the bullying and teasing expertences of ...bullying and teasing - the problem in the pas1 three...
TRANSCRIPT
A GAME OF CAT AND MOUSE:
THE BULLYING AND TEASiNG EXPERTENCES OF CHILDREN WITH
CEREBRAL PALSY
Nikie Tentoglou
A thesis subrnitted in confomity with the requirements
for the degree of Master of Social Work
Graduate Department of Faculty of SociaI Work
University of Toronto
C Copyright by Nikie Tentogiou (200 1)
National Libmy 1+1 O,,,, Bibliothèque nationale du Canada
Acquisitions and Acquisitions et BiMiographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Weiilngton Shet 365. rue WeUington Omwa ON K l A O N 4 Onawa ON K 1 A W Canada Canada
The author has granted a non- exclusive licence dowing the National Lhrary of Canada to reproduce, ban, distribute or seii copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electronic formats.
The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantid extracts fkom it may be printed or othemise reproduced without the author's petmission.
L'auteur a accordé une Licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationaie du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thése sous la fome de microfiche/film, de reproduction sut papier ou sur format électronique.
L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.
A Game of Cat and Mouse: The Bultying and Teasing Experiences of Chiidren with Cerebral PaIsy Nikie TentogIou, Master of Social Work (2001) FacuIq of SociaI Work. University of Toronto
ABSTRACT
An exploratory qualitative study was undertaken to determine how ten children.
aged 8 to 12. with a diagnosis of Cerebral Pdsy describe and experience peer teasing and
bullying at school. Seven themes emerged in girls' and boys' descriptions of their
e'tperiences of victimization: a nvo-tiered definition of bullying, the type of abuse
endured. negative reactions and emotions. pointing the blame. their failing support
systems. friends. and a disabled child as a buIly. These themes support the idea that
children tvith physical disabili ties experience and interpret buliying similady to children
without disabilities. however both their leamin_e disabilities and the adults' reactions
clearly made it difficult for them to ded with their struggles at school. The situations
improved for children who were seen by adults to whom they turned. as reqiiiring help.
whereas those who were not believed or were ignored continueci to experience
victimization.
This study iilurninates the need for professionah and parents to acknowledge the
bullying and teasing claims children with physical disabilities make. Without their
assistance children will continue to be victirnized. Increased education and awareness of
peer victimization is essentid for anyone dealing with chiIdren with disabilities. The
study's limitations. the implications for socid work practice and füture research are
discussed.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
M e n 1 first began to think about whether 1 should cary out a MI thesis. I had
many people to turn to and ask for their advice. When 1 finally decided to go for it. I
knew 1 was going to work with many individuals. Throughout this entire process i have
continued to work with these "advisors" and. in addition to them. have created
relationships with others whom i want to express rny appreciation.
To Judy Globerman. my prîmary research supervisor and role model. You are an
amiizing person with a vast amount of knowledge and kindness. You know hov. much
support a student needs and when to back off and allow for a rich leaming e'rperience. 1
thank you for teaching me a new way to look at research and a new way to appreciate the
e'rperiences of others. Good luck in the new chapter ofyour professional Iife.
To Barbara Germon and Gert Montgomery. my clinical supervisors and dear
friends. Kou were there for me from the very first day I conceptualized the idea of this
research project. You both provided me with unconditional support. sound advice.
encouragement. and most of a11 for the foundation for a deep interest in working with the
Cerebral Palsy popdation. I know that you wiil always be there for me. Thank ?ou.
To Faye Mishna. rny secondary supervisor and social work bullying expert.
ïhank p u for your constant support. wealth of knowledge. time and interest. 1 was very
forrunate to have you as a part of my comminee. 1 hope that one dsy Our sirnilar interests
wilI bring us back to work together.
To the staff of the Neurodevelopmentai Program. Bioorview MacMilIan
ChiIdren's Centre. You not only provided me with the names of the children for the
study. but with their Iives. You introduced me to a population that 1 was not experienced
in and you showed me that they are each unique individuals with sornething wonderful to
offer. The work you cary out, each and every day, is commendable.
To the ten children who opened their hearts and presented me with the knowledge
that will aid other children in similar situations. You have taught me that in life.
whatever cornes your way. can be endured and surpassed. You tmly are role models and
should be aware that your experiences will help you grow into stronger and wiser people.
i wish you al1 the best life has to offer.
To my farnily and î'riends. Demetre and Loucritia Pinellis. my loving parents.
From the very start, you believed in me and knew that one day would achieve this
success. The day has finally corne when you will sec me receive that piece of paper that
says 1 finally did it! To my sisters and brother. Sofia and Minas & Kelly Pinellis. Your
support and love was rnuch appreciated. i wish you al1 the best in your future
rndeavours. To my dear Friends. Tessy Gravas and Cora Kunderlik. You were always
there for me when 1 was discouraged and wanted to give up. Th& you for the
perseverance and hope. To the Pinellis and Tentoglou clans. I know how proud y011 al1
are of me. 1 cannot express how this makes me feel. 1 am tmly grateful for the immense
support and love 1 have received frorn everyone.
Last. but certainly not least. to rny spouse and best Friend. Tom. Words cannot
describe what 1 want to Say. You provided me with the encouragement that no one could
ever give. Thank you for your patience, trust, and understanding. You have supported
me in al1 my endeavours and you pushed me when 1 wanted to give up. 1 know that 1 am
uuIy blessed to have you in rny lik. Thank you for not giving up on me. 1 love you frorn
the bottom of my heart.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDCEMENTS iii TABLE OF CONTENTS v CHAPTER 1: REVIEW OF RESEARCH LITERATURE 1
BuIlying and Teasing - The Problem 1 Defining Bullying 2 Characteristics of Victims 2 Characteristics of Bullies 3 The Psychological Effects of Being BuIIied J Developmental Analysis 5 SociaI Conte'rt of Bullying and Teasing 7 Disabilities and Attitudes 8 Special Needs Children and Bullying 1 I Physical Disabilities md BulIying 12 Conclusion 1 J Culturai Review 16
CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS 19 Research Question 19 Methodology 20 Samphg 2 1
a Establishing Research Credibility 23 Dependabiiity 23 Referential Adequacy 23 Peer Debriefing 24 Confimabiiity 2 4 Audit Trail 2 J Prolonged Engagement 24 Persistent Observation 25 Authentici ty 25
8 Data Collection 25 Development of the interview Guide 2 5 Interview Process 26 Transcription 26
Data .4naiysis 27 Eihical Issues 28
CHAPTER 3: FiNDiNGS 30 Introduction 30
Two-tiered Definition of BuILying 30 Type of Abuse 32 Their Reactions and Negative Emotions 33 Pointing the BIme - Their Thoughts 34 Their Failing Support Systems 36 tnterpretation of Peer Relationships 39
7. Disabled Child as a Bully 11 . Summary 12 CHAPTER 1: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 44
Surnmary of the Study 44 Implications for Social Work Practice 45 Limitations 16 . Future Research 47 Conclusion 48
REFERENCES 49 APPEMIICES 6 1
Description of Participants 6 1 Invitation Letter 62 Telephone Screening 63 Interview Guide 65 Parent Consent Form 68 Child Assent Form 7 1 Release Form 75 School Speech on Teasing 76
Bullying and Teasing - The Problem
In the pas1 three decades there has been a growing concern arnong educators.
clinicians and researchers regarding the prevalence of childhood bullying and the etTect it
has on those who are involved. It is documented that teasing/bullying is a major problem
in the classroom and the schoolyard in Canada (Charach. Pepler & Ziegler, 1995: Craig.
Peters & Konarski. 1998: Hanchi. Catalano & Hawkins. 1999). Limited research has
shown that 21 to 28 percent of Canadian elementary and middie school studenrs have
been bullied (Harachi et al.. 1999). Only two major Canadian studies have examined the
incidence of bullying in schoois. Toronto survey researchers found that 20 percent of
7 1 1 fourth to eighth graders (aged 9 to 15). or almost one in Rve studenrs. have
experienced bullying at least once or twice in a schooi term. and eight percent have been
victims of bullies on a frequent bais. daily in most cases (Ziegler & Rosenstein-Manner.
199 1 ). Of the cases reported. 70 to 80 percent are believed to be minor and transitory. 1 O
to15 percent more concerning and enduring. and fÏve to ten percent serious and requiring
prolonged and cornprehensive intervention (PepIer & Craig, 1999). Calgary survey
rescarchers found that 21.3 percent of 379 fourth to sixth graders (ages 8 to 12) reported
that they had been victims of bdlying a& school and 1 1.6 percent reported that they had
bullied others (Bendey & Li. 1995). Althou& Canadian data are sparse they are
consistent with other findings (Smith. Morita. Junger-Tas. OIweus. Catalano & Slee.
1999) that conclude that bullying among elementq school children is a widespread and
enduring problem.
Defining Bullying
Bullying has been conceptualized in a number of different ways. The most
commonly accepted definition of bullying in Canada is the one developed by
Scandinavian researcher Dan Oliveus ( 1 99 1. 1993. 1994). that '-a person is being bullied
when he or she is exposed. repeatedty and over time. to negative actions on the part of
one or more other persons" (1 99 1. p.4 13). A negative action refers to a situation in
which -'someone intentionally intlicts. or anempts to infiict, injury or discornfort upon
another. Negative actions cm be cmied out by physical contact. by words. or in other
ways. such as by making faces or dirty gestures or by rehsing to comply with another
person's wishes" (p.413). Bullying is also seen as consisting ofdirect. physical
agression. as wefl as indirect behaviour such as teasing (Harachi et al.. 1999). It is
believed that in order for rhe action CO be qualified as victirnization. there needs to be a
certain imbalance in the suength or power relations between the victirn and bully. in
which the bully is perceived as always being more potverhl (Oliveus. 1991 : PepIer &
Craig. 1999).
Characteristics of Victims
When considering buIlies and victims as part of a system of interaction. m
important question concems whether there is a group of children that is consistently
victimized by their peers. Sorne researchers a-me that victims have certain individual
characteristics that make them easy targets for beins buflied (Beane. 1998; Bentlsy & Li.
1995: Boulton & Smith. 1994. Byrne. 1994: Craig & Pepier. 1997: Craig et al.. 19%;
Dawkins. 1995: Glew, Rivara & Feudtner. 2000: Myard & Joseph, 1997: Olweus.
1991,1994: Pepler. Craig, Ziegler & Charach. 1994; Roberts & Coursol. 1996: Ziegler &
Rosenstein-Pvlanner. 199 1). It is believed that the main reason chiIdren are victimized is
reiated to a distinctive pattern of characteristics and behaviours that victimized children
display chat sets them apart from their peers (OIweus. 1993).
Victimized children tend to fa11 into two main categories: passive or lotv-
agressive and provocative or high-agressive. OIweus ( 1 99 1.1 994) paints a picture of
the typical passive or Iow-agressive victim. He has found that these victims ofregular
bullying are more rn~ious. insecure and suffer from Iow self-estesm in cornparison to
their peers. They are ohen cautious. sensitive. quiet. and commonly react by csing and
withdrawing when attacked by others. They ofien see themselves as failures and are
described as feeling stupid. ashamed and unattractive. Victims are lonely and often do
not have even one friend in their class. Craig and colIeagues (1998) agee u i t h OIweus
that the majority of children who are identified as victims are passive. muious. weak.
Iack self-confidence. are unpopular with other children. and have low self-esteem. The
other group ofvictims hixi been labeled as provocative or hi#-aggressive (Olweus. 1993:
Pe-. Kusel & Perry 1988). These children are tiighly agessive. tend to provokr the
attacks of othors and are found to be arnong the most rejected of children ( P e s et al..
1988).
Characteristics of Bullies
It is equaily important to look at the individual qualities that bullies have been
found to possess. There are nvo categories that these children cm faIl under: passive or
anxious buiIies and aggressive or active bullies (Olweus. 1993). The former goup
comprises only a small percentage O€ bullies: therefore not much research has been
conducted on them.
Buliies tend to be older, less-intelligent males (Olweus. 1993), use direct foms of
victirnization and have littie empathy for their peers. Olweus (1978) found that, contr.;
tci popular belief. bullies do not suffer from low self esteem. and that if they do
experience loiv self-esteem. it is of a different character and level from rhar of their
victims. Bu1 lies value vioIence and are usually agressive toward others. They rilso tend
to be impulsive and exhibit a strong need to dominate others (Olweus. 1993).
The Psychological Effects of Being Bullied
blany children involved in bullying have been found to s u t h t'rom many
psychological and psychosomatic symptorns. The tindings are consistent that being
victimized may have serious and long-term effects on children at crucial points in their
development. Eder ( 1990) argues that the absence of social interactions in a child's I i fe is
a major psychosocial risk. His study found chat socially well-integrated children feel
better about school and about life as a whole. and are healhier than socially Iess
integrated children.
in the short-term. victims may suffer from health problems including bed-wetting.
sleeping problems. headaches. abdomina1 pain (Williams. Chambers. Logan & Robinson.
1996). concentration difficulties. rnood swings. and anrciety (Miller, Beane & Kraus.
1998). Many children who are victimized by their peers have few or no friends/sociaI
life. experience difficulty concentrating, and skip school without their parents'
permission (Forero. McLellan. Risse1 & Bauman. 1999). Some of the long-term effects
of the victimization of a child at school rnay include social. emotional, andlor
psychological distress (Craig et al.. 1998). Children who are teased or bullied have been
found to be at risk for poor mental health. internalization of their problems. anxiety. fear.
depression. somatization or ernotional problems. withdrawn behaviours, social isolation.
aggressiveness, academic and/or emplopent problems. and may even expenence severe
suicida1 ideation (Bijttebier & Venommen. 1998: Chesson. 1999: Craig. 1998: Craig et
al.. 1998: Glew et al.. 2000: Kaltiana-Heino. Rimpela. Marttunen, Rimpela & Rantanen.
1999: Kumpulainen. RiNinen. Henttonen. 1999: Kurnpulainen. Risanen. Henttonen.
Almquist. Kresanov. Linna. Moilanen. Pina. Puura & Tarnminen. 1998: Pepler & Craig:
Rigby. 2000: Salmon. James & Smith. 1998; Slee. 1994). The most publicized and
extreme consequence of vicrimizrttion is suicide and/or murder (Glew et al.. 2000).
It is very important to note hotvever. that the causality of the relation betweçn
individual traits and psychological behaviours has not yet been determined and whether
these characteristics precede or folIow the actual victimization is not clear (Bernstein &
Watson. 1997). In a longitudinal study. Olweus (1993) found that boys who had been
victims in the period between 6Ih and 9" p d e had much higher levels of depression and
a more negative view of themselves at age 23. Moreover. the degree of childhood
victimization was highly correlated tvith the level of adult depressive tendencies. These
findings suggest that former victims may have internalized the negative evaluations of
their peers fiom childhood into aduithood (Olweus. 1993). It is ciear that being bullied
on a constant basis takes a col1 on its victirns.
Developmental Analysis
Developmental theory has been used. in various degrees. to explain the
phenomenon of peer victimization (FinkeIhor. 1995: Smith. Madsen & Moody. 1999).
Large-scale research has shown that there is a fairly steady downward trend of reports of
bullying through ages 8-16 years (OIweus. 1993. 1994: O'Moore. Kirkham & Smith.
1997: Rigby. 1997: Whitney & Smith. 1993). Smaller samples have also found an age
decline between p r i m q school and secondary schools in bullying reports (Bentley & Li.
1995: Boulton & Undenvood, 1992; O'Moore & Hillery, 1989; Pepler et al.. 1993).
Researchers have provided insight into bulIying processes and have proposed a
number of theoretical explanations of these experiences through a developmental analysis
(Finkclhor. 1995: Smith et al.. 1999). Finkelhor ( 1995) argues that in order to understand
the nature and impact of victimization on chiidren. a developmental perspective must be
used. "Developmental Victirnology' is the term he empIoys to describe "the study of
victimization across the changing phases of childhood and adolescence" (p. 178). This
theory is broken down into two distinct domains: risk and impact. He suggests that there
is much evidence that supports the developmentai aspect of risk such as a child's age.
eender. personality. environment. and dependency needs that rnay cause a child to be b
victimized.
Smith and colleagues ( 1999) have also proposed a number of hpotheses that may
explain why bullying occurs by utilizing a developmental perspective. These include the
social context in which bullying is occurring, the level of social and cognitive skills ofthe
individuals involved. and the issue of how the term bullying is understood at different
ages (Smith et al.. 1999). Their research strongly supports the idea that younger children
are bullied more than older children because structuraily. there are more children older
than they are in school who are in the position to bully them. They also found that
younger children have not yet acquired the socid skilrs and assertiveness skills to
effectively deal with bullying incidents and discourage hrther bullying. in addition,
children are less equipped if the bulliss are older.
Social Context of Bullying and Teasing
The problern of victimization cannot solely be explained by individual traits. To
better understand bullying and victimization the social context of those involved needs to
be addressed. Few studies have focused on this issue (McCarthy. 1998; O'Connell,
Pepler & Craig. 1999: Sutton R: Smith. 1999). Bullying has been described as a group
process in which students reinforce each other's behaviours in their interactions. it is
collective in nature and is based on social relationships in the group (O'Connell et al..
1999; Sutton & Smith. 1999).
In an observational study of 53 bullying episodes on the school playground. i t was
found chat peers spent 24 percent of their time reinforcing bullies by passively uatching.
2 1 percent of their tirne actively modeling bullies. and 25 percent of their time
intewening on behalf of victims (O'Connel1 et al.. 1999). The results were interpreted as
confirming peers' central roles in the social processes that unfold during playground
bullying episodes (O'Connell et al.. 1999).
In a qualitative snidy of the experiences of former victims of bullying it was
found that bullying could be perceived as a form of rituai discourse (McCarthy. 1998).
The bullying episodes were staged in specific areas throughout the school where a
participating audience was IikeIy to be present and direct adult supervision absent. A
vaciety of roles as well as a hierarchy between the students aIso ernerged (McCarthy.
1998).
Sution & Smith (1999) have identified four main factors of the roles children
rnight play in a bullying situation. These are Pro-Bullying, Defender. Outsider. and
Victim. The roles are M e r split into seven more specific roles: bully. reinforcer.
assistant. defender. outsider. victirn. and no role (Sutton & Smith. 1999). It is clear that
the social context of the victimization of children is a cornplex and intricate problem that
concems many issues including those of relationships. perceptions of self and oîhers. and
feelings.
Victims have generally been found to have lower levels of peer acceptanct. in
comparison to bullies and children who are uninvolved (Boulton. 1999: Boulton & Smith.
1994: Olweus. 1978: Perry et al.. 1988: Ray. Cohen. Secrist. & Duncan. 1997: Slee &
Rigby. 1993). Both male and fernale rejected children were victimized more often than
popular. average. and other status children (Boulton & Smith. 1994). The tendency to be
victimized has been found to br negatively correlated with self-appraisals of the number
of ftiends. popularity. happiness and feelings of satèty at school (Slee & Rigby. 1993).
Research has s h o w that friendships c m provide protection against victimization
(Boulton. Tmeman. Chau. Whitehand & Arnatya. 1999). Students who had a
reciprocated best fricnd received significantly less peer nominations of victimization than
did classrnates tvithout a reciprocated best friend. whereas students without a best friend
received the highest increase in victimization (Boulton et al.. 1999).
Disabilities and Attitudes
The proper sociaiization of children into society is important and leads to positive
outcornes. Some of these may include proper development. identity. and peer relations.
The socializrition of children with disabilities is an issue that needs to be addressed due to
the increased and mandatory mainstreaming and integration of the children in schools and
other social environments. By e'iarnining the attitudes of children toward their peers who
are physically disabled we can come to understand how peers' attitudes may affect the
development of their relationships and fiendships. in order to help them successfully
form and maintain friendships. Research into the determinants of children's attitudes is
critical if ive are to improve the chances of social success for the child who is disabled
(Rosenbaum. Armstrong & King. 1986). Numerous studies demonstrate that individuals
have more negative attitudes toward persons with disabilities than toward those without
disabilities (Crystal. Watanabe & Chen. 1999: Esposito & Peach. 1983: Harper. 1997 &
1999: Newberry & Parish. 1986: Richman. 1983: Richman & Harper, 1978: Roberts &
Lindsell. 1997: Roberts & Smith. 1999: Sandberg. 1982: Siller. 1986: Wallander &
Hubert. 1987: Weisel. 1988: Weisel & Florian. 1990: Woodard. 1995). This is also the
case mith children who have facial distigurements or unattractiveness (Langlois. 1986:
Ritrer. Casey & Langlois. 1991). This negative evaluation by others ma? have severe
consequences. Several studies have provided evidence that negative attitudes of peers
without disabilities have profound impact on many aspects of the life of a child with a
disability (Brown. Ford. Nisbet. Sweet. DomelIan & Greunewald. 1983: Langlois. 1986:
Rose & Smith, 1993: Waddell. 1984). [t is therefore crucial to have a better
understanding of the factors that influence the dcvelopment of attitudes. both positive and
negative. in young children toward their peea who are disabled.
Roberts and Lindsell(1997) and Roberts and Smith (1999) found that children's
attitudes toward peers with disabilities and the arnount of control they believed they had
over their behaviour toward such peers. significantly predicted children's intentions to
intemct with and befciend a classmate with physical disabilities. Children who reported
positive attitudes toward peers with physical disabilities in general were more likely to
indicate that they engage in a higher level of friendship behaviour with a classmate with a
physical disability. Conversely. children who reported negative attitudes were more
likely to indicate a lower level of social interaction and îi-iendship towards a classmate
with a physical disability. Siperstein. Bak and O'Keefe ( 1988) also found similar rcsuits
in relation to peers with intellectual disabilities.
Researchers agree that children \vithout disabilities in western and nonwestern
cultures have particular social prekrences for children with physical disabilities
depending on the degree of their apparent stigrna (Crystal et al.. 1999: Harper 1991. 1992
& 1997: Richardson 1970. 1971. 1976 & 1983: Richardson & Friedman. 1973;
Richardson. Goodman. Hastorf & Dornbusch. 196 1 ). The idea of being disabIrd
produces a majority of negative emotions in children in both cultures. including feeling
ernbarrassed and worried (Crystal et al.. 1999). The most common hierarchy or ranking
of visible physical disabilities has been repeatedly documented as î'ollows (most to leut
preferred): non-disabled. crutches:brace. wheelchair. hand missing. facial disfigurement.
and obesity (Richardson. 1983). It has therefore been suggested that physical or
observable differences are significant factors in social acceptance across a variet); of
cuhres (Harper. 1999). Children without physical handicaps and/or children whu are
physically attractive have been found to be more accepted. liked and popular than their
disabled and/or perceived unattractive peers (Kleck & DeJong. 1983).
Special Needs Children and Bullying
It is equally important to focus on children with special needs and their social
experiences due to the rise of integrated classrooms in schooIs. Successful integration is
the goal for the child in today's classroom. Howver. studies have shown that children
with special needs. specifically learning disabilities. are at greater risk of being
vicrirnized than their non-special needs clstssmates (Demelweek. Humphris St Hare.
1997: Hodson. 1989: Llewellyn. 1995: Martlew & Hodson. 199 1 : biorrison. Furlong &
Smith. 1994; Nabuzoka & Smith. 1993: O'Moore & Hillery. 1989: Thompson. Whitney
& Smith. 1994: Whitney. Nribuzoka & Smith. 1992: Whitney & Smith. 1993: Yudr.
Goodman & McConachie. 19'38). Mainstream c hildren have been t'ound to play
significantly Iess frequently with children with mild leaming disabilities (bhtlrw &
Hodson. 199 1). Children ivith special needs are also found to be more involved in
bullying both as bullies and as victims (Thompson et al.. 1 994).
It is well docurnented that children with chronic medical conditions are teascd
more frequently and have poorer body images than their non-affected peers (Barrett &
Jones. 1996: Chadton. Pearson & Morris-Jones. 1986: Demelweek et al.. 1997: Gerrard.
199 1: Hobby. Tiernan & Mayoii. 1995: Hu&-Jones & Smith. 1999: L e t 1999:
Lowenstein. 1978: McHenry. 1999; Roth & Bed. 1998; Vessey. Swcinson & Hagedorn.
1995: Voss & Muiligan. 2000: Wilde & Haslam. 1996). These targeted children were
ofien perceived to be unattractive. smaller/shorter than heir peers. had obvious dif'ferent
physical characteristics or abiIities (such as clefi palate. epilepsy. faciaI port-wine stains.
a hearïng aid. hemipkgia leaming disabiiities. n a d deformities. psoriasis. spinal
deformitv, and stuttering). or were experiencing a crisis. disuess or neglect. For some
children. low self-esteem and negative seIf-attributions may intensi- their social
inadequacy since they may feel that they are to bIame for what happens to them (Barrett
& Jones. 1996). Researchers have found that the perception of children with special
needs. in particular mild learning disabilities. of their o ~ t n acceptance does not always
tally with peer appraisals (Vaughn. Hogan. Kouzakanani & Shapiro. 1990). It is
suggested that deticient social perception in children with leaming disabilities may render
thsm at greater risk than other children. to cliperience peer rejection or victimization
(Vaughn et al.. 1990). A negative body image and an inabili ty to cognitively understand
may contribute to a child's poor self-concept. which c m then be reinforced by being
victimized by his or lier peers.
Physical Disabilities and Bullying
Beginning fiom birth. children with physical disabilities are more prone to being
victimized due to their vulnenbility (Jones. 1992: Kerr. 1986: Smith. 1996: Wright.
1983). Bullying is just another difficulty they may face. The research that explores the
victimization of children with physical disabihies is sparse. Howver, a few studies
have found that children who are physicaIIy different were easy targets for victimization
(Dawkins. 1996: Rubin. LeMare & Lollis. 1990: tlewellyn. 1995: Rickert. Hassed.
Hendon & Cunniff. 1996: Yude et al.. 1998). Studies show that the incidence of teasing
is substantially higher among children with a speech impediment than it is arnong the
general school population (Hu&-Jones & Smith. 1999: Langevin. 1998: Langevin. - Bortnick. Hammer & Wiebe. t998: Mooney & Smith. 1995). As well. adolescents with
Turner Syndrome. a sex-chromosome disorder that causes physical anomalies. have also
been found to also suf5er from peer ridicule and teasing about their physical appearance
(Rickert et al.. 1996).
in a study of 5 5 mainstreamed 9-10 year olds with hemiplegia, a mild tom of
cerebral palsy (CP). the children with hemiplegia were found to be statistically
significantly more rejected and Iess popular. to have kwer kiends. and to experience
more victirnization in comparison to their controls (Yude et ai.. 1998). The researcher
attributed this increased victimization to peers' negative biases towards chiIdren with
disabilities and towards the lack of social awareness in socid skills displayed by children
with disabilities (Yude et al.. 1998).
Llewellyn ( 1994 & 199)) found drarnatic results in her study rhat compared the
educational experiences of young people with physical disabilities in special ssgregatsd
schoois with those in mainstream integrated schools. Eighty-four percent of the young
people invrviewed experienced some form of bullying in their mainstream schooling.
By contnst. the sarnpie obtained fiom special schoots reported no bullying. One mo~her
interviewed for the study stated that "my son was tipped out of his wheélchair and leli on
the ffoor unable to pick himself up. and although other children witnessed it not one of
thern went to help him" (LIewetIyn. 1995. p. 741). The results of this study were
supponed by the author's suggestion that in mainstream schooling there is considenble
covert buIIying that takes the form of socid isoiation and exclusion. The subjects saw
this as is"sssential preparation for the r d worid" (p. 741). Clearly the discussion about
the amount of bullying that children with physical disabihies endure is taboo.
In another study of 100 children aged 8- I 1 and 13- 16 years with a diagnosis of
CP. muscular dystrophy. marked co-ordination disorders. poliomyelitis. spina bifida or
Erb's palsy, it was found that 30 percent of the children were being bullied at school
(Dawkins, 1996). The factors that were predictive of the child's increased risk of being
bullied included being alone at playtime. being male. having less than two good fiiends in
their class and receiving extra help in school (Dawkins, 1996). It was hypothesized that
chiIdren tvith a disability have an increased chance of being bullied. not because they
have a visible physical difference. but because they have an increased chance of requiring
extra help in school and of attending special classes (Dawkins. 1996). This may be due
tc, the stigma or the negcttive manner in which their peers perceive children who receive
extra help. Nevertheless. children with physical disabilities are more vulnerable to being
victirnized by their peers and therefore necessitate special support and protection at
school. They also require education and coaching on how to deal with being teased that
can help put an end to this helplessness.
Conclusion
In terms of victimization. children with physical disabilities are caught [rom both
ends of the spectrum. They are boni with a vulnerability that renders them to
psychological and physical distress. as well as not having a figurative voice that can be
heard. There is a need for more research on the factors associated with teasingbullying
of individuals who are physically challenged. Most of the research on this topic has
focused on the epidemiology of teasin_&ullying, predictors of victimization. and the
effectiveness of intervention programs in schools. However. Little research has been
conducted on the experiences of children with physical disabilities who have been
victimized. Little is known about the bullying experiences of children tvith physical
disabilities, and the ways in which children perceive and attribute meaning to their
experiences of being teased/bullied. While teasing/bullying is a perpetual problern for
children wïth disabilities there is little recognition and understanding of the dynamics of
this complex phenornenon.
More research needs to be conducted in order to create increased awareness of the
subjective information that c m be missed when conducting quantitative research.
Although some of the questionnaires that are used for research purposes include
information about feelings and causal explmations on the experiences and situations of
victimization. the emotional, and rnainly the cognitive aspects of bullying have been less
documrnted (del Bamo. 1999). In pmicular. the dynamics of the process. the causal
explanation of the situation. the feelings of people involved in the maltreatment
relationship. etc. c m be studied as they are represented in the minds of children ~vho have
experienced peer victimization directly (del Bamo. 1999). These representations can
shed light on the difirent ways in which bullying or social sxcIusion is interpreted by the
victims. and consequently can be relevant to design intervention and prevention stratsgies
(Shantz. 1987).
Vey lirtle research has examined the qualitative experiences and perspectives of
children without disabilities who have been teased (Ambert. 1994: .4rnold. 1994:
Branvold. 1996: Cullingford & Momson. 1995: Owens. Shute & Slee. 2000: Torrance.
1997). BranvoId (1 996) examined the experiences of three elernentaq school children
who were identified as victims of teasing. Her qualitative findings were similar to others'
quantitative research in that the children's self-concepts and reputations were strongly
influenced by their peers. they internalized their amiety. experienced embarrasment.
were overly concerned with others' impressions and evaluations of themselves. and were
deliberately and consistently being rejected by their peers (Branvold. 1996). No research
studies have focused on the experiences of children with physical disabilities who have
rither bullied others or have been victims. in conclusion 1 present a study that will look
at the subjective experiences of children with physical disabilities who have been
subjected to peer victimization.
Cultural Review
In order to rnost effectively design and develop a qualitative study on children
with physical disabilities' experiences of victirnization McCracken ( 1988) emphasizrs
the importance of retlexivity. He terms this as "cuitwal review" where the researcher
examines their otcn d u e s . biases and assumptions about this topic.
In my otvn clinical experience of working with children with a primary diagnosis
of Crrebral Palsy 1 have been exposed to many children who either have been victimized
by their classrnates or were bullies themselves. 1 took note that during the peer suppon
group 1 was CO-leading. it took a while to get the children to talk about their esperiences.
and some remained hesitant even after eight sessions. to reveal any information. Some
zsamplrs of overt bullying were name-cdling. tripping and pushing the victim. and
chasing the victim tvith unpleasant objects. Examples of covert bulling were escluding
the victim in classroom activities. no one wanting to be their partner andlor sit beside
them at lunchtime. In one exueme case the chiId was actually transferred out of his
school by his parent due to the severe abuse and buliying to which he was subjected.
This not only affected the children's scholastic achievements. but also their socialization
skills. cognitive skills and psychological welI-being. It is aiso important to note that. in
my experience. other clinicians and parents have reported concerns regarding similar
experiences. After tvord went around that our goup program was dealing with teasing
and bullying issues more clients were referred to the program and the social workers.
The issue of diversity also has corne up with one of my clients who was being
victimized by her peers. She spoke about race and how that was the reason for her being
bullied. and not her disability. Uer mother also agrsed that the reason hrr daughter tvas
teased and subjected to peer ridicule was because of her skin colour. This is an important
aspect upon which to focus because 1 feel that the issue of disability was not a concern
for this family. The fact that she was of a different colour was their understanding of
why she was being bullied,
1 irnagined that 1 would hear about a kind of "secretive" bullying that is occumng
arnongst children with physical disabilities. 1 thought that children who are physically
different frorn other children may be used to being: pointed at or ridiculed. and thus the!
might not mention anything to others. This may not be taIked about by these children
and therefore not addressed by their parents. teachers or health care providers. Because
making fun of someone who is in a wheelchair is not "appropriate" or deemrd right in
today's society. children without disabilities may be teasing or bullying their classmatrs
in a covert rnanner. Examples such as the ones mentioned in the previous paragraph ma!
have been more prominent in this population of children who are bullied.
The assurnption that children with physical disabilities are the ones who get
victimized by their peers instead of k ing the ones who bulIy is another issue that 1 would
have liked to examine. It is assurned that children with disabilities are the victims and
those who have no disabilities are the bullies. In one of the cases 1 worked with. the child
who was physically disabled (and in a wheelchair) was a bulIy to another child in his
class. He made htn of the other student. got other children to "spy" on him and report
back their findings, '~a~le-tailed" on him. and made me believe that he was the one ivho
was getting victimized. Of course. this was an isolated case but is important to mention.
1 feel that this is important to talk about because it might be telling us that children with
physical disabilities have the ability to bully others and that there may be something
coing on that we are not aware of. There may be a history with the disabled child that ive C
are not aware of that could be affecting his/her way of dealing with others.
CKQPTER 2
R E S E W DESIGN iUYD METHODS
Research Question
There is no question that children who are victimized by their peers expenence
negative e ffec ts which distress thern physically. socialI y. and psychologicall y. Research
has s h o w that children with physicai differences are much more vulnerable to being
maltreated by their peers than children who have no physicd differences. The
information available regarding victimized children with physical disabilities is scarce
and insuftlcient. There are no published research studies to date that have addressed the
experiences of victimization of children with disabilities from their point of view. The
purpose of my research study was to explore and better understand the dynarnics of peer
victimization in children with physical disabilities. The central questions to which the
exploratory study was addressed are: How do children ivith disabilities describe. explain.
feel. react. understand. and deal with teasing and bullying? How do they make meaning
of their teasing experiences? What are the coping strategies they use to deal with these
experiences? What have children found helphl in thesr situations'? Therefore. the
research question 1 wanted answered is: @%ut are the teasing and birllying rxperiencrs of
children ivho crre physicdy disabled?
The object of this research was to l e m about children with physical disabilities'
expenences of teasing and bullying so that we can more effectively develop prograrns
and services for the Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre's clients and their families.
It uras intended that experiences or meanings of the children would be illuminated and
categories. concepts, themes. and patterns would be identified to better understand the
bullying experience. I have included a thorough explanation of each relevant category.
Topics include: methodology. sampling. establishing research credibility. data collection,
data analysis and ethicd issues.
Methodology
Qualitative research is distinguished from quantitative research in that it is a
process (Gubrium & Holstein. 1997: McCracken. 1988). The goal of qualitative research
is ta isolate and define cntegories during this process. Unlike quantitative research that
focuses precisely on a limited number of categories, the qualitative rescarcher takes the
man); categories that the participant has tdked about and looks for patterns of
interrelationship (McCracken. 1988).
1 used the open-ended long interview method developed by McCracken ( 1988) to
explore the bullying experiences ofchildren with physical disabilities. This was a hi~hiy
intensive study of children's bullying experiences. it was cross-sectional in design and
exploratory in nature. The data were collec ted usine audio-tape recordings and. after al1
interviews were completed they were transcribed and analyzed according to McCracken's
mode1 (1988).
The long interview method (Crabtree & Miller. 199 1 : McCracken. 1988) is a
depth interviewing technique designed to generate narratives that focus on fairly specific
research questions. The emphasis is on gathering detailed data from a relativelu small
number of respondents. As McCracken (1988) notes. "it is more important to work
longer. and with greciter care. with a few people than more superficially with man): of
them" (p. 17). This means that the findings are not genenlizabie. but they can be
transferable to other contexts. Even though a small sample was used and the participants'
stories are their own. suggestions and recommendations can still be made for the areas of
research. education and practice. it should be clear that the sample is not representative
of the general population.
There are four structure steps to the method of inquiry of the long interview
process (PvlcCracken. 1988). These are: 1. Literature Review: a review of analytic
categories and interview design (ses Chapter I ): 2. Cultural Review: a revieu of culturat
categories and interview design (see Chapter 1): 3. Data Collection: the interview
procedure and the disçovery of cultural categories. and 4. Data Annlysis: the discovery
of analytical categories (McCrarken. 1988).
Sampling
The sample was a non-probability. purposive. homogeneous group of children. 1
included participants with the t'ollowing demognphic criteria: Ten 8- to 13-year old male
and female outpatients of the NeurodeveIopmental Program at the Blooniew MacMillan
Children's Centre. MacMillan Site. Their prima? diagnosis was Cerebnl Palsy (mild to
modente hemiplegia to quadnplegia). and they either had no learning disabilitp or a
diagnosis of mild learning disability. All of the children were integrated into cegular
classrooms. fiorn grades t!ee to five and they al1 were verbal. The sample was also
ethnically diverse. The sample was determined fiom examination of the medical charts at
the Bioorview MaciMiIlan Children's Centre. 1 interviewed 10 children to achieve
category saturation (McCracken. 1988). This was to be able to exhaust the information
that 1 obtained from the children. Categories or topics that arise in qualitative long-
interviews tend to repeat themselves d e r a number of participants. Ten is the nurnber of
participants that has been found to saturate categories. I interviewed four femaIes and six
males (see ilppendlr A) . .Ml but two of the children were identified by the referring
protèssionals as having experienced peer victimization at school.
The w2y 1 obtained the sample was by approaching the proîèssional staff of the
Neurodevelopmentai Program (NDP), MacMillan Site and informing them that 1 was in
the process of looking for participants for a peer victirnization research study. 1 let them
know that 1 was lookiny for children (male and fernale) to verbnlly interview with a
primary diagnosis of Cerebral Palsÿ. aged 8 to 13 years old. This age span was srlected
because most of the bullying and teasing takes place during the elementary school years
(Harachi et al.. 1999). The children also had to be in an integrated classroom because
these kids have been found to be more vulnenble IO bullying experiences. I obtained
separate lists of narnes from the social worker. psychoIo&. nurse. medical director.
occupational therapist and physiotherapist. reviewed each child's chart and obtained
the necessq information that 1 required in order to determine if I could include him'her
in the study. Once 1 had a master List of 27. 1 sent out invitation letters to al1 of the
tàmilies.
The invitation letter (see Appendix B) that was sent on Bloorview MacMillan
Children's Centre letterhead was signed by the professional who rekrred the child.
inviting parents to discuss this study with their children and ask them if they wouId liks
to volunteer to be interviewed. The- had a choice to cal1 me to let me know whether the!
were interested in participating or not. [I they had not caIled in two weeks 1 followed-up
with a telephone cal1 to answer any questions they might have and see if they were
interested. When 1 spoke to the parents [ compieted a screening interview over the
telephone (see Appendix C). If both parent and child were interested in participating. I
would then book the 1-2 hour interview at the Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre
depending on their schediile. Parents were reminded that they would not be able to
participate in their child's interview(s). If a child was not suitable for the study or was
not willing to participate 1 crossed their name off the master list and proceeded to contact
another tàmily. It was also mentioned to the parents that due to the nature of
interviewicg chi!dren. especially children with leaning disabilities. I may be required to
mset ~vith them more than once and that the intervietvs may rangs from !- an hour up to
two hours depending on the child's interest. engagement with the interview and stmina.
Second interviews were not in fact required during the study.
This description of the sample. how participants were obtained. and the contest
within which the? came to participate in the research study enhances research
transkrability. This information can be used by readers to help [hem decide whether they
c m use the tindings to fit their situation or clinical population.
Establishing Research Credibility
Dependrbility - Throughout the entire research process detailed notes of the
process. memos and details of the data analysis were kept. Notes were reviewed with the
supervisor replarly. This shows evidence of the data collection and analysis process.
(For more information please see Data Collection and Data halysis sections).
Referential Adequacy - In addition to the detailed notes. a retlexive journal was
kept. This was used to wite down feelings. thoughts. ideas. cornrnents and questions that
arose while conducting the interviews. This was also reviewed and addressed on a
reguhr basis between my supervisor and myself. Audio-tapes, transcriptions. and the
reflexive journal provide evidence IO estnblish referential adequacy.
Pcer Debriefing - During the research process 1 regularly consulted with rny
supetvisor. professors at the faculty. and colleagues at the Bloorview MaciMillan
Children's Centre to discuss any matters related to the research process and data analysis.
Concerns, issues. questions and processes were addressed via telephone. elsctronic mail
or in person. This process of peer debriefing served to enhance research credibility.
Confirmabiliîy - Throughout the hdings section. 1 inciuded man. quotes in the
description of the emergent themes so the reader c m conf rm the themes.
Audit Trail - The process of inquiry is clear. The notes and detailcd mernos of
the research process and decisions made are available br others ta r e v i w . This indudes
my detaiIed mernos. comments or questions answered by rny supervisors or colleagues.
Prolonged Engagement - Due to my invohement with children with physical
disabilities and peer victimization and extensive knowledge of the Iiterature 1 feei that i
was crcdible to cary out this research. I worked as a tirst year social ivork student
complrting my the-month practicum at the Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre last
year. 1 had the opportunity to work with Barbara Germon. MSW and staff from a variety
of other professional disciplines in the NeurodeveIopmentaI Program. My assignments as
a student included tvorking as a counselor with children and their h i l i e s in a variety of
tvays. I CO-lead a peer support youp of six ch i ldm in the NeurodeveIopmental Progrm.
met with two children on a weekly basis who had teasingbuilying issues. and also helped
in the preparation oCa bullying presentation for SociaI Work Week. Staying in the tield
long enough to build a relationship of trust. and to be sure one understands the context
from which the interviewee's s t o ~ comes establishes prolonged engagement (Lincoln &
Guba 1985).
Persistent Observation - The research interviews lasted From 112 to one hour in
Iength. None of the children were asked to participate in second interviews. A limitation
of this study is that the interviews may have been too short. Perhaps if the interviewer
were to return to the children and spend more time with them such as conduct another
interview or attend a few sessions of their kid support group. persistent observation could
have been insured. Although the children did tend to answer questions with one-word or
one-sentence. if they tvere to interview longer. it is quite possible that the information
collected would be enhanced. This is something to consider for future studies.
Authenticity - Afier the research is cornplete 1 plan to educate families and heaIth
care providers at the Bloorview Macblillan Children's Centre on this topic. 1 uish to
enhance the participants' understanding of the issue and will also be open to
recommendations or alternative fëedback from others. This will help me achieve
authenticity (Altheide & Johnson. 1998: Erlandson. Harris. Skipper. & Allen. 1993 ).
Data Collection
Development of the Interview Guide - Data collection included the
development of an interview guide (see Appendix D). The construction of the inteniew
mide included information from the literature review and from personal experiences in "
working tvith children with physical and leamhg disabilities (see author's cultural
review). Analytic and culturai topics and issues were organized into broad categories. .A
Iist of major. largely independent topics was generated. dong with several subheadings
relevant to sach. Five dominant domains of interest were identified:
1. Personal experiences of teasing and bullying 2. Reactions to being bullied or teased 3. Explanations and interpretations of why they are bullied or teascd 4. Others' reactions to their victimization 5 . Their advice to other children in similar situations
These topics became themes around which the five open-ended "grand tour" questions
were constnicted. After a couple of interviews with children and consultation with rny
supervisor. the interview guide was modified to better aid the intemiewer in obtaining
more significant information.
Interview Process - Children were inte~iewed at the Blooniew MacMillan
Childnn's Centre. rLlaciLIillan Site in vacant office rooms. Most of the interviews were
held afier schoo t or on the weekend. All interviews wsre audio-taped and required from
one-half hour to one hour to complete. Prior to eüch interview. intomed cansents were
signed (see Appendices E and F). The interviews were completed uithin a three-rnonth
time span. Three interviews were conducted on one day. two on anothor. and the other
five were each conducted on separate dqs .
Field notes were kept of each encounter. These included impression
management. descriptions of the setting. delibente distortions. minor misunderstandings.
topic avoidance, and feelings of the interviewer. These notes were used later in the
analysis to provide a conversational context for interpreting the narrative and audit mil
material for peer debriefing.
Transcription - Accurate transcripts were made of each interview, Because the
details of the discourse!conversation were not considered significant in answering the
research question. linguistic notations were not included in the transcriptions. Pauses,
c ~ n g , and other obvious displays of emotion were noted. Each transcnpt was printed on
paper wide enough to provide a generous margin For recording later observations or
cornrnenting about the associated text. One hour of taped conversation took
approltimately four or five hours to be transcribed.
Data Anaiysis
McCracken (1988) States. 'rhe object of analysis is to determine the categories.
relationships. and assumptions that informs the respondent's view of the world in p e r d
and the topic in particular" (p. 43). He goes on to describe the five-stages to the analysis
process. rnoving from the particular to the general (McCracken. 1988). These are the
stages that I followed in order to analyze the data. The tive stages are: 1. Utterances:
Treating each utterance in the interview transcript in its own terms by ignoring its
relationship to other aspects of the text and creating an observation. 2. Observation:
Developing codes or descriptors of the data called 'observations' first by themselves.
second. according to the evidence in the transcript. and third. according to the previous
literature and cultural review. 3. Expanded Observation: Exmining the interconnection
of the second-lcvel observations. resorting once again to the literature and cultural
review. The focus of attention now shitts away from the transcript and toward the
observations themselves. Reference to the mscr ip t is now made only to check ideas as
they emerge from the process of observation cornparison. 4. Themc: Taking the
observations generated at previous levels and subjecting them. in this collective form. to
collective scrutiny. The object of analysis is the determination of patterns of intertheme
consistency and contradiction. 5. Interview Theses: Taking these patterns and themes.
as the' appear in the several interviews that made up the project, and subjecting them to a
final process of analysis. comparing across transcripts (McCracken. 1988).
Ethical Issues
Due to the nature of the research ethicai issues needed to be addressed. 1 first
obtained informed consent from the parents and assent from the children prior to the
interviews (see Appendices E and F). A release form was attained from the Bioorview
Machif illan C hildren's Centre's Farnily and Community Relations Office regarding the
audiotape recordings of the participants (ses Appendix G). This was also attended to
prior to any interviewing. A complete expIanation of what would be involved was
provided in the forms. Also included in the foms was the issue of confïdentiality. 1 did
not promise strict contidentially because there is no such thing with the nature of this
research. It stated that there would be sharing of information prior to the development of
the manuscript with my supervisors. The participants' narnes would be anonymous to
anyone involved and papers or publications that may aise from this research.
The issue of h m was also addressed in the information forms. The population
that 1 was deaiing with is already vulnerabte. I was interested in talking to them about
problems they might be esperiencing that are not pleasant to discuss. The potential
difficulty that needed to br addressed was that the material that ws were dealing ivith
might bring up negative emotions in the participants. 1 recognized that I have a
responsibility as a social worker to help the individual deal with these feelings. Two
social workers from the Blooniew MacMillan Children's Centre were readily on hand to
act as support for any child that \vas distressed due to the interviews. Gert Montgomery.
MSW and Barbara Germon. MSW were available to the participants if they needed to
speak with a registered social worker regardiig issues that mi& have come up. The
social workers were not contacted for any issues pertaining to the children's reactions to
the study or for any abuse disclosure. No information was withheld from the participants
regarding the research protocol. The disclosure, honesty, and fairness of the study were
evident.
CHAPTER 3
FINDINGS
Introduction
Al1 but one of the participants experienced bullying. One child who was
identified by the professional health care staff for the sarnple indicated in his interview
that he was a bully and not a victim. Seven thernes emergcd frorn the coding of the data.
First. it was found that children who have been victimized define bullying in two
dit'ferent ways. Second. there were many variations to the type of abuse they endured.
Third. they experienced many negative emotions. Fourth. they either blamed themselves
or the bully for what they experienced. Fifth. the children talked about their failing
support systems. such as their friends. parents and teachers. Sixth. in comparison to
children without learning disabilities. they interpreted the relationships with their friends
in a different way. Finally. the seventh category referred to children with disabilities as
bullies and how they experienced this relationship.
1. Two-tiered Definition of Bullying and Teasing
Al1 of the victims defined bullying as a negative act. The children described
bullying and teasing as "bad" (P7). "wrong" (P6). "not right" (P6). "cruel" (P6).
"annoying" (PS), "upsetting" (P8). "hurtfùl" (P5) and a form of "harassment" (P9 and
P 10). This coincides with how research has defined bullying. Dan Olweus (199 1 )
describes bullying as "a negative action (where) someone intentionally inflicts. ..injury or
discornfort upon anothei' (p. 41 3). An 1 l-year old boy described it as being "very cruel
and wrong that bullies are doing this ... It's really no& pod. . .for people to feel sad and
afiaid.. .it's not right."
The second part of the children's definition was descriptive. Bullying was
defined in terms of an activity as when sorneone teases" (P8). "narne-calls" (P8).
"makes tùn of somebody" (P9). '-harasses" (PlO), '-physicaIly hum someone" (P5).
%ghts" (PJ), "annoys" (P8). or "plays a game of cat and mouse" iP10). Harachi et al.
(1999) describe the negative actions that a bully intlicts upon hislher victims as direct.
physical agression as well as indirect behaviour such as teasing. .A 12-year old girl
described bullying --whçn people make tùn of someone who's dit'fcrent.. .or teases
somebody.. .physically hum them. like touches them or punches them or something like
that." .\n 8-year old girl dcscribed ir as. "making fun ot'people and treating them not
very nicely.. , likt: cailing names and al1 that stut'f."
There is a beiief in the research literature that in order t'or the bullying act to be
qualified as victimization there needs to be a certain irnbalance in the strength or power
relations behveen the victim and bully (OIweus. 1991 : Pepler & Craig. 1999). A 13-year
old girl who defined bullying as a game ofcat and mouse explained it clearly:
It's basically people pinpointing a weak person or a personthat they think is weak and then sort of attacking it like an
animal with. like a cat with a mouse. They find it and if they think they can catch it they just go for the goal and they jump at the chance to use it for their oivn game.
1 believe that the analog of a cat and mouse is the pinnacle of the research findings. The
description that teasing and bullying amongst school-age children is like a game of cat
and mouse is the central theme that \vas heard throughout d l of the interviews. One child
was the target while the other was the "game-player." By reaching that target they
resiched a level where they exerted control and have power over the other child. This is
precisely how the research on bullying and teasing describes the victimization
relationship (Olweus. 1991; Pepler & Craig, 1999).
2. Type of Abuse
It is interesting to compare the children's definitions of bullying to their actual
bullying experiences. Clearly. their experiences reflected thcir descriptions. Thrce
separate categories emerged: physical. verbal. and psychological. Researchsrs have
identified al1 three categories as a type of bullying to which one cm be subjected
(Harachi er al.. 1999: OI\veus. 1991 ).
Physical abuse for the children in this study included pushing. kicking. punching,
beating up. stealin% from them. stomping on their feet. ganging up on thcm.
drivingiphying with their wheelchair. throtcing erasers dowm their pants. and burping in
their face. .4 prime example ot'this is whac a 1 2 - p r oId girl endured rtt her previous
school by three boys. $vas in grade three and these grade sixes. they al1 gansed up on
me. The? al1 put me in a corner and. um. they started beating up on me and stuff like that
. . . and I vas bleeding too." A 13-yem oold boy also described it. '-The? !vant to drive mu
wheelchair ... they don't leave me alone."
Verbal abuse included insults. narne-calIing. teasing. swearing. saying mean
things. and making fun of them. .An I I -y boy staced. "They called me stupid, baby.
sIow runner. those kind of words." and a 13-year old girl remembered when a boy in her
class said. "You're such a cripple." A 9-yar old girl dso described one of the manÿ
incidents that she endured. "1 remernber when I went to recess and one of the boys told
me that I \vas one of the dumbest kids in class and they were the smartest kid in class."
PsychoIogical abuse included ignoring. spreading nirnours, not playing with them.
getting fiends against them. and not coming over to their house to play anymore. There
were many incidents to iIlustrate this type of abuse. A few of them that stood out include
the following quotes. h 1 1-year oId boy stated that -'the bully told things that weren't
true and so they didn't want to be rny &end because they thought these things." A 13-
year old girl remembered that ."(the buIIiss) acted like 1 was diseased. They didn't touch
me. they didn't go nea me. they didn't do anything." An 3-year old girl describes the
emotional turmoil she is currently enduring:
The one person's doing mean things to me right now. She sent another bcsr friend of mine a note saying. '-1 hate you. from (me)" and (mu bcst friend) actually picked thrit up when 1 was there and she said. "I don3 believe that you sent rnc thar." I'rn like, "1 didn't." 1 know that either this one girl that was teasing me a& the party or the one girl that was just rloing it right now sent the note.
The frequency of the bullying acts mged from only once to everyday. The
average length of tirne the builying was endured was approximately 2 school years.
There was no gender difference in terms of who bullied whom. Both boys and girls
bulIied and teased either gender. The ages of the kids who bullied the victims ranged
from either being the sarne or older.
3. Their Reactions and Negative Emotions
Ali of the victims of bullying described hotv they felt about the abuse the?
endured iviih negative feelings. These included feeling "mad" (P 1. P5, P6 and P7). "sad
(P3. P5. P6. P7 and P9). "bad" (PI and P7). "afraid (P3 and P6). "a~vfui" (P6). "upset"
(PS). "embarrassed (P10). "conhsed" (PI01 and "depressed" (PIO). . 1 have included a
few exampies of these emotions. A 9-year old girl statsd that %im and his fnends ail go
togethsr to make me feel bad." a 12-year old boy summarized his feelings as "it hurt
physically and rnentally." a 1 3-year old girl said that "it would just make me cry." and '-it
was embarrassing because 1 would cal1 the teachers and the teachers would ignore me."
Other reactions were feeling "different" (P6). "aione" (P6) and "lonely" (P9). .b
1 1-year old boy stated. "1 felt different .. . 1 thought that I was the only kid in the school
who was getting teased," .4lthough this will be addressed in the following theme. feeling
dif'ferent was a common eexplanation as to why the children believed they were being
isolated.
However. one of the children who admitted to being teased at school reacted in a
different way than the rest of the children. He stated. "1 actually don't c m " when iiskrd
how he felt about being teased. The 9-year old boy told the intenicwer that he had no
feelings towards the teasing he was eexperiencing. This type of response was a theme
throughout rhe interview.
4. Pointing the Blame - Their Thoughts
%\en asksd what the'; thought about the bullying they undenvent and kvhy it
happens. most of the children responded by either blaming the bully or blaming
themselves.
When they blamed the bully they said that the bullies were "idiots" (P7). "not
nice" (P5 and P7). "not right" (P6 and P9). "wrong" (P6). "terrible" (P6). "mean" (P9).
"nasty" (P7). "selfish" (P6). "stupid" (P7) and "did bad stuffl (P2). The children also
talked about why the bullies were like that. They tended to blame others for the bullies'
actions and said that "they were bullied themselves in the past" (P7). that "it was their
parents' fault" (Pj and P6). that "there were problerns at home" (P3). "to feel powerful"
(P6L "to fit in with their friends at school" (P3 and P5). and that "they are iznorant" (P6).
.An 1 1-year old boy believed that it was al1 about power.
They did that to me because they wanted to be powerful. They wanted to feel powerful and they knew if they picked on someone who \vas weak.. .I evould get a reaction from them. get upset and they would be powerful. But maybe a strong kid.. .kind of tough. when they want to tease him. it's just no fun. You know. he evould. they wou!d not get a reaction to it.
By blaming themselves the victims intsmalized the abuse and took a personal
responsibility for it. Many of h e m blamed dieir "disabilities and their differences" i P3.
P6, P 10 and P 13). "a misundsrstanding betwecsn the themselves and the bully" ( P5). that
they "amop the bully" (P4). they are "stupid and durnb" (P6. P7 and P9). they rire "easy
to pick on" (P10). the "bullies think that they are liars" (P5) and they "pee in their pants"
(P7). A 9-year old girl talked about tvhy she is being picked on at school:
Well. they haven't liked me since grade one.. . I think 1 know why they do it to me. -Cause they think i'm stupid. That's why. 'Caux i remember when I went to recess and one of the boys told me that 1 was one of the durnbest kids in class and they were the smartest kid in class.
.4 12-year old girl talked about the reasons she ew victimized at school:
1 got bullied a lot because L couldn't evalk properly.. . I don't know. Just 'cause they're mean and stuff. They wanted. I guess 'cause they wanted to see people hurt.. . They made fun of me too. Like they made fun of a lot of people and stuff. Because there were oniy two people who had disabilities. Me and a person in a wheelchair. .. 'Cause 1 was different. And maybe because 1 had. well i have a disability.
A 13-year old girl talked about the reasons she thought she ivas teased:
1 would Say to you right now with great contidence that if 1 wasn't in a whezlchair, if 1 didn't have Cerebral Palsy. 1 probably evouldn't have gone through half the builying that 1
went through because most of the comments were in direct reference to the chair and to the disability. So that has a great deal to do with it. 1 don't know what would happen if 1 were able-bodied and 1 don't know if history would be the same. Al1 1 do know is that most of the comrnents, 98% of the comrnents were directed towards the chair because they thought that was made me w e k . And that's what made me easy. So. 1 don't know.
Clearly. these children have ideas and points of view regarding who is to blarne
for the bullying act. They are either aware of the power irnbalance between bullies and
victims and know that it's not their hult for that phenornenon. or the: internalize the
teasing and blarne thernselves. usine their disability as an excuse.
5. Their Failing Support Systerns
Many of the children's responses to the bullying thsy endured were to go to
someone for support or help. Whether it was a parent, friend or professional (Le. teacher.
principal. social worker, etc.) most of them told someone about the bullyinz. However it
rarely helped and according to the victims. most peers and professionals simply ignored
their pleas for heIp. did not believe h e m andfor did not aid them. A 9-year old boy
advises other children what do if they are being bullied:
Well. 1 just think that whenever you're being teased or bullied. don't like go tell the teacher or something 'cause when you go and tell the teacher she's gonna Say. "Who did it?" and (the bully's) gonna Say. "1 never did if' and then you'll both get in trouble. So just ignore it.
One 1 1-year boy explained the lack of help:
Well. my old school was really no help anyvay. And the principal wouldn't give me help. ..I just think they just didn't know how. and when someone tried to help them they just tvouldn't take the suggestions. ..They just didn't know how and when people came to help them they just wouldn't take the tielp.
Another 13-year old girl stated.
My teacher was. 1 canui't even describe my teacher, because she was just not willing to listen or even care about my problems that that made the situation worse. Because she wasn't willing to care and she wasn't willing to listen and she wasn't willing to understand. And that made tfie situation worse.
According to the children in this study most teachers and principals were not in
the position to deal with these senous issues in the classroom. Although. one of the most
positive experiences that a child had with professionals is described in a school speech he
wote on teasing (see Appendix H). He also spoke about the benefits of a support group:
1 talked to my mom about this situation and she took me to a support group and then 1 m a other kids that were going through the same thing. [t made me feeI suprised and better that 1 met other kids that were like me. We helped each other plan what to do about our problems.
The children's parents' reactions were more positive than the prokssionais. Most
of the children's parents who were tord about the bullying tried to hrip in sorne way. .A
13-year old girl exemplifies this:
My parents realized that was upset and bey said. '-What's wong?" So 1 son of. 1 told them 'cause they knew some of the stuK that had been going on but 1 hadn't corne home telling them every single day. "This is what happened today." So they thought. Iike they knew I was depressed so 1 went to see a doctor at Sick Kids' (Hospitai).
She continues to tell her story of how. with her parents' heIp and support. she transferred
into another school.
So when 1 went home that day 1 said. "blom. this is too rnuch. I'm 12 years old and look at my life. Look at what my life is. 1 cantt deal with this anpore. [t's too much. I need to transkr." 1 said that i'm unwilling to go back to that school another year and half. We had already been thinking about switching me for eighth grade and to just finish the year. but 1 said, 'Tm not willing to go back to school unless it's somewhere eise because
1 can't deal with this anymore". So she said. "Fine." In that space and time of two weeks we did school meetings. we did conferences, we did this. we did that and 1 was at a new school within ten days of returning to school. And that was the best thing 1 had ever done in rny entire life.
However. one of the children's parents did not agree with their child that he
shouid transkr schools. The 12-year old States. "when 1 finish this year 1 wanna 20 to
another school .. . but my mom and dad think that (the present school) is a good schoot."
This sounds like his parents think that changing schools will not make a diffsrence.
The children's friends' reactions varied as well. Most of the children did not have
friends who protected them and supported them when other children at schooI teased
thern. The other children would join in and tease the victirn and not help them. An 11-
year old boy thought 'rhey were just doing it since their friends were doing it. Like the
most strongest buliy said "Come on everyone. I'm picking someone to buliy.. .I had
people joining in with the leader." An 8-year old girl also talked about a similar situation
with her peers. "There was one girl that was really. really teasing me so like everybody
else that liked me at the time . . . were actually going dong with that one girl to rnake me
feeI bad . . . And then everybody started to ignore me. gang up on me and al1 that stuff."
There was oniy one child who had a îiiend who stuck up for her. "Sometimes rny fi-iend
. . .she gets mad when sorneone rnakes fun of me. M y best friend. when she's around. she
always yells at (the bullies)."
Clearly. rnost of the children do not have strong supports in the school system that
they c m rely on and go to when they are in a bad situation. They are receiving messages
t'rom their school that they are not important and that they do not need to be helped.
They have parents and friends who struggle to fend for them and to get them heIp but
they are not h l l y supported by the system. which cm have lasting effects.
6. Lnterpretation of Peer Relationships
Probably the most interesting finding of al1 was the relationship between the
victims and their tiiends. For almost a11 of the children intervietved. there was some
mention of friends at schooi and hotv they w r e treated by hem. Manu of the children
described confusing relationships with their friends in which the hend bulIies them as
well as is their friend. A 9-year old boy stated. "WelI. i got one friend who sornetimes
calls me four-eues. but it's not that much that he does it." An 8-year old boy talksd about
his relationship tvith his friend. " M y tnend who bulhes me like to play Pokemon ivith
my other friend." Another 12-year old girl talked about her relationship with two
different groups of fiiends:
. . . a girl in my class. (Betty). she's really. really mean to one of my friends (April). She took one of (April's) tiiends. Iike against her. Like the mean girl (Betty) took one of (Apri1)'s t'riiirnds Eitvay from her to make her not a friend anymore.
tnterestingIy. this girl taiked about how she found Beny's teasing of A p d h y . Yet she
continued to describe her otm relationship with Betty.
And sornetirnes they do it to me. ..I hang out with Bem;. md I hmg out with Xpril. 'Cause well whenever Betty isn't there then hang out with April.
This child would choose to be friends tvith the buily over the friend because she was in
the -'cool group."
Another example of the relationship ofwhere teasing and bullying coincides tGth
positive experiences of friendship was mentioned by an 8-year oId girI:
It was rny best hiend's birthday party and at that time we
weren't really, really good friends but when we were friends she told me about the party so 1 went anyways. and it turns out that when it was sleepover time, everybody started to tease me and do all this stuff.. .they weren't treating me very nicely . . . Wdl they made up to me. so we're friends again. So and now that girl that was teasing me at the pany is actually my friend now.
I have one really. really. really, really good %end that's right now being really. really. really nice to me for once. She's the one that was teasing me. So now she's in my group and she's being nice to me. But 1 have a feeling that as soon as isvr move out of croups she's going to be mean to me again. for some reason. b
She's been mean to me like off and on. off and on. off and on.
This child also exemplifies the confusing nature of the relationship with her friends.
.4 13-year old girl described her experience of accepting both the positives and
negatives in a relationship with her friend.
1 had one reliable friend tiom the time 1 was in grade two to the time 1 was in grade sis. But at school. she wris with the in-crowd. She was with the girls flaunting their hair and batting their eyes. You know. and she was nice to me at school but it just wasn't the sort of sarne type of relationship out of school. Out of school Lve had our arms linked. We did everything together but inside of school I just let her do her own thing.
Even though they hated it when it was awhl they really wanted to be part of the in-group
and they tvould forgive. They didn't have the suength to say T m outta here."
It is interesting to compare how other researchers have addressed this particular
research finding with children with learning disabilities. The findings in my study are
consistent tvith previous research (Flicek. 1992: Kistner & Gatlin. 1989: Stone &
LaGrecri. 1990; Vaughn & Waager. 1994: Wiener. Hams & Shirer. 1990). In a study that
compared thirty-eight 9 to 17-year old children with leaming disabilities to a sarnple of
children without learning disabilities. it was found that students with learning disabilities
had lower social preference scores and were more likely to be socially rejected ( K u h e
and Wiener. 3000). Branvold (1996) examined the experiences of three non-disabled
children who were identified as victims of teasing and she found that their peers were
deliberately and consistently rejecting them. This research study coincides with the
children's peer experiences. It is interesting to note that even though children with
ieaming disabilities may understand what a friendship entails, they might lower their
standards in realiw. in order to have a friend of some kind.
7. Disabled Child as a Bully
One of the children who !vas intervicwed did not tit in with the rest of the sample.
tIe turned out to be a bully and althuugh this was not the sample that I was looking for to
intervie~v. i t offered some interesting insights of its own. This is crilled a negative case
and it shows evidence of opposite data that are important to discuss and compare with the
rest of the sample and findings.
First of all. this child demonstrates chat children with disabilities have the ability
to victimize other children. Research t e k us that children who have disabilities or
speciai needs are more vulnerable to being victimized at school than their non-disabied
and non-special needs classmates (Demelweek. Humphris & Hare. 1997: Hodson. 1989:
Llewellyn. 1995; Martlew & Hodson. 199 1 : Mocrison. Furlong & Smith. 1994:
Nabuzoka & Smith. 1993; O'Moore & Hillery. 1989: Thornpson. Whitney & Smith.
1994: Whitney. Nabuzoka & Smith. 1992: Whitney & Smith. 1993: Yude. Goodman &
McConachie. 1998). This child does not support this daim.
Interestingly. although his behaviour fits the definition of bullying this chiid did
not label or see himself as a bully. He justified al1 ofhis actions and denied doing
anything wrong or bad. The reasons he gave for bdlying his classmate was because the
victim annoyed him and because the teacher and his friends did not like her either. He
labellcd his friends as the bullies and blamed them for doing something wron;. He
strongly ernphasized his popularity at school and bngged about his actions. When asked
CO define bullying he focused and talked about actions and consequences.
Summary
tn addition to the seven themes that emerged frorn the data analysis, it is
interesting to note a common reaction that a few of the children had to the questions that
were asked. At first. even though they had admitted to it with other proîèssionals. a feu.
of the children did not want to talk about their experiences and denied ever hating been
teased. .4s the interviews progressed and the interviewer persisted. most of the children
who reacted to the questions became more comfortabie and ended up revealing what had
actuall occurred at school with their peers.
The stoq that emerged from the children is that of someone trying to understand
and explain what they have endured. These are the children's understanding of why
something bad happens and how they are helped in their timc of need. Not al1 of their
experiences tvere identical. but their stones were united in similarities and differences.
At first. the children talked about what they thought bullying and teasing is. This
accuntely reflected their actual bullying and teasing experiences. The tvpe of peer
victimization that they endured was similar to how the literature describes it. They
suFfered the s m e type of teasing and bullying that children without physical disabilities
endure. As well, their reactions and whom they blarned for the teasing and bullying \vas
similar to what the research describes They either intemalized their feelings or
ex t ed ized their emotions. They then went on to describe how peopIe reacted to the
bullying and teasing and who actually helped them overcome this negativity. One of the
most interesting tindings was some of the children's relationship with their frisnds. Their
interpretation of their relationships was justified in thrir own minds as being "normaI"
and satisfactory. This may be attributed to some of them having learning disabilities and
how they interpret social contexts. Finally a negative case example of a child with a
diagnosis of Cerebrnl Palsy who buliies was appreciated. This child provided itvidence
that even children with physical disabilities have the ability to become bullies. An
interesting finding. that provides knowledge and implications for future research and
practice.
CHAPTER 4
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
Summary of the Study
The present smdy explores the peer victimization experiences of ten children with
a diagnosis of Cerebral Palsy, some of whom also have leaming disabilities. It attempts
to illuminate when. how and why the bullying and teasing took place. according to the
participants. It tells a story of how these ten individual school-aged children make
meaning of their victimization experiences and how they deal with them. Even though
their coping strategies may differ from one another. their thought. feelings and ideas
about these incidents are similar. The game of cat and mouse is a concept that many
children could identiS; ttith. The majority of the children also spoke about their
friendships at schooi and how they interpret these relationships. One of the unexpected
findings was a chiid who was identified as a bully and how he understood and interpreted
the bullying process.
The tindings of this study coincide with the previous research on bullying
and teasing amongst children. In particular. the children's detinitions of bullying and
teasing, the type of victirnization they endured, their reactions. who they blame and who
they tum to for help and support is consistent with the research. They experienced
bullying and teasing in similar ways to what researchers describe "normal" children to
go through. Even though there are no qualitative research studies conducted with
children with physical disabilities with which to compare this. this present study c m be
weighed against some of the quantitative studies that speak to the type and severity of the
abuse chiIdren endure. Being exposed to physical. verbal and psychological abuse was
common with every child wicli the exception of one. As well. where the bullying
incidents took place, how ofien and by whom. also coincided with the previous research.
Implications for Social Work Practice
Although this research study is limited in sarnple and cannot be generalized to al1
children with Cerebral Palsy who have been bullied. it has potential to shed some light to
prokssionals who work with this population. In particular. social workers that are
working with chiIdren with physical disabilities who. in addition. have been identitied as
victims of bullying. can use this information to help better understand and deal with the
child's situation. Initially. knowing that bullying cari and does occur amongst children
with physical disabilities. is the initial step that one c m take to help. Being aware and
non-judgmental of their suscepti blc condition as tvell as their disabili ty is crucial. Thrse
hvo factors are central to aiding a vulnerable child who has corne to a professional for
help.
Bullying/teasing is not an occurrence that transpires within a vacuum. It is all-
encompassing and besides affecting the child's interna1 Me. also affects the child's
environment and people in his or her life. Whether a teacher. parent. fnend or health care
professional. everyone needs to be aware and educated about peer victimization and the
grave effects it can have on its victims. [ beiieve that it is the social worker's rolr to
educate the people who are invoived with the child and to üdvocate for supports and
change. frevention is the key in aiding the most vulnerable populations against peer
vicrimization. and education is the start. Research has s h o w that children with special
needs are more vulnerable to victimization at school (Demelweek. Humphris & Hare.
1997: Hodson 1989; LIewellyn. 1995; MartIew & Hodson. 199 1 : Momson. Furlong &
Smith. 1993; Nabuzoka & Smith. 1993; O'Moore & Hilley. 1989: Thompson. Whitney
& Smith. 1994; Whitney. Nabuzoka & Smith. 1992: Whitney & Smith. 1993; Yude.
Goodman & McConachie. 1998). By knowing this. socid workers can be more sensitive
to the child and recognize that what the child sees may not be exactly what is in reality.
Another important point to mention is that knowing the child and having
established a relationship with him or her is crucial in better understanding and helping
them with their bullying problems. The children in this study who knew the interviewer
frorn previous meetings were tàr more open and kl t more comfortablr in talkiny about
their experienccs than uere the children who were mesring the intenkwsr for the. y e n
first time.
Limitations
Thsre were a f t tv significant Limitations to the study that may have affectcd the
results of the study. These include the research design. member chscking and
uiangulation.
As rnentioned throughout the thesis. this type ofresearch design does not allow
for the findings to be generalized to the entire population of children tvith Crrebral Palsy.
T l e qualitative design used was intended to obtain introductory information on how ten
children with Cerebral Palsy make meaning of their bullying and teasing experiences.
Member checking is a part of establishing research credibility in that the
investigator checks back with the study respondents to see if their interpretations fit the
participants' experiences. The researcher talks to the participants and checks to ses if the
information she obtained resonates with the participants. Mernber checking did not occur
for this research study due to time constraints. The tesearcher was behind in deadlines
and did not have the opportunity to meet with the children for a second interview.
Triangulation is another part of establishing research credibilil in that more than
one and different sources. methods. investigators or types of data inquiring about the
sme topic w r e used. The only method of data gathering was the Iong interview. No
other method or source was used and there was only one investigator. For sirnilar h u r e
studies. it would be important to utilize other methods 'or gathering data including focus
groups. case notes. andlor parent interviews in order to snsure trianguiation.
Future Rcsearrh
I began this study wich the intent to determine basic informaiion on children with
physicai disabilities who are being bullied and teased, The quality and quantity of
information that was discovered was immense. By applying the findings to practicd use
one can begin to work with chilciren ho have espcrirncsd sirnilu abusive sitintions ar
school. The simple task of talking with the children can be very rewarding. both to the
chiid and the aduh involved.
More research is needed to bettclr understand the ways in n hich childrcn tvith
physical disabilities understand and explain peer victimization. B. looking at. not only
children who have idçntiiied themseIves as being buIIied, but to aII children with ph_vsical
disabilities. it may be possible to determine what the diKerences are betwen rhe children
and what makes them susceptible to this victimization.
More research is needod to understand the ways in which children with physical
disabiIities cultivate fnendships. This research shows that fiends play a major role in the
children's [ives and are very important to them. In what ways c m parents. children with
disabilities and other children in the community Ieam to develop meaningful and healthy
relritionships behveen children with and without disabilities?
There are many unanswered questions that Stream from this research study. Why
do certain children with physica1 disabilities get victimized and some do not? Wh? are
the c hildren's reactions to the victimization different in cornparison to their peers? How
c m we. as parents. teachers. social workers. professionals and fiiends help thern? What
cm be done to educate the p e r d pubk about this phenornenon and will it ever corne to
an end?
Conclusion
This is one of the first qualitative research studies that has atternpted to look at dis
bu1lying and teasing experiences ofchildren with Cerebnl Palsy. Its prima?
contribution is that it has brought awareness and concem to the peer victirnization of
children. Optimisticaliy. we anticipate that it hdps at lem one child to understand. cope
or deal with their victimization problerns.
Children with Cerebral Palsy are more vuherable than other children without
special needs to be teased or bulhed at school. Due to their inability to protect
themselves and to be socially able to deaI with and comprehend peer victimization on
heir own. these chiIdren are at greater risk for abuse. both srnotionaIIy and physically.
This study reveaied that children who are being teased or bullied at school require
another person to either expiain to them what is going on or to actually do something
about it and get help. For those children who were ignored. not beheved or ridicuIed. the
builying continued. Until the seriousness of peer victimization is brought forth to the
public's attention and is completely undemood by those invoIved with children. whether
directly or indirectly. children of al1 abilities will continue to suffer and undergo severe
and mental mguish.
REFERENCES
Altheide, D.. & Johnson, J. (1998). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. in N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln, (Eds.). Collectine and Intepreting, Ouditative Materiais. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.
AmbeR A. (1 994). A qualitative study of peer abuse and its et'fects: Theoretical and empincal implications. Journal of Mariage and the Familv, j6! 1 19-1 30.
Arnold. F. (1994). Builying, a taie of everyday Iife: Retlections on insider research. Educational Action Research. 3(2). 183-1 93.
Barrett, H.. & Jones. D. (1996). The inner life of children with moderate learning difficulties. In V. P. Varma (Ed.) The inner life of children with special needs (pp. 45- 62). London. England: Whurr Publishers. Ltd.
Beane. A. (1998). The trauma of peer victimization. In T. W. Miller ( Ed.). Children of trauma: Stressful Iife events and their effects on children and adolescents (pp. 205-2 1 8). Madison: International Universities Press. Inc.
Bentley. K. M.. & Li. -4. K. F. (1995). BulIy and victim problems in e lementq schools and students' beliefs about agression. Canadian Journal of School Psvchologv. 1 I(2). 153-165. -
Bernstein. J. Y.. & Watson. M. W. (1997). Children who are targets of bullying: .A victim pattern. Journal of Interpersond Violence. i2(4). 483498.
Bijttebier. P.. & Vertommen. H. (1998). Coping with peer arguments in school- açe children with bully/victim probiems. British Journal of Educational Psvchologv, a. 387-394.
Boulton. M. J. (1999). Concurrent and Iongitudinal relations between children's piayground behavior and social preference. victimization. and bullying. Child Develoument. 70(4). 944-954.
Boulton. M. J.. & Smith. P. K. (1994). Bully/victim problems in middle-school children: Stability. self-perceived cornpetence. peer perceptions and peer acceptance. British Journal of Develoomental Psvcho1o.w. 1 2 . 3 1 5-329.
Boulton. M. J.. Trueman. M.. Chau. C. Whitehand. C.. & Amatya. K. ( 1999). Concurrent and longitudinal links between friendship and peer victimization: Implications for beliiending interventions. Journal of Adolescence. 22(4). 461 -466.
Boulton. M. J.. & Underwood. K. (1992). Bullyhictim problems arnong middle school children. British Journal of Educational Psycholow. a. 73-87.
Branvold, S. ( 1996). An exploration of teasing: A case study of three elementary school students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 5 6 ( l OA): 3833.
Brown. L.. Ford. A.. Nisbet. J.. Sweet. M.. Donnellan, A.. & Gruenewald. L. ( I983). Opportunities availabie when severely handicapped students attend chronological age appropriate regular school. Journal of the Association for the Severeh Handicamed. 8. 16-34.
Byrne. B. (1994). Bullying: .A cornrnunity approach. Mount Memon. Blacluock. Co. Duglin: The Columbia Press.
Charach. A.. Pepler. D. J.. & Ziegler. S. (1995). Bullying at school: X Canadian perspective. Education Canada. 35, 12-1 8.
Charlton. A.. Pearson. D.. & klorris-Jones. P. H. ( 1986). Children's return to schoo1 atier treatmen t for solid tiimours. Social Science & Medicine. 2. 1 3 2 7- 1 M.
Chesson. R. ( 1999). Bullying: The need for rin interagency response: BulIying is a social as well as an individual problem. British Medical Journal. s ( 7 2 0 6 ) . 230-33 1.
Crabtree. B. F. & MiIlsr. %'- L. (1991). A qualitative approach to p r i m q care research: The Long interview. Farnilv Medicine. 2 3 7 ) . 155-1 5 1.
Craig. W. M. ( L 998). The reIationship mong builying- victimization. depression. ansirty. and aggression in e k m e n t q school children. Personalin and Individual Differences, &l(l), 123- 130.
Craig. W. M.. & Pepler. D. J. (1997). Observations ofbulIying and victimization in the school yard. Canadian Journa1 of School Psvcholo~v. Ij(2) . 4 t -60.
Craig. W. M.. Peters. R. D. & Konmki. R. (~ 1998). Bullvin~ and Victimimtion Amone Canadian School Children. Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada.
Crystal. D. S. . Watanabe. H.. & Chen. R. (1999). Children's reactions ta physical disability: A cross-national and developmental study. International Journal of Behavioraf DeveIo~ment. 23( 1). 9 1 - I I 1.
Cullingford. C.. & Morrison, J. ( 1995). Bullying as a formative influence: the relationship benveen the experience of schooI and crimindi';. British Educational Research Journal. a ( 5 ) , 547-560.
Dawkins. J. L. (1993). Bullying in schooi: Doctors' responsibilities. British Medicd Journd. XO(6975). 274-275.
Dawkins, J. L. (1996). Bullying, physical disability and the paediatric patient. Deveio~mentai Med. Child Neurologv. 38(7), 603-6 12.
del Banio, C. (1999). The use of semi-stnictured interviews and quaiitative methods for the study of peer bullying. [On-line article]. Available: htt~://~~~~v.eold.ac.ukitn~rlreports~aimî madridI .html
Demellweek. C. Humphris. G. M.. & Hare. M. (1997). Children's perceptions of. and attitude towards. unfamiliar peers with facial port-{vine stains. Journal of Pediatnc Psvchologv, 23(4). 47 1483.
Dodge. K. A. (1999). The structure and function of reactive and proactive agression. In D. Pepler & K. Rubin (Eds.). The develo~ment and treatment of childhood agmssion (pp.20 1-2 18). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.
Eder. A. ( 1990). Risk factor Ioneliness. On the interrelations between social integration. happiness and health in 1 1 -. 13- and l5year old schoolchildren in 9 European countries. Health Promotion International. j( 1 ). 19-23.
Erlandson. D. A.. Harris. E. L.. Skipper. B. L.. & Allen. S. D. (1993). Quality criteria for a naturalistic study. Doinc Natunlistic Inuuirv: .A Guide to Methods. Newbury Park. CA: Sage.
Esposito. B. G.. & Peach. W. J. ( 1983). Changing attitudes ot'preschool children toward handicapped peers. Exce~tional Children. 3. 36 1-363.
Finkelhor, D. ( 1995). The victimization of children: .A developmental perspective. h e r i c a n Journal of Orthopsvchiatrv. 6512). 177- 193.
Forero. R.. McLellan. L.. Rissel. C.. & Bauman. A. (1999). Bullying behaviour and psychosocial health among school students in New South Wales. .Australia: Cross sectional survey. British Medical Journal. X9(7206), 344-348.
Flicek. M. (1992). SociaI status of boys with both academic probiems and attention deîïcit hyperactivity disorder. Journa1 of Abnomai Child Psvcholoev. 3 .333- 366.
Gerrard. J. M. ( 199 1). The teasing syndrome in facially defonned children. Australian and New Zealand Soumai of Familv Therapv. i2(3). 147-134.
Glew. G.. Rivara, F.. & Feudtner. C. (2000). Bullying: Children hurting children. Pediatrics in Review. 2116). 183- 190.
Gubrium. J. F. & Holstein. J. A. (1997). The new lanouace ofqualitative method. New York: Oxford University Press.
Harachi, T. W., Catalano. R. F.. & Hawkins. J. D. (1999). Canada. In P. K. Smith. Y. Morita. J. Junger-Tas. D. Olweus. R. F. Catalano & P. Slee. (Eds.). The nature of school bullvin~: A cross-national ~ersuective (pp. 296-306). New York: Routledge.
Harper. D. C. (1 99 1). Psychosocial aspects of physical differences in children and youth. In K. Jaffe (Ed.). Rehabilitation and Phvsical Medicine Clinics of North America. L 765-779.
Harper. D. C. (1995). Children's attitudes toward physical differences arnong youth from Western and nonwestern cultures. Cleft Palace Journal. 2. 114-1 19.
Harper. D. C. (1997). Children's attitudes toward physical disability in NepaI: .A field study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psvcholoev. 28(6). 710-729.
Harper. D. C. (1999). Social psychology of difference: Stigrna. spread. and stercot).pes in childhood [Presidential address]. Rehabilitation PsvchoIocv. 437) . 1 j 1 - 144.
Hobby. J. L.. Tiernan. E.. & Mayou. B. J. (1995). The -Pinocchio' nasal deformity due to cavernous lymphangioma. Journal of the Roval Societv of Medicine. 88(9). 535-536. -
Hodges. E. V. E.. & Psi. D. G. ( 1996). Victims of peer abuse: An ovewiew. Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Problems. 5.23-28.
Hodson. J. ( 1989). The social integration of children with speciai educational needs: The need to force links between ~hiloso~hicai princi~les and professional ~ractice. Unpublished B.A. Thesis. University of Sheffield. UK.
Hugh-Jones. S.. & Smith. P. K. (1999). Self-reports of short- and long-term effects of bullying on children who stammer. British Journal of Educational Psvcholo~v. 69(2). 141-158. -
Jones. P. R. ( 1992). Psychology for physically disabled people. Educational and Child Psvcholow. 9(1). 6-1 6.
Kaitiala-Heino. R.. Rimpela. M.. Marttunen. M.. Rirnpela A. & Rantanen. P., (1999). Bullying. depression. and suicida1 ideation in Finnish adolescents: School s w e y . British Medical Journal. Y9(7206), 38-25 1.
Kerr. N. (1986). On being different: Children with physical disabilities. In S. ;LI. Auerbach & A. L. Stolberg. (Eds.). Crisis intervention with chiIdren and îàmiiies ( pp. 203-225). Washington: Hemisphere Publishing Company.
Kistner. J. A. & Gatlin. D. (1989). ConeIates of peer rejection among chiIdren with leaming disabilities. Leaming Disabilitv Qiiarterlv. 12. 133-1 JO.
Kleck, R. E., & DeJong, W. (1983). Physical disability. physical attractiveness. and social outcomes in chiIdrenns small groups. Rehabilitation Psvcholonv, 3 2 ) . 79-9 1.
Kuhne. M & Wiener, J. (7000). StabiIity of social status ot'children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilitv Ouarterlv. 2311). 64-75.
KumpuIainen. K.. Ritsiinen. E.. & Henttonen. 1. ( 1999). Children involved in bullying: PsychologicaI disturbance and the persistence of the involvement. Child Abuse &. 33(12). 1253-1262.
Kumpulainen. K.. Rasanen. E., Henttonen. 1.. AImqvist, F.. Kresanov. K.. Linna. S-L.. Moilanen. 1.. Piha. J.. Puura. K. & Tamminen. T. (1998). Bullyinç and psychiatrie spnptorns among elementary school-age children. Child Abuse and Nedect. 3 7 ) . 705- 7I 7.
Langevin. M. 1 19%). Teasine and bullvine: Lrnacceptable behavior. Hel~inz chiIdren handie teasin~ and bullvinq (ISTAR research monograph). Edmonton, Alberta: Institute for Stuttering Treatnirnt & Research (ISTAR) and Communication Improvernent Program. afiIiated with the University of Alberta.
Langevin. M.. Bonnick. K.. Hammer. T.. & Wiebe. E. (1998). Teasinghullying experienced by children who stuttrlr: Toward development of a questionnaire. Contemporarv Issues in Cornniunication Science and Disorders, 5. 17-24.
Langlois. J. Il. (1986). From the eye ofthe behoIdcr to behavioral reality: Development of social behaviors and social relations as a tùnction of physical attractiveness. in C. P. Hermm. M. P. Zama & E. T. Higgins (Eds.). Phvsical apwarance. stigrna and social behaviour (pp, 23-52). Hilisdale. N J: Erlbaum.
Leff. S. ( i 999). Buliied children are picked on for their vulnerability [Letter to the editor]. British Medical Journal, XS(7190). 1076.
Lincoln. Y. S., & Guba. E. G. ( 1985). Establishing trushvorthiness. Naturalistic Inuuirv. Newbury Park. CA: Sage. pp.. 389-33 1.
Llewellyn. A. (1994). Educationai eqeriences of voune people with ~hvsical disabilities: A cornpan'son studv of soecid and mainstrem schoolinq. Lnpublished masters thesis. University of North Wales. Bangor.
Llewllyn, A. ( 1995). The abuse of children ttith physical disabiIities in mainstream schooling [Annotation]. Develo~mentai Medicine and Child Neuroloev. 2. 740-743.
Lotvenstein, L. R. (1978). The buIlisd and the non-buIIied child. Bulletin of the British Psvcholo~icai S o c i e ~ . 31.3 16-3 18.
Martlew. M., & Hodson, J. (1991). Children with mild learning difficulties in an integrated a ~ d in a special school: Comparisons of behaviour. teasing and teachers' attitudes. British Journa1 of Educational Psvcholorv. 6.35-377.
McCarthy, T. G . (1998). Bullies and rheir victims: The kiIling ground. Dissertation ~bGracts International Section A: Humanities and socialGiences. a(9.4): 3470.
McCracken. G. (1988). ï h e long interview. Beverley Hills. CA: Sage.
McHenry. P. ( 1999). Understanding and treating psoriasis. Current Pediatrics. 9{3). 194-198.
Miller. T. W.. Beane. A.. & Kraus. R. F. (1998). Clinical and cultural issues in diagnosing and treating child victims of peer abuse. Child Psvchiatrv and Human Development. 29(1). 21 -22.
Mooney. S.. & Smith. P. K. (1995). BuIlying and the child who starnrnrlrs. British Journal of Special Education, 2. 24-27.
Morrison. G. M.. Furlong. M. J.. & Smith. G. ( 1994). Factors associated with the sxperisnce of school violence aniong gonerai sducittion. leadership class. opportunit-; cIass. and special da! class pupilç. Education & Treatment of Children. 17(3), 356-369.
Mynard. H.. & joseph. S. ( 1997). Bullyhictim problems and their association with Eysenck's personality dimensions in 8 to 13 year-olds. British Journal of Educational Psvchoioev. o. 5 1-54.
Nabuzoka, D.. & Smith. P. K. ( 1993). Sociometric status and behaviour of chikdren with and without learning difficulties. Journa[ of Child Psvc holow and Psvchiatrv. s (8 ) . 1433- 1438.
Yewberry. BI. K.. & Parish. T. S. ( 1986). Enhancement of attitudcs toward handicapped children through social incenctions. The Joumd of Social PswhoIozv. 1. 59-62.
O'ConnelI, P., Pepler. D.. & Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in buklying: Insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence. 22(4). 4 3 7 4 2 .
O'Moore. M.. & Hillery. B. (1989). Bullying in Dubiin schoois. trish JournaI of Psvcholow. 10.42644 1.
O'Moore. A. M.. Kirkham. C.. & Smith. M. (1997). BulIying behaviour in Irish schools: A nationwide study. Irish Journal of Psvchologv~ B. 14 1-1 69.
Ofweus, D. (1978). Aeeression in the schools: Cullies and whipping bovs. Washington. DC: Hemisphere.
Olweus. D. (1991). Bully/victim problems arnong schoolchildren: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention prograrn. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.). The development and treatrnent of childhood aggression (pp. 41 1-448). HiIlsdaIe. NJ: Erlbaum.
Olweus. D. ( 1993). Bullving at school: What we know and what ive c m do. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Ol~veus. D. (1994). Bullying at school: Basic facts and effects of a school based intervention prograrn [Annotation]. Journal of Child Psvchologv. 337). 1 17 1-1 190.
Oivens. L.. Shute. R.. & Slee. P. (2000). "Guess what 1 just heard!": Indirect. aggression among teenage girls in i\ustralia. Aeeressive Behavior. 3-67-83.
Pepkr, D. J.. & Cnig. W. M. ( 1999). blaking a difference in bullving. Lhpublished manuscript. York University at Toronto and Queen's Universip at Kingston. Available: htt~:~/~~~vw.vorku.c~res~'archilamars~a~icles.htm
PepIer. D. J.. Craig, W. XI.. Ziegler. S.. & Charach. A. (1994). An evaluation OF an ami-bullying intervention in Toronto schools. Cmadian Journal of Communitv Mental Health. fi(2). 95-1 10.
P e q . D. G.. Kusel. S. J., & Perry. L. C. (1988). Victirns ot' peer aggression. Developmental Psvcholorrt. 2.807-8 14.
Ray. G. E.. Cohen. R.. Secrist. M. E.. & Duncan. M. K. (1997). Relating agressive and victimization behaviors to children's sociometric status and friendship. Journal of Social and Persona1 Relritionshi~s. 14.95108.
Richardson. P. K. (1997). Making friends at school: The social interaction patterns of young children with physical disabilities. Dissertation Xbstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. 57(12A): 51 14.
Richardson. S. -4. (1970). Age and sex differences in values toward physical handicaps. Journal of Hedth and Social Behavior. il(3). 207-2 I.C.
Richardson. S. A. ( 1971). Children's values and friendships: A study of physical disability- Journal of Health and Social Behavior. I3(3). 253-258.
Richardson. S. A. (1976). Attitudes and behavior toward the physically handicapped. Birth Defects: Original Article Series. a. 15-34.
Richardson. S. A. (1983). Children's values in regard to disabilities: A reply to Yuker. Rehabilitation Psvcholow, 28, 13 1-1 JO.
Richardson. S. A., & Friedman, M. J. (1973). Social factors related to children's accuracy in lcarning peer group values towards handicaps. Human Relations, z( 1). 77- 87.
Richardson, S. A., Goodman. N., Hastort A. H., & Dombusch. S. M. (196 1). Cultural uniforrnity in reaction to physical disability. American Socioloeical Review. 3. 23 1-247.
Richman. L. C. (1983). Self-reportcd social. speech. and facial concerns and personality adjustment of adolescents hith cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Journal. 3. 108-1 12.
Richrnan. L. C.. & Harper. D. C. ( 1978). Observable stigmata and perceived materna1 behnvior. Cleft Palate Journal. fi, 2 15-2 19.
Rickert. V. 1.. Hasscd. S. J.. Hendon. A. E.. & Cunniff. C. (1996). The cffects of peer ridicule on depression and self-image among adolescent females with Turner Sydrome. Journal of Adolescent Health, fi! 34-38.
Rigby. K. ( 1997). Attitudes and beliefs about bullying among .Australian school children. Irish Journal of Psvcholoev, 18. 202-220.
Rigby. K. (7000). Effects of peer victimization in schools and perceived social support on adolescent well-being. Journal of Adolescence. 3. 57-68.
Ritter, J. M.. Case?. R. J.. & Langlois. J. H. ( 1991 ). Adults' responses to infants v q i n g in appearance of age and attractiveness. Child Develoument, $2, 68-82.
Roberts. C. M.. & Lindsell. J. S. (1997). Children's attitudes and behavioural intentions towards peers hith disabilities. International Journal of Disabilities. &+(2). 133-145.
Roberts. C. M.. & Smith. P. R. (1999). Attitudes and behaviour of children toward peers with disabilities. International Journal of Disabilitv. Development and Education. 46( 1 ). 35-50.
Roberts. Jr.. W. B.. & Coursol. D. H. (1996). Strategies for intervention with chiIdhood and adolescent victims of bullying. teasing. and intimidation in school settings. EIementcw School Sr Guidance. j0.204-212.
Rose. D. F.. & Smith. B. J. (1993). Preschool mainstrearning: Attitude barriers and strategies for addressing them. Young Children. g. 59-63.
Rosenbaum, P. L.. Armstrong. R. W.. & King. S. M. ( 1986). Children's attitudes toward disabled peers: A self-report measure. Journal of Pediatric Psvchologv. i l (4) . 5 17-530.
Roth. 1. & Beal, D. (2000). Teasing and bullying of children who stutter. [On-line article]. Available: http:/~~nnv.mankato.msus.edii /dept/cioumal/roth.html
Rubin, K. H.. LeMare. L. J.. & Lollis. S. (1990). Social withdrawal in childhood. In S. R. Asher & J. D. Coie (Eds.). Peer reiection in childhood (pp. 217-219). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Salmon. G. James. -4.. & Smith. D. M. (1998). Bullying in schools: Self reported anxiety. depression. and self-esteern in second- school children. British Medical Journal. 3 17(7 163). 924-925.
Sandberg. L. D. (1982). Attitudes of nonhandicapped elementary school students toward school-aged trainable mentally retarded students, Education and Training of the Mentallv Retarded. Q. 30-34.
Shantz. C. ü. ( 1987). Conilicts between children. Child Development. 3. 283- 305.
Siller. J. ( 1986). The mesurement of attitudes toward physically disabled pzrsons. In C. P. Herrnan. M. P. Zama & E. T. Higgins (Eds.). Phvsical Aooearance. Stipma. - and Social Behavior (pp. 245-288). Hiilsdale. NJ: La~mnçe Erlbaum Associates.
Siperstein. G. N.. Bak. J. J.. & O'Keefe. P. (1988). Relationship between children's attitudes toward and their social acceptance of mentally retarded peers. Amencan Joumal on Mental Retardation. 9j. 74-27.
Slee. P. T. ( 1994). Situational and interpersonal correlates of anxiee associated with peer victimization. Child Psvchiatrv and Hiiman Develooment. 232). 97- 107.
Slee. P. T.. & Rigby. K. (1993). Austraiian school children's self appraisal of interpersonal relations: The bullying experirnce. Child Psvchiatrv and Hurnan Develo~ment. 230.273-282.
Smith. M. (1996). The secret life of the physicdly disabled child. In V. P. Vrüma (Ed.). The imer life of children with specia1 needs (pp.3744). London. England: Whurr Publishers. Ltd.
Smith. P. K.. Madsen. K. C.. & Moody. J .C. i. 1999). What causes the age decline in reports of being bullied at school? Towards a developmental anaiysis of risks of being bullied. Educational Research. U(3). 267-285.
Smith. P. K.. Morita. Y.. Junger-Tas. J.. Olweus. D.. Catalano. R. F.. & Slce. P. (Eds.). (1998). The nature olschool buliving: A cross-national perspective. Yew York: Routledge.
Stone. W. L. & LaGreca, A. M. (1990). The social status of children with learning disabilities: A reexamination. Journal of Leamina Disabilities. 23-32-37.
Sutton. J., & Smith, P. K. ( 1999). Bullying as a group process: An adaptation of the participant role approach. Aggressive Behavior, 35(2) , 97-1 1 1.
Thompson. D. Whitney. 1.. & Smith. P. K. (1994). BuIIying of children with special needs in rnainstream schools. Support for Leaming, q(3 j. 103- 106.
Torrance. DA. ( 1997). 'Do you want to be in my gang'?': A study of the r~istcncr and rtTects of bullying in a p r i m q schooi class. British Journal of Soecial Education. 14(4). 158-162. -
Vaughn. S. & Hmger. D. ( 1994). The measurement and assessrnent of social skills. In G . R. Lyon (Ed.). Frames of reference for the assessmçnr of leamine disabilitv: New views on measurement issues (pp. 557-570). Toronto: Paul H. Books Publishing Company.
Vaughn. S.. Hogan. A.. Kouzakanani. K.. & S hapiro. S. ( 1 990). Peer acceptance. self-perceptions. and social skills of learning disabled students prior to identification. Journal of Educational Psvchologv. û2( 1 ). 10 1-106.
Vessey. J. A.. Swanson. M. N.. & Hagedorn. M. 1. ( 1995). Trasing: who sriys names c m never hurt ?ou4? Pediatric Nursinq. a(3). 297-299.
Voss. L. D.. & MuIligan, 1. (2000). Bullying in school: Are short pupils at risk? Questionnaire study in a cohort. British Medical Journal. XO(7233). 6 12-61 3.
Waddell. K. J. (1984). The self-concept and social adaptation of hyperactive children in adolescence. Journal of Clinical Child Psvchologv, G. 50-55.
Wallander. J. L.. & Hubert. N. C. (1987). Peer social dyshction in children with deveIopmentai disabilities: Ernpirical ba i s and a conceptua1 model. Clinical Psvchologv Review. z(2). 205-22 1.
WeiseI. A. (1988). Contact with mainstreamed disabled children and attitudes torvards disability: .i\ multidimensionaI maiysis. EducationaI Psvcholoev: An IntemationaI f ouma1 of Experimental EducationaI Psvcholow. & 16 1 - 168.
Weisel. A., & Florian. V. ( 1990). Same-and cross-gender attitudes tokvard persons with disabilities. Rehabititation PsvchoIow. j5.229-238.
Whitney. 1.. Nabuzoka. D.. & Smith. P. K. (1992). Bullying in schools: Mainstream and special needs. Support for Learnine, Z(1). 3-7.
Whitney. 1.. & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. Educational Research, 3.3-23'.
Whitney. 1.. Smith. P. K., & Thompson. D. ( 1994). Bullying and children with special educational needs. In P. K. Smith & S. Sharp (Eds.). School bullving: Insights and ~ers~ect ives (pp. 2 13-340). London: Routledge.
Wiener, J. Harris. P. J. & Shirer. C. (1990). Xchievement and social-behavioral correlates ofpeer status in LD children. Learnine Disabilitv Ouarterlv. lj. 1 14-1 27.
WiIde. M.. & Haslarn. C. (1996). Living with epilepsy: A qualitative study investigating the experiences of young people attending outpatient clinics in Leicester. Seizure. j( 1 ). 63-72.
Williams. K.. Chambers. M. Logan. S.. & Robinson. D. (1996). Association of comrnon health symptoms with bullying in p r i m q school children. British Medical JoumaI. 3 l j(7048). 17- 19.
Woodard. R. (1995). The et'fscts of gender and type ofdisability on the attitudes of children towrird their peers with physical disability. Therapeutic Recreation Journal. i9(3 - ). 2 18-227.
Wright. B. A. ( 1983). Phvsical disabilitv: A psvchosocial approach (7" Edition). New York: Harper & Row. Publishers.
Yude. C.. Goodman. R.. & McConachie. H. ( 1998). Peer problems of children with hemiplegia in rnainstream primary schools. Journal of Child Psvcholoev. 3(4) . 533-541.
Ziegler. S.. & Rosenstein-Manner. M. (1991). Bullvine at school: Toronto in an international context. Toronto: Toronto Board of Education Research Services.
APPENDIX A - DESCRIPTION O F PARTICIPANTS
ID CENDEH A C E CHADE PHIMAHY SECONDAHY TERTIAHY VISIBLE NUMBER DiSABI IAITY I>ISABILITY DlSABlLlTY DEVICES
USEU
Male
Male
Fernale
Male
Fernale
Male
Fernale
Male
Male
Fernale
Cerebral Palsy (Athetoid)
Cerebral Palsy (monoplegia)
ADHD
Schizencephaly
Cerebral Palsy (hemiplegia)
Cerebral Palsy (hemiplegia)
Cerebral Palsy (diplegia)
Cerebral Palsy (herniplegia)
Cerebral Palsy (herniplegia)
Cerebral Palsy (dipfegia)
Cerebral Palsy (Athetoid)
Cerebral Palsy
nla
Seizure Disorder
nla
Learning Disability
Strabisrnus
nla
nla
Visual Perception Learning Disability
Non-verbal LD
Shunted Hydrocephatus
nla
Language Delay
nla
Stuttering Problem
nla
nla
nla
nla
Wheelchair
nla
Hand splint
Hand splint
Wheelchalr
nla
Ankle Foot Orthosis
Wheelchair
Wheelchair
Wheelchair
APPENDIX B - INVITATION LETTER BLOORVIEW MACMILLAN CENTRE
Re: Research Project on the Bullying Experiences of Children with Physical Disabilitics
Dear <<Name of Parent(s)>>:
This is to inform pou of a project that is occurring at the Bloorview blachitillan Centre. We are looking at the experiences of children with physical disabilities and bullying at school. The research will try to answer the following question: How do children with disabilities describe. explain. feel. react, understand. and deal with bullying?
Little is known about bullying and children with special needs. To the researcher's knowledge. there are no research studies that have Iooked ar children with physical disabilities N ho have been bullied. With your child's help we can better understand these experiences. We can also try to End the answers to develop prograrns and awareness for health care providers. children and their families.
This letter has been written to invite you to consider involving your child in this project. The research project would involve <<Name of Chiid>> in an interview at the Bloorview MacMillan Centre. The interviews will be conducted by Nikie Tentoglou who is completing her Master of Social Work degree at the University of Toronto. She \vas a practicum student at the Centre Iast yeür and is very familiar with this topic and population.
If you and your child are interested to panicipate in this project. please call Nikie Tentoglou at (416) 425-6220 est. 3087. If you wish, you can also contact Barbara Germon. Social Worker at (416) 425- 6220 ext. 3584 for funher information. If you are not interested please call Nikie to let her know. If she does not hear from you in a couple of weeks she will give you a cab1 to answer any questions -ou may have.
Thank-you for your consideration ofthis very valuable project.
Barbara Germon. MSW. RS W Social Worker
APPENDIX C - TELEPHONE SCREENING
Introduction
Thank-you for calling back with an interest in the bullying research project at the Bloorview MacMillan Centre. Any information you provide me with today will be kept contïdential and shared only with rny supervisors if required. You c m you stop me at any time during this telephone cal1 if you decide not to have your child involved in this study. If you have any questions regarding this study please fiel free to ask.
As inentioned in the invitation letter that was sent to you the object of this research is to leam about children with physical disabilities' experiences with teasing and bullying. This is so that we can more effectively develop future programs and services for children and FarniIies at the Bloorview Macblillan Centre regarding teasing and bullying. If you agree to invite your soddaughter to participate in this study 1 will need to meet with (name of child) at least two times. It would be preferable if we could meet at the Bloorview MacMillan Centre. During these audio taped meetings we will talk about any experiences (narne of chiId) has had with teasing or bullying. Because this may cause (name of child) distress. two registered social workers and 1 will be available for follow-up if helshe needs to talk to someone about what he/she is feeling.
[Plec~se be mvure (kut I m e neecl to meer wirh (name of chilci) for LI rhird or fortrrh rime. Chilclren m e riirerenf than adrdts in that they require a lot more rime ro unmer cpesrions and because of the nature of the topic m q be more hesitmr in tcrlking with me. I1:fiitrire meetings m e reqiiiredyori and child will need ro give me permission tu meet with (ncime of chird) again.]
Now. if you don't rnind. in order to help me determine if (name of childl qualifies for the study. 1 would like to ask you some questions about himlher.
Date of Telephone Interview:
Name of Parent:
Address:
Phone Number where you c m be contacted:
Name of Child:
Female or Male (circte) Child's D.O.B.:
Child's Age:
Primary Diagnosis:
Secondary Diagnosis:
Name of School:
Grade Lcvel:
Does (name of child) attend an integrated school? No - Yes - If yes, is helshe in an integrated classroom?
Does (name of child) take any classes outsido of hidhcr regular classroom? Yes - No - If yes, how many classes are taken outside of hislher regular classroom?
Could you tell me how many children, approximately are in (name of child's) classroom?
Are there any other children in the classroom that are physicdly different than the No other children? Yes - - If yes, could you tell me about that?
Are there any visible devices that your child uses in order to wrlk? (ie. wheelchair, brace, crutches)
Does your child have a Learniog Disorder? Yes - No - If yes, what is the severity?
To your awareness, has (name of child) ever experienced teasing or bullying at school? Yes N o -
Can you teil me a little bit more about that?
Thank-you very much for your answers!
Do you have any questions for me?
Do you still wish to allow your child to participate in this study? Y e s No-
Date & Place of Scheduied Appointment:
APPENDIX D - INTERVIEW GUIDE
Introduction
This is a study about kids bullying other kids. t am going to a& ?ou about bullying. I'm going to ask you whether other kids have ever bullied. teased or treated you badly. Your answers will hdp me understand bullying. I will use your ansivers to help other kids who are bullied.
Before we begin. 1 want to talk about confidentiality. Do you know what coniïdcntiality is? It means that e v e l h i n g you tell me roday will stay in this room. 1 am çoing to be tape-recording you ioo. The only person who will be listening ro these tapes is my teacher. I won't te11 anyone about the stuff we talk about, but if yoii tell me that you have been physically or sexually hurt by someone. i will have to tell.
Another thing for you to know is that if you get upset about somsthing. there rire people you can talk to. You c m talk to me. Barbara or Gert.
There are no right or tvrong answers: 1 just want to know what you thinh. [f you do not understand any question chat I ask. then let me know so 1 c m explain ii to you. We cm tahs a break at any tirne. You cm also stop the intemiçw whenever );ou tvant.
Now I'm going to talk about bullying.
1. Can you tell me what you think it is? (Wait for answcr then give them the definition below)
It's when someone makes you feel bad or when someone makes fun of you just to hurt your feelings. Sometimes bullies do it so you c m get mad. sad or scared. It's aIso when a person ivants to ernbanass or hun you. It's tvhen they cal1 you narnes. make fun ofyou. tmnt [O t'ight or beat you up. when they don't talk to !ou on purpose. when they get other people against you. and when the' i t ~ e c k your things.
We know that it happrns to a lot of kids. We also know that it's hard to talk about tOO.
Now that I've given you this definition, can you tell me what you ttiink about this?
2. Have you ever been bullied or treated badly like in the definition 1 gave you? (If yes, tell me about it. If no, have you seen someone else being builied? Have you ever bullied another kid?)
Prompts: Can you tell me about that?
What was that like for you? How did that make you feel? How recently? Pushed yodthem? FIas called yodthem a name? Ignored yodthem on purpose? Not played with yodthem on purpose? Made h n of yodthem? Was nasty to youhhem? Tried to kick yodthem? Said they'diyou'd beat youithem up3 Tried to make yodthem give thernfyou money? Made yodthem do something yodthey didn't want to do'?
(You want this to tlow like a conversation - so if the child says "somstimes the other kids make fun of me because 1 can't run that fast" you then probe this - "What was that like for you?" naturally follows and isn't something you come back to later.)
3. Earlier you said that you felt .... "badly" (use their words) when the other kids made fun of you, can you tell me about what you did when you felt like that?
( I f they say they didn't talk to anyone. you c m ask. 'rell me about that. how come you didn't tell your teacher?" and you'll get at their perceptions of others' attitudes. expectations. biases. values. etc.)
Probes: Did you talk to anyone about it'? (teacher. friend. parent) Who did you go [O? What did you say? Cm you talk about what it was like to talk about this with (name the person)? If it were to happen again. what would you do? If this were to happen to one of your friends. what would !ou tell them to do? -- (This might be a way to get them to think about what they would do differently - sornetimes thinking about others helps.)
4. We're interested in knowing what you think is going on here. .. Why do you thiak they do that?
Prompts: Why were they doing that? Can you tell me a bit about the bully? Can you tell me about the child that got [teased]? How old was the bully? Victim?
Are there some kids who aren't builies - what makes h e m different than the other kids who are*?
Probes: What is it about the bully that makes them do that?
(Characteristics)
5. When those things happen that you talked about, did rnyone do any thing?
Prompts: Tell me about what people around you were doing when zhis happened. Did anyone try to help you'? Did anyone join in?
6. Earlier you taiked about "getting teased at recess" (fil1 in with their erperiencels), how long did tbis happen for?
(For kids o u need to focus hem so because you've talked to them for awhile now. o u ma! need to really have them think about one or two incidents or types of buIlying for this question to rnake sense to [hem and for you CO get rncaninghl data.)
Prompts: Did it just happen once or many times'?
7. What would your advice be to other liids who are being bullied?
Prompts: What would you tel1 h e m to do or say if the? were being bullied?
APPENDM E - PARENT CONSENT F O ~ LOORVlECV MACM~LLAN CENTRE
TITLE OF STUDY: v The bullying experiences of children who are physically disabled
INVESTIGATOR:
Nikie Tentoglou. BA 2" Year Master of Social Work Student University of Toronto (4 16) 425-6220 cxt. 3087
CONTACT NAlMES:
Dr. Darcy Fehhgs. MD. FRCP (Cl Physician Director. Neurodevelopmental Program. Bloorvicw t.lacbIillan Childrrn's Centre (416) 425-6220 sxt. 3586
Barbara Germon, MS W Social Worker. Neurodevelopmental Program. Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre (416) 425-6220 ext, 2584
Gert SIontgomery. MSW Social Worker. Musculoskeletal Program Bloorview b!acivIillan Children's Centre (4 16) 425-6220 sxt. 380
Purpose of the study:
Research s h o w that children with physical differences are more likely to be bullied than chiltiren who have no physical differences. Little information is available about children with physical disabilities who are buIIied. The purpose of this research is to understand this bener.
Description of the study:
This study requires 2 meetings with your chiId. The meetings will take piace between your child and myself. The f i i t meeting will take I to 2 hours. i will let you know v if 1 need to meet with your child agiin. Ali interviews wi11 be tape-recorded.
TORONTO. OSTr\RIO . W C IRY
Potential benefits:
There are no major benefits in taking part in this study. It is possible that your child rnay feel good about talking about hiderself . Further. your child rnay talk about bullying they have felt. seen or heard. Your child rnay also get ideas about how to deal with bullying. Your child rnay also be able to help other children who are being bulIied.
Potential harms:
If your child is upset by some of the thinzs we talk about. two social workers. Gen Montgomery and Barbara Germon are available.
Confidentiality:
Your child must be willing to participate in this study. The information hat I collect tiom your child will be protected in the sarne way as their medical chart. No information about your child will be given to anyone without your written permission.
The only instance that 1 1viI1 not be able to keep confidentiality is if someone tells me that a child under 16 years is being hun or is not being properly cared for. .As well. if someone tells me that they are going to harm him or herself or somcone rlse. In that case we must follow the law and contact professionals who cm help.
No information will be published that has you or your child's name in it.
Research information. includinç audiotapes, are destroyed after the research is complsted. Written notes from the interviews wil1 be kept for three years fo1lowing the study. No information identifying you or your child will be on the notes.
This consent fom will be îled in your child's medical chart. One copy of the consent form wiil be filed in the researcher's research file. You will be given a copy of the consent and assent foms for vour otvn records.
Participation:
Your child has the right to choose to be a part of this study. You also have the right to not ailow your child to be a part of this study. You have the right to withdraw your child from this study at any tirne. Your decision wi1I not affect the care you receive at the Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre.
For questions and further information:
PIease contact Nikie Tentoglou, Barbara Germon. or Dr. Darcy Fchlings with an); questions or concerns you rnay have in regard to this study. If you reach voicemaiI piease leave your narne and phone number. We will cal1 you back as soon as possible.
Please complete the consent portion of this form below.
1 have taken part in research at this Centre in the past. -- Yes No
1 am currently participating in another research study at this Centre. Yes No
The name of the study is "The bullvine exoeriences of children with ~hvsical disabilities"
I have received an erplanation of the study by the investigator named below. 1 understand that 1 rnay refuse to have my child participate. 1 may withdraw my child from the study at any time without any peualties of any kind.
1 hereby consent to participate in this study.
Print Name Signature Date
Investigator's Signature
APPENDIX F - CHILD ASSENT FORM v
Title of Study:
To find out more information about what you feel and what you think when you are teased or bullied at school.
Investigator:
Nikie Tentoglou, BA 2" Year Master of Social Work Student University of Toronto
Contact Names:
Darcy Fehling, MD, FRCP (C) Physician Director, Neurodevelopmental Program, Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre
Barbara Germon, MS W Social Worker, Neurodevelopmental Program, Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre
Gert Montgomery, MS W Social Worker, Neurodeveloprnental Program, Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre
Why are we doing this study?
Sometimes kids are mean to other kids and they bug or tease them at school. Getting teased is not good for anyone. 1 would like to help others fiom being teased and bullied. In order to stop this 1 want to find out more information about why kids do it. 1 also want to find out what happens to kids who get teased and how they feel about it.
What will happen to me during the study?
You will meet alone with me for a couple of interviews. You will meet me at the Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre. The first meeting will last from 1 to 2 houn. During that time we will talk about teasing at school. 1 will have some questions that I will ask you. Your answers will be written down and will also be tape-recorded. I will need you and your parents' permission to do this. 1 may call you again after the interview to ask you about your answers from the first interview.
Are there good things and bad things about the study?
The good thing is that you will be helping other kids who get teased at school. The answers you give me will help me to corne up with ideas to help stop this from happening to other kids.
The bad thing is that during or after the study you may feel badly about what you talked about. Even after the study is over and you still feel like you need to talk to someone you can call me. We c m meet again and talk about it some more. If you do not want to meet with me, there are 2 other people you may want to meet with.
What if I feel funny during the study?
If, at any time, you feel that you do not want to continue talking anymore we will stop. It is O.K. No one will be angry or upset with you. We can also stop in between to take a break if you need one.
Who will know about what 1 said in the study?
The answers you give me will not be shared with anyone except for my teachers at school. Even when 1 talk or write about the answers you give me, 1 will never Say p u r name. 1 will not even tell your parents or doctor what you tell, unless you ask me to. The only time when 1 will have to tell someone is if you Say something that will hurt you or someone else. 1 will let you know if 1 am going to tell anyone.
INou give us your permission, please sign here.
I want to be in this study.
Name of participant and age
Signature
Narne of person who obtained assent
Signature
Date
I was present when read this
form and gave herlhis verbal assent.
APPENDIX G - RELEASE FORM BLOORVIEW ~ IACMILMN CENTRE
v Client Name: Chan Number: Date of Birth:
RELEASE FORM FOR CLIENT .AUDiO VOICE RECORDING
1. fname of client or person legally authorized to consent on behalf of the client), give my consent to have audio recordings made of
(name of child being audiotaped).
1 understand that the purpose of the audiotapes is for research purposes only and 1 consent to this. 1 understand that 1 can withdraw this consent to have the audiotaped recordings made or used bq writing on this form.
I understand that the audiotaped recordings are the property of BLOORVIEW blACMILLr\N CENTRE. but that I may request access to view them m obtain copies. subject to the Centre's policies on Release of Information. 1 undertake not to reproduce copies of audiotaped recordings without written approval of BLOORVIEW MACMILLAN CENTRE.
I understand that these audiotaped recordings will be stored in a secure location that \vil1 protect the privacl. of the peson recorded and they will be kept for the tirne period required by law or outiined in the policies of BLOORVIEW blACMILLAN CENTRE.
i give my consent to have audiotaped recordings used by BLOORVIEW MACMILLAN CENTRE for activities outside BLOORVIEW MACMILLAN CENTRE providing such use is consistent with the purpose set out above.
Date:
Signature of Client or Penon Legally Authorized to Consent on Behalf of the Client:
This was explained to me by:
APPENDIX H - SCHOOL SPEECH ON TEASING
1 want to talk to you about teasing because 1 was teased and 1 want to help other kids who are going through the s m e thing. I was teased because 1 have Cerebral Palsy.
A boy in my class said that 1 talk and look weird and run slow. I got mad. Then the other kids started teasing me because they wanted to be his Friend. It made me feel like 1 tvas al1 alone and different.
1 taIked to my mom about this situation and she took me to a support group and then 1 met other kids that were going through the sarne thing. It made me feel surprised and better that 1 met other kids that were like me. We helped each other plan what to do about our problems.
So 1 learned that kids bully other kids to feel powertùl and that if ?ou ignore them they don't feel so powerful. If you tell other kids your special unique ways they might understand. I told my class about my cerebral palsy and it worked for me.
I realized that we are ail good at some things and not so good at some rhings. 1 think that (Narne of School Program) at (Name of School) is a wonderful thing to help kids that are going through this situation.
1 think that vie should tum this school into something called a bully- free zone and put up posters saying things like "no builying aliowed." 1 think that bullies should not do this because it makes other kids feel like 1 felt.
I hope that you found my speech helpful and that if you are going through the sarne thing that you will talk to somebody because it helps a lot.