The Bystander Effect

The Law By Force In 1964, Kitty Genovese was brutally attacked and left to die near her home in Queens, New York. Her death contributed to the social psychological phenomenon called the bystander effect. You would think that Media coverage following her murder spawned a nationwide debate about the disturbing apathy surrounding the events, leading to the construction of the social psychological phenomenon known as the bystander effect. The standard way of thinking about topic “The Killing of Genovese has it that ”The attention-grabbing headline was followed by an even more disconcerting description” For more than half an hour 38 respectable, law‐abiding citizens in Queens that watched a killer stalk and stab a woman. Although I should know better by now, I cannot help thinking that it was later determined that many of the so-called “facts” in Gansberg’s piece were exaggerations, in this version of Genovese’s murder made national headlines and the disturbing apathy surrounding the events sparked national debate about bystander
intervention, particularly in urban settings.
One implication of The Topic of The Bystander Effect is that it refers to the phenomenon of individuals that are more likely to help when they are alone than when in the company of others. When it comes to the topic of The Killing of Genovese most of us will readily agree that Genovese’s murder has become “a kind of modern day parable of the good Samaritan, When it comes to the topic of The killing of genovese, most of us will readily agree that we strive for accuracy and fairness. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question That there’s not always a upstander in a bystander situation. Whereas some are convinced that They are imposing on us a duty to assist, provided we don’t put ourselves at risk, others maintain that Bystanders look the other way, ignoring the victims because we have no legal obligation to assist. In conclusion, then as I suggested earlier, defenders of Bystanding and Upstanding can’t
have it both ways. Their assertion that people have a legal system strength on Individualism But some Choose to take a stand, breaking connection with people of following the crowd and it is contradicted by their claim that bystanders become upstanders from moving silence to action. Bystanders contribute to the problem, Upstanders stop the problem. I agree that It takes courage to be an upstander because my experience There were Situations where i had to take a stand because I’m not a bystander and I confirms it. Of course, many will probably disagree with this assertion that The Bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation. Is it always the case, as I have been suggesting, that It’s ok to be a afraid and to just follow the crowd it’s completely normal because that’s everyone’s decision to be a bystander but not everyone, there is alway that silent hero, The Upstander that jumps into action. Yet is it always true that the idea of these social norm-shaping reactions to someone's words or behavior could prevent violence is helpful only to the extent that the community realizes their power. However, does the evidence I’ve cited prove conclusively that Any one of us is a bystander any time we are interacting with others and we can either promote positive and healthy attitudes and behaviors, or harmful ones. Although I grant that individuals who observe a problem and want to do something but don’t, I still maintain the fact that there are most people want to upstand and do the right thing.