In today’s paper, I read about the tragic death of Missouri teen Megan Meier (11/17/07 PJS, A11, not on JS website, but AP story is available here). Then I saw it was also in the Chicago Tribune. Then I saw it in the blogs. Then I saw this video (hat tip: Death by 1000 Papercuts):
And this report from CNN:
Megan Meier killer herself a year ago because a boy she met on MySpace dumped her and started saying nasty things about her to other people. It’s hard enough taking that kind of bullying from your peers as a teenager, but she also struggled with depression and ADD, which obviously made matters worse.
That would be tragic in and of itself. But it gets worse. It turns out the boy she met online wasn’t even a real person. He was made up by the parents of a girl who used to be Megan’s friend, and who lived just down the street.
The parents. They are adults. And they traumatized a 13-year-old girl.
They were trying to get back at Megan for not being friends with their daughter anymore, apparently. Can you imagine? I can’t. I won’t. It’s too painful for the mind even to contemplate.
The newspaper in the area — the St. Charles Journal — decided not to print the names of the couple who created the fake MySpace identity and used it to torment a 13-year-old girl. But the blogs did. You can find them on the blogs pretty easily if you want to know. I’m wondering how long it will be before that couple goes into the witness protection program, because they’re going to be the target of much outrage. One of the blogs claimed that the couple’s house was under heavy surveillance by local police to make sure there isn’t any violence done to them.
There are so many questions raised by this sad incident: What’s wrong with these adults that they would do something so stupid and cruel to a teenager? Should there be a criminal charge for cyberbullying? What does this say about the safety of adolescents using social networking sites like MySpace? Should the newspaper have published the names of the couple involved in cyberbullying? What, if anything, can be done to keep something like this from happening again?
I have to wonder if this girl had other issues involving home life and family that contributed to this. While I think what the parents did was way overboard, I don’t think they are soley responsible here.
So far, we have just one side to this story. I’m going to reserve judgment. But yeah, there are parents who get TOO involved in the details of their children’s lives. But do we KNOW that the parents did this?
Can you imagine the death count if everyone committed suicide when things didn’t go the way they wanted them to?
Millions, perhaps?
This girl obviously had a good deal more in the problem department than just this make-believe dude. It’s no excuse for the adults to do such a thing… but it’s also not a good enough reason to say that they caused this girl to commit suicide.
There are far more teenage suicides than you realize. These kids are coming into puberty and things just don’t look the same to them anymore. They are looking at the world through round eyes out a square window and things are distorted. A young girl or guys first love is so deep and emotional it simply controls their every thought and action. To find out that this was a fake just destroys them. And to add insult to injury to find out that it was done by what is supposed to be grown adults is even more devastating. If all the facts are true then it is an abomination and these adults (and that a stretch of the term) should be held accountable. I am sure they feel it was justified because of the injury done to their daughter, but was the final price worth it? One beautiful young life torn, crushed, destroyed and wiped out. Nothing is worth that.
The “parents” that did this knew this girl had mental health problems yet thought this was harmless. What is wrong with people? Where has human decency gone?
SD, I think it’s pretty clear that it is WAAAAAAAAAAY out of the ordinary for a teenager to hang herself over a fake internet pal. You can run with this “so many danged teen suicides” slick-oh as much as you want, but it truly is not THAT danged many. Mental illness has to do with teen suicide (and any suicide for that matter)… what triggers it does not cause 99.9999% of society to commit suicide… so to try and say these idiotic parents CAUSED the suicide is really stretching it.
My guess is that if the fake internet pal did it, something else would have caused it sooner or later, anyhow. I would like to know what the dead girl’s parents were doing in terms of psychiatric treatment for a girl on the precipice anyhow.
If I jump out and yell “boo” at kids on Halloween, and the first 1,000 of them scream in delight, and the 1,001st kid goes and hangs himself over being scared, does that make me culpable? Or… does it just mean that the 1,001st kid has problems that go WAAAAAAAAAAY beyond being “scared” far too easily?
I would imagine that this ‘Josh’ merely added to the feelings she already had and that the existing ADD and depression were the route cause of her suicide.
Prego:
It isn’t that I disagree with you, but several years ago I worked with a group of teenagers for a summer and I can not believe the self-imposed drama some of these kids create for themselves…and this was BEFORE My Space got big…and how they would react to said dramas. It was about enough to drive me nuts just overhearing some of it. I can’t imagine if you threw in some online drama world, too.
Prego, your comments are dismissive, cruel, and part of the problem rather than part of the solution. Having been in this girl’s situation at one time in my life, I recall how deeply comments like yours cut. And I recall how friends whose parents made comments like yours were urged to drop me as a friend at a time when I most needed support. I can’t possibly argue rationally with you about this right now because I’m so furious I’m shaking, but I urge you to learn something about teenaged suicide or talk to teenagers who’ve been in that situation before you toss off such cruel, hurtful, counterproductive comments.
If I’m reading this correctly, what these parents did goes way beyond just a thoughtless remark or a reflexive action (i.e. not allowing your own child to associate with a friend who has “issues”)or yelling “Boo” at somebody. These parents made a deliberate, concerted effort to create this “Josh” character, respond to Megan’s communications with him, allow time for Megan to get hooked on him, THEN have him “dump” her and post nasty comments about her.
Yes, perhaps Megan’s other issues would have driven her over the edge eventually. But these adults acted with malice, not on impulse or in good faith (doing something they mistakenly believed to be right), and therefore bear more responsibility for what happened.
Eyebrows, get over yourself. I have friends who had a child commit suicide… I’m certainly not making light of it. What I’m saying is that those stupid adults could have made such a fake kid site and screwed with a 100,000 different kids, and NEVER have considered that one would commit suicide… because 99,999 would NOT. All that shows is that ONE kid had a problem that maybe something else might have set him/her off and take his/her life.
It’s a very very sad case. But, don’t point to these stupid adults as being the CAUSE of the poor girl’s suicide. She had deep seated emotional and mental issues that perhaps something else in the future might have caused the same reaction, without having the proper medical/psychological care and treatment. I don’t understand your reaction to what I wrote. Way too emotional, Eyebrows. I expect an attorney to be a bit more pragmatic.
And the callousness continues.
I don’t expect anyone to be “pragmatic” about the death of children. It’s a little sad that you do.
… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…
Prego, these parents INTENDED to cause pain. This was not a game or an accident. The fact that they succeeded beyond their wildest dreams does not make them LESS culpable. If you hit 99 people with a hockey stick and break their collarbone, and you come into my game INTENDING to break my collarbone but instead manage to paralyze me from the neck down, you’re not suddenly off the hook. You intended to cause injury; you succeeded. The fact that it wasn’t the injury you intended has no bearing.
This, however, is even more serious than that situation. By all media accounts, these parents knew the girl’s family and knew she had psychological problems. They knew her specific triggers (such as weight). They deliberately went after those specific points with the intention to do as much damage as possible. This is not jumping out of the bushes and yelling boo at random children; this is targeting the child who was sexually assaulted by a man who jumped out of the bushes and shouted “boo” and doing it to him.
If you KNOW a teenaged girl is anorexic, for example, and you know she is visually triggered into anorexic episodes, and you show her a picture of a bone-thin model and trigger an episode, you’re not off the hook on the grounds that “99 girls out of 100 wouldn’t stop eating after seeing this picture.” You deliberately picked the 100th who would. If you are pitching beanballs at children who jump out of the way, you’re not excused when you hit the 100th child with a beanball because he’s in a wheelchair on the grounds that “99 out of 100 children jumped out of the way.”
Once you start with the intention to hurt someone, you ARE legally responsible (not to mention morally responsible) for all the hurts that flow from that initial intention. (Unfortunately, they’re probably not criminally responsible, but there’s certainly several torts to be applied here.) But these parents didn’t even do that — these parents deliberately targeted a child in the way they knew would do the most damage possible. They’re even MORE culpable than otherwise.
And frankly your comments are not tending to support your statement that you’re not “making light” of this child’s suicide.
Oh, yes. Crying, and jumping around, and shaking from anger has ALWAYS accomplished a lot, Eyebrows. If you had even bothered to read my entire postings, instead of picking out bits and pieces that suited your “anger,” you would have read that I certainly agreed that the case was sad… but, like a typical over-the-top stereotypical female responder, you have to respond with EMOTION. I wasn’t blaming those parents for CAUSING the suicide of that girl… I wasn’t shaking with anger, bleary eyed with venom spewing from my mouth, so I am callous, unfeeling, horrific… geez.
I hope you don’t practice in the field of family law. I would hate to see you breaking down into the fetal position every time a sad case turns up. THAT’S where I thought a “pragmatic” mind sometimes trumps the tears and shaking. Maybe a real court of law IS like “Law & Order,” huh?
Chef Kevin, you’re right. But, “drama” has always been a part of teenaged years… heck, for an entire lifetime for many people. Each and every person who has survived their teenaged years, at one time or another, has had “suicide” flash across their minds. Obviously, very very few ever take it to its conclusion. How many of us wanted to die when the one we loved didn’t love us in return? I’m certain that a number of the teenaged suicides are based on such a premise. Does that mean we should hold the person who did not return the love as responsible for the suicide?
What about the kids who shoot up their schools, killing classmates? Many feel they were “justified” for doing it because they were bullied and picked on. Does that mean we hold those that bullied and picked on the law-breaker as fellow perpetrators to the crime? Where does this craziness end?
Or… do we simply accept that fact that now and then, people will over-react. They will not behave normally… they will not behave like the 99.99% of the rest of the population do. Once in a great while, someone with a mental illness will respond to bullying by killing fellow students. Once in a great while, someone with a mental illness will commit suicide because they feel they cannot go on without the love of someone. Once in a while, someone with a mental illness will commit suicide because they are picked on, made fun of, be it in person or by a fake student on the internet.
The answer is not breaking into tears and other forms of shaking and grief… the answer is working harder at identifying these mental illnesses and getting these people on the proper programs, care, and drugs that will make their lives better. The answer is not trying to chase down those bullys, stupid parents, and the like with the flaming torches. That’s the easy answer. That’s the emotional answer. The hard part is taking care of the problem at the ROOT of it. Because, you see, a person with a mental illness is liable to go “off” at any provocation that the rest of us are able to eventually leave behind.
The lesson is to pay close attention to these kids and identify the possible mental illnesses. You can only protect them so much from the rest of the world. You have to do the best you can to control the reaction, because the cause, in one form or another, will always be there.
Eyebrows, your examples of the anorexic girl and the kid in the wheelchair, are truly over the top once again. You’re comparing apples to basketballs. The arsehole parents involved are truly mean-spirited and extremely “callous” (there’s your word), and just genuine creeps. But, to jump from there to their virtually planning for this girl to hang herself is not only reaching, but virtually attaching your hand to Sputnik.
I’m done yakking about this. One thing I’ve learned after nearly 26 years of marriage, it makes a lot more sense to just say “Honey, you’re right,” and go watch a football game.
So… Eyebrows, you’re right.
Wow, Prego, those have to be some of the most heartless, misogynous, and downright nasty comments I’ve seen on my blog. And I’m not talking about what you had to say about Megan Meier.
I think your comments to Eyebrows were uncalled for, and you should apologize.
That bad, huh? I’ve re-read them, and compared to what she called me, I thought they were relatively tame. Besides, I already told her she was right. If I was that out of line, I’ll be more than happy to throw a “sorry” there, too. I just need a few more folks to tell me so. I can be swayed easily by public opinion when wronging a woman is involved.
Tally:
Apologize- 2
Not Apologize- 0
I’ll check on the votes later, and will follow thy will.
Make that:
Apologize – 1
Not Apologize – 0
(Eyebrows has not asked me to apologize.)
I vote prego man apologize not only to Eyebrows, but to all the “sterotypical females” that he insulted with his comments.
As details about Lori Drew’s 6 week cyber-voyeur techniques emerged, the more I am convinced that outing this kind of behavior is not only right, but essential. Essential? Really?
It is becoming clearer everyday that Lori Drew employed many of the same grooming techniques that child predators utilize to charm their way into gaining a child’s trust. The most significant key here is that Lori Drew spent approximately 6 full weeks baiting Megan into this trust by posing as a “cute” boy that Megan would be attracted to.
Right here, Drew utilizes the sexual stimulation that exists in male/female pair bonding in order to manipulate the 13 year old girl.
Lori Drew groomed her victim like many child predators do, enticing her with flirtation, mild sexual conversation and playing on Megan’s weakness. Lori knew that Megan had a low self esteem and was treated for depression.
There are uncanny parallels between the typical Child Predator MOA and those utilized by Lori Drew to control and manipulate Megan in the relationship Lori developed with her.
Outing Child Predators has been public policy in most states and is usually upheld under the premise that the public has a right to reasonably protect itself from criminal behavior where it exists. Families with children have a right to know when those who might prey upon their child, live nearby. Public policy dictates that if a child is exposed to potential harm from predatory activity, then parents should at least have the opportunity to be aware such harm may exist.
But what if a child predator confesses to a crime, but is never convicted? Does the potential for risk exist despite the legal process?
Thus far, details in the case have been heavily supported by Lori Drew’s own admissions, police records and interviews. The amount of speculation in this case has been minimal, and the majority of public outrage has largely focused on the facts presented.
The Missouri Public Records Act of 1961 was enacted partially to inform the public of persons, events, proceedings and reports that may effect the public directly. The records (such as the charges Lori Drew filed against the Meier family), were the principal documents used to tie Lori Drew to her abhorrent acts. By filing this police report, Lori in effect put herself into the spot light. The Blogging community simply connected the dots and reported the results.
The Vice enjoys the sharp irony that Lori Drew’s own actions, activities and zeal to hurt someone eventually lead to her own uncovering. As I see it, public policy laws and Lori Drew’s own manipulations of those laws worked to her undoing. The Vice is appreciative for Lori Drew’s assistance in these efforts.
Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
On Wednesday, October 21st, city officials wasted no time enacting an ordinance designed to address the public outcry for justice in the Megan Meier tragedy. The six member Board of Aldermen made Internet harassment a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $500 fine and 90 days in jail.
Does this new law provide any justice for Megan? Does this law provide equitable relief for a future victim?
The Vice rejects the premise of this new law and believes it completely misses the mark. Classifying this case as a harassment issue completely fails to address the most serious aspects of the methods Lori Drew employed to lead this youth to her demise. The Vice disagrees that harassment was even a factor in this case until just a couple of days before Megan’s death.
Considering this case a harassment issue is incorrect because during the 5 weeks Lori Drew baited and groomed her victim, the attention was NOT unwanted attention. Megan participated in the conversations willingly because she was misled, lured, manipulated and exploited without her knowledge.
This law willfully sets a precedent that future child exploiters and predators might use to reclassify their cases as harassment cases. In effect, the law enacted to give Megan justice, may make her even more vulnerable. So long as the child victim doesn’t tell the predator to stop, even a harassment charge may not stick with the right circumstances and a good defender.
Every aspect of this case follows the same procedural requirement used to convict a Child Predator. A child was manipulated by an adult. A child was engaged in sexually explicit conversation (as acknowledged by Lori Drew herself). An adult imposed her will on a child by misleading her, using a profile designed to sexually or intimately attract the 13 year old Megan.
Lori then utilized the power she had gained over this child to cause significant distress and endangerment to that child. She even stipulated to many of these activities in the police report she filed shortly after Megan’s death.
City officials who continue to ignore this viable, documented admission and continue to address this issue as harassment are intentionally burying their heads in the sand, when the solution is staring them right in the face. Why?
There are several other child exploitation laws on the books. To date, none of them have even been considered by City, State and Federal officials in this case. The Vice is outraged that a motion was never even filed, so that the case could at least be argued before a judge or jury.
Danny Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com