal is
abjection
Considering
that bullying is both different types of behaviour and a particular impact that
re-focusses our understanding of the dynamic - this can re-define bullying in a
way that helps practitioners’ responsd to feelings and actions. This is always more effective than checking off
criteria and having uniform sanction based responses.
Bullying is not defined by the type of
person who did it either
Care needs
to be taken because labelling is not without its risks, labelling a child or
young person on the basis of bullying behaviour can result in a confirmed
identity as a ‘bully’ or ‘victim’ resulting in ongoing behaviour patterns based
on this identity.
This is not
to dilute behaviour but is to keep the focus of the adult’s responses on the
behaviour that is problematic, rather than the assigning characteristics to
those involved. This is a solution focussed approach that is designed to help
people change the way they behave, rather than attempt to change who they are.
We help people change by telling them and naming the behaviour that is
unacceptable, being clear that what they are doing is bullying and that it
needs to stop.
It is a
fundamental part of behaviour management that we tell people what the behaviour
was they did, why it is not acceptable and help them figure out what to do the
next time they feel that way – I did get asked recently if not labelling
children as ‘bullies’ is gobbledygook at parliament
With this in
mind – we offer up a new definition for people to consider
Bullying is a relationship of violence involving practices of
domination that strip another person of the capacity for agency, using
interventions carrying the sustained threat of harm.(Sercombe and Donnelly
2012)
The actual
intervention may not be repeated, but the threat at least needs to be sustained
over time. Typically, the threat will be sustained by actions: looks, messages,
confrontations or physical interventions.
Lastly, if
we can accept that bullying takes something away from people, that they can no
longer take effective action our response must focus on helping get that back.
This is the
real shift in anti-bullying practice – how do I help someone get back a feeling
of being in control of themselves and in a place to take effective action to
feel safe and get on with their day?
Things like
moving desks or even just excluding people won’t on their own help restore
agency – young people must be included in what will happen next and given the
chance to steer what direction it goes in. They need to be asked what they
would like to happen and we need to take that seriously.
This is not
always easy but it must remain our goal with every intervention – to help young
people get back to a place where they are in control and can take effective
action. Where not all attempts to bully are successful – this can see you
continue to challenge people’s behaviour but you may need a lighter response to
the young people they are attempting to unsettle.
In reality –
what does that look like? What does it sound like? You will need to ask
questions like
What would
you like to happen?
What do you
think will happen if I tell his or her parents?
What will
happen if I tell your teacher?
What are you
worried about?
Be prepared
for them to say
Don’t tell
my dad – you will out me to him and I’m not ready for that
I just want
you to know what is happening and if I need you I will come and get you
If you talk
to his dad he will get a doing/beating and it’ll get worse
So you
explore what options they do have and sometimes that means pointing out that
you need to do something as not doing anything is dangerous
Open conversations like these promote
communication – this promotes positive relationships and they promote and role
model problem solving behaviours –these relationships can become stronger and
children become more resilient to what is happening because of this strong
purposeful relationship – even with just one person.
The process of listening and
consciously trying to get back agency – a sense of being on control – won’t
always lead to a perfect outcome but it will help the person being bullied
So in
conclusion, I would suggest that we have in fact re-framed our approach to and
understanding of bullying based on children and young people’s experiences –
that this understanding compliments the significant and long standing work on
resilience, and on how we promote and enable this in our children and young
people.
When we are
promoting respectful relationships, when we are building capacity to respond
effectively, when we are helping young people learn to negotiate tricky
relationships and when involve them we help them to become more resilient.
Brian
Donnelly
