Easy. Put the word out that bullies will be forced to undergo brain scans to determine if they are sociopathic or not. The sociopaths’ involvement will dry up almost immediately. Parents know if they if their child is a bully, but the last thing they want is for their child to bear the stigma of being an identified sociopath. Few sociopaths are criminally insane, in the sense that they can’t help themselves. Draw a line they don’t want to cross and they won’t cross it. For those without that self control, reopen the mental hospitals.
Also for schools with repeated bullying problems, require that the principal undergo the same scan. If sociopaths sense a sociopath at the top, they feel licensed. I think child sociopaths would be similarly sensitive, if inarticulate regarding the situation.
I consider all corruption and evil to have two components — sociopathic and nonsociopathic. Each component needs its own approach. Also I believe handling the sociopathic corruption will automatically reduce the nonsociopathic corruption by removing that leadership.
We have the knowledge and the technology, why aren’t we using it?
The Path Whisperer 
I agree that the article contains information useful for dealing with episodic social conflict among children and teaching appropriate interaction. My concern, however, is that along with identifying behaviors that can trigger this episodic conflict, this article subtly attributes to the victims of bullying behaviors that are actually more characteristic of bullies themselves. Also, bullying is a systematic and targeted behavior. It requires forethought and strategy and is, as far as I have seen, a dominance tactic almost exclusively directed at those who are as nonagressive as the bully is aggressive. For LiveScience to imply that the victims of bullies are receiving just retribution for misunderstanding scowls and tapped feet – which are themselves at best marginally appropriate behavior, by the way – is inexcusable. The comments on this article say more than I ever could. (Until I read the full study the article is based on, I’ll reserve judgment on that, because I won’t hold the study responsible for how LiveScience characterizes it.)
I sense that, if the mishandling and misconstruing of bullying problems becomes a more widespread phenomenon, the social ethic could be subtly reengineered to create a hesitance to engage in legitimate self-defense and an acceptance – however reluctant – of pathological power structures. Schooling is socialization, and if sociopathic children are socialized to give their worst inclinations free reign while everyone else is socialized to either take it or collude with it, I shudder at the implications.
LikeLike
This recent episode in the Ohio area certainly hints at sociopathic license at the administrative level in the school district in question:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101008/ap_on_re_us/us_bullying_one_town.
The featured victim was actually taunted in her casket.
On a related note, a few months ago I found a report regarding a “study” that fingers the victims of bullies as being the problem — here’s a link to one article covering it at LiveScience.com: http://www.livescience.com/culture/children-social-rejection-100202.html.
Your thoughts?
LikeLike
Absolutely it seems that sociopaths were present in authority positions in the Mentor, Ohio situation. Bullying is so obviously horrible for the victims, normal people with normal empathy should not be able to pretend it is of no consequence. I have seen a “chortle-chortle” response in sociopathic HR personnel as they enjoy witnessing bullying. Also note the schools’ smarmy defense, “oh, gash darn, we lost all your complaint records when we switched to computers!” — such arrogance. That supports the argument that there were actual sociopaths among the authorities.
It’s ghastly that schoolmates were snickering at her body at the wake. That’s too far off acceptable behavior and implies, essentially proves, that there was a [were] sociopath[s] at the heart of that bullying. Further that the sociopathic involvement was so strong that non-sociopaths were pulled into a sociopathic modality that has damaged their soul and ability to feel empathy. Those kids have to be pulled back into feeling empathy again, if possible.
That LiveScience article was very sad (though it certainly had some valuable things to say). There seems to be a refusal to come to grips with corruption or evil on all levels, let alone when dealing with school children. Also, while sociopaths are certainly skilled at detecting vulnerabilities, often their targetting can make no sense outside of their sociopathic thinking processes. Also I think sometimes sociopaths pick individuals with vulnerabilities to bully simply because it is easier to pull in others to join in the bullying, but it is the bullying itself, and concomitant feeling of power, that seems to drive the sociopath. The potential sociopathic bully needs to know of possible consequences, and they have to be very strong, if they are to be controlled.
LikeLike