Cyberbullying and Online Exposure of Minors: How to Protect Your Children and Hold Offenders Accountable

This page is a translation of the original Portuguese text, provided for convenience. It deals with Brazilian law. If there is any discrepancy, the Portuguese version prevails. Read the original in Portuguese

When a child or teenager is humiliated, threatened, or exposed online, what parents do in the first few hours largely determines whether the offender can be held accountable and the content removed. Preserving evidence, using the right reporting channels, and seeking protective measures are steps that must happen in order, without deleting anything and without confronting the aggressor directly.

What to do in the first hours after you find out

When many parents and guardians discover an attack on their child, their instinct is to delete the content, block the offender, and put the matter behind them. That reaction is understandable, but it often destroys the very material that would support a report or a lawsuit. The first practical rule is: do not delete anything before you have recorded it.

Before blocking anyone, document what you saw. That means taking screenshots with the date and time visible, saving the address of the profile or post, and writing down usernames, phone numbers, and the times messages were sent. Videos and audio files should also be downloaded when possible, always keeping the original file.

Talking with your child is just as urgent, but it calls for care. The goal is to offer support, understand how far the content spread, and find out who else has seen it. Blaming the victim or reacting with panic tends to make a child hide relevant information, which hurts both emotional protection and the investigation of the facts.

How to preserve evidence so it holds up

Digital evidence is fragile. A post can be deleted by its author within minutes, and a stand-alone screenshot without context loses weight when it is challenged. That is why evidence must be preserved in a way that shows the material’s authenticity, integrity, and origin.

The most robust option is a ata notarial (a notarized record of the facts observed), prepared at a notary office. The notary accesses the content in the presence of the person requesting it and describes in a public document everything seen on the screen, including URLs, profiles, and messages. The document carries public faith (it is presumed authentic) and makes it much harder to claim that the evidence was fabricated or altered.

When an immediate notarial record is not feasible, there are alternatives that make the record more reliable. Capture services with timestamps, continuous screen recording that shows you navigating to the offending page, and saving the post’s source code all help show that the content really existed at that address at that moment.

It is also worth recording the information that identifies the offender or leads to them: the profile name, the account’s numeric ID, any associated e-mail addresses or phone numbers, and any earlier posts that link the person behind the attack to the account. These details are decisive in allowing the platform or the courts to reach the person responsible.

Deleting the offensive content before recording it is the most common mistake, and the one that most weakens the victim’s case.

All of this documentation should be organized in a single folder, with files named by date and description. A clear, chronological set of evidence speeds up the work of whoever will review the case, whether that is the police, the platform, or the attorney handling the removal and damages action.

Reporting channels and content removal requests

Once the evidence is preserved, you can start reporting. Reports run in parallel, not in sequence: it is possible, and advisable, to use more than one channel at the same time, because each has a different purpose and speed.

The first channel is the platform where the content is circulating. Social networks and messaging apps maintain specific forms for reporting harassment, exposure of intimate images, and threats, and they give priority to cases involving minors. A removal request made this way is usually the fastest route to getting the material taken down.

The second channel is the government. Disque 100, Brazil’s national hotline, receives reports of violations of the rights of children and adolescents, and the Polícia Civil (state civil police) files a police report, including at online police stations. When there is suspicion of a sexual image involving a minor, reporting it to the police is mandatory and urgent, given the seriousness of the crime.

There are also channels that specialize in receiving reports of child abuse material and work to alert providers and authorities in a coordinated way. For court-ordered removal, when the platform does not honor the administrative request, the parent or guardian can seek a specific order to take the content down and to identify the offender through connection records.

Protective measures and accountability

Taking the content down solves the immediate problem, but it does not exhaust the protection available. When there are continuing threats, stalking, or a risk to the minor’s safety, it is possible to request protective measures that keep the aggressor away, prohibit contact, and bar new posts, with a fine for violations.

The offender can be held accountable in three spheres that do not exclude one another. In the criminal sphere, conduct such as threats, insult, stalking, disclosure of nudity or sexual acts and, above all, producing or sharing images of child abuse constitute separate crimes. In the civil sphere, the child or teenager who was harmed is entitled to compensation for pain and suffering (dano moral, or non-pecuniary damages).

When the person who committed the offense is another minor, accountability follows its own logic. The teenager answers for an ato infracional (an act equivalent to a juvenile offense), subject to the measures set out in the specialized legislation, while civil compensation for the harm falls on the parents or guardians, based on their duty of supervision.

Schools are also part of this map of responsibilities. Episodes of systematic intimidation that begin or continue in the school setting require action by the institution, which has a duty to prevent, investigate, and refer cases of violence among students. Failing to act on facts that have been reported can create liability for the school itself.

Platforms, for their part, are liable when they fail to remove manifestly unlawful content within a reasonable time after being notified. A well-documented notice that identifies the exact address of the post is precisely what creates this duty to act and supports a claim for compensation against a provider that does nothing.

Emotional care and prevention that reduce repeat incidents

The legal side goes hand in hand with emotional care. Online exposure leaves marks that outlast the episode, and psychological support for the child or teenager is part of dealing with it, not a secondary detail. Health and social-assistance professionals can be brought in from the start.

When it comes to prevention, open conversation about internet use is usually more effective than a simple ban. Agreeing on clear privacy rules, reviewing account settings, giving guidance on what not to share, and keeping a relationship of trust at home all reduce the chance of new episodes and shorten the time between an incident and a request for help.

Finally, keeping the file on a resolved case has practical value. If the offense returns, resurfaces on another platform, or comes from the same person, material that is already organized allows an immediate response and shows a pattern of repeat conduct, a circumstance that carries weight both in the criminal sphere and in setting the compensation owed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it better to delete the offensive content or leave it up?

Do not delete anything before preserving the evidence. The best approach is to document the post with a screenshot, its address, and the date, or to obtain an ata notarial (a notarized record), and only then ask for removal through the platform’s channels. Deleting on your own or blocking the offender before recording the content tends to destroy the material that would support the report and the claim for compensation.

Are the parents liable if the aggressor is also a minor?

The teenager who committed the offense answers for an ato infracional, subject to measures set out in the specialized legislation. Compensation for the harm, however, falls on the parents or guardians, based on their duty to supervise their child. So even when the offense comes from another young person, the affected family can seek compensation from the offender’s parents or guardians.

Can a platform be held liable for not removing content?

Yes, when it fails to remove manifestly unlawful content after being clearly notified, with the exact address of the post. That notice creates the provider’s duty to act. Inaction in response to a well-documented request can make the platform liable, in addition to the person who directly committed the offense.

As informações deste artigo são de caráter informativo e não substituem consulta jurídica individualizada. Cada caso possui particularidades que exigem análise específica.