Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I disagree. This is like believing that if one is attacked, the right thing to do is to call the police even though one should be capable of dealing with the attack by one's self. The truth is, the police, like the adults in you scenario will arrive after the damage is done. It's their job to be reactive. I don't believe in a "nanny state" solution. The school in this situation is taking a similar tack - to react to the child's egregious behavior, and it seems that they are doing little, if anything, if he indeed is persisting in hitting and spitting. The responsibility lies on them at this point to take a proactive stance to absolutely prevent any further acts of agression. A child under physical attack, unless adults are immediately present to halt that attack, is certainly in enough danger to warrant hitting back. "Maintaining self control" through non-reaction while one is struck or spit upon is showing that either the attack is accepted and/or that there will be no consequences to the attacker beyond a lecture from the teacher/administrator. I do not feel this is an effective deterrrent to prevent further misbehavior. My view of a victim of such agression taking proper action includes not only stopping the attack immediately, but rendering the attacker incapable of continuing even should they want/choose to do so, thus my view on subjects of his violence giving the attacker a proper "beat down" as hard or as often as needed. I do not see emotional problems as being an excuse to become violent with others. If the kid suffers the immediate consequence of his actions, one of several things may happen: 1) the school will take proper action; 2) his parents will take proper action to remove him from the environment; or 3) he will learn through repeated negative reinforcement not to strike/spit upon others.
As stated, I would not issue what amounts to a hunting license to others to inflict harm upon him indiscriminately, but would not bring any form of punishment to those who reacted to his behavior with a punch to the snout. I believe the fault here lies with both the school and the parents for attempting to put what sounds like a dysfunctional child into a normal environment. It also sounds like neither the school nor the parents are doing anything to rectify the situation in an effective manner.
Oh, and I agree that "telling them to hit back" is not effective, but showing them how to is.
I think that you are makin an assumption that if a child or person decides to hit back and knows how to do it, then it should work.
But it is very possible that the child might be beaten more severly simply beacause he or she is weaker than the attacker.
Police and protection by law make it possible for people with less physical ability to exist in equal terms with people with a strong physical strength.
Again violence against violence cannot be a solution in a short term or long term.
Hitting back sounds "right" to begin with, but intellectually, there are better ways to handle such situations where I can encourage my son to assert and protect himself by using not just his physical abilities, but "using" knowledge that support his rights.
Your son may be able to handle himself physically, but what about when there is a chance that he can get hurt a lot worse? Say in the future around high school, or in college at a bar. What if weapons were used, or more than one bully is there to go against your son?
I would try to teach my son to think of it from a certain point of view. School is "suppose" to be a place for learning. Hitting and getting bullied is not a proper place for school or anywhere, so it is wrong. When a bully hits my son, I would teach my son to think and find a way out of the situation safely. Yes, telling the teacher is the proper way to address the bully because it reinforces to that individual that such behavior is not acceptable.
The dilemma is what actions can your son do during the incident and in the time before he can report the incident to an authority figure (teacher). I would say, 1. Encourage your son to assert by saying, "Do not him me. stop it."
2. If the bully chose to continue the assault, then have him think of a way to remove himself out of the situation. And if hitting back is the option, then yes I would agree. And this puts you in the position to say your son gave a warning, and the his retaliation of hitting back is self defense to remove himself out of the confrontation. Any principal who would punish the victim in this situation just sets himself up for a lawsuit.
I think that you are makin an assumption that if a child or person decides to hit back and knows how to do it, then it should work.
But it is very possible that the child might be beaten more severly simply beacause he or she is weaker than the attacker.
Police and protection by law make it possible for people with less physical ability to exist in equal terms with people with a strong physical strength.
Again violence against violence cannot be a solution in a short term or long term.
All probabilities considered, hitting back is more likely to deter an attack when compared to standing/sitting/lying there and taking it. That's where teaching one's child to fight effectively comes in. My dad once told me "If the other guy's bigger, pick up something heavy and whack him with it." In other words, do what's necessary to equalize the situation. While we do have protection of law, the police will at best respond in minutes when seconds may count. The situation is the same with a teacher or other adult unless they are immediately present. Both will arrive after damage has been done, try to evaluate what has occurred, take some notes and names, and proceed from there. And it does little to deter future incidents. It more often than not in the case of a physical attack falls upon the non-aggressor to take steps to stop the violence. If you feel violence against violence is not an answer, tell me how you feel about passivity against violance as a preferred solution.
My 6 year old was in a similar situation recently. My son did not hit back, but instead told the teacher. The school informed me of the situation, and the boy who hit my son was punished. I was very happy both with how my son responded, and also how the school responded. I personally would not counsel my son to fight back at school, we never did with my grown children, either. If a child is older than six though, and playing somewhere such as outdoors in their neighborhood when attacked, yes I would think it was appropriate to fight back. But at six though, I can't think of an occasion where a six year old is really left unattended and could be hurt bad enough to need to fight back. I will say though, how children behave with one another, and what parents teach their children, can differ wildly from region to region. When I was growing up in Oklahoma I was taught to always fight back if hit by a child. And at school there, there were some real nasty kids, even girls, who would hit just for the fun of it. But I have found that children in suburban schools in general where I live now don't have quite that level of violence. So, I can understand why some parents want their children to fight back, perhaps they live in an area where that is the norm.
I think you are comparing apples and oranges. A child at school where other adults are immediately present (or should be, if they are not that is another issue) is VERY different than an adult, on their own being attacked by another adult. Noone is saying that an adult should just take it and wait for the police. But I think children should be taught to get or wait for an adult to help if at all possible. Now if a child is going ballistic on the child, well that too is different, but I didn't get that impression.
If this has been going on for some time, then yes someone needs to take this further with the school and the school is at fault as well. But that is a different issue from whether or not to teach your child to just hit back.
Location: Finally escaped The People's Republic of California
11,314 posts, read 8,656,908 times
Reputation: 6391
Nothing stops a bully like a good punch in the nose, support your son...just make sure he isn't the aggressor...Funny how even you aren't concidered a "tough" guy, if the bullies know you'll fight back, they usually won't bother you........
You gave him the right advice and yes the school will not like it but not teaching your child to protect himself is a bad idea. I had situation just like this when my son was 6 yrs old. He was in first grade. He was very shy and sensitive. Another boy had been picking on him. Of course this kid would slug my son when the teacher wasn't looking. Most kids wont slug another kid in front the teacher.
His school also had the policy to tell the teacher. My son tried this a few times but if the teacher was busy, she wouldn't hear my son out and just tell him to go sit down. For my son being so shy, he gave up on the telling part. My husband and I told him that he needed to hit back if needed but he would say things like he didnt want to hurt the other child etc. I contacted the teacher and got the response that she never noticed or she would look into it.
One day, I went to pick him up and the school informed me that my son was in the office due to fighting. I walked in and there was my son sobbing, he kept saying..I didn't want to hurt him...I really didnt! Turns out the other boy was slugging him and my son hit his breaking point. He slugged the back and of course that is when the teacher saw the incident. I calmly listened to how my son needs to know not to hit and all that jazz. When we got home we talked about what happened and I assured my son he made the right decision. He acted like the world had been lifted off his shoulders. He was more confident and that bully never touched him again. Its a doggie dog eat world out there, even in elementary school. One needs to know how to protect themselves cuss there will be situations where no help is around. He now 13 and hasn't had a fight since. He has an aura of confidence and I think that helps with bullies.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,782,175 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by sisyphus89
Police and protection by law make it possible for people with less physical ability to exist in equal terms with people with a strong physical strength.
Again violence against violence cannot be a solution in a short term or long term.
A bit of a digression on my part, but I think that the assumption above is completely wrong. No one is so strong that he can't be overcome by a number of smaller people.
There is a hypothesis that an even temper has become linked to the genes for large stature over time. Why? A big, strong, volatile a-hole is dangerous to himself. Even in today's world of police and protection by law, people with hyper-aggressive traits do not enjoy the longevity that good citizens do. "Police and protection by law" are necessary constructs in a civilization and they function to secure the population-at-large. They do not perform as well at protecting individuals from instances of spot aggression or torment that is difficult to prove or enforce punishment for. Luckily, for a child that is being bullied, a swift kick to a bully's groin is difficult to prove or enforce punishment for as well.
This has never really come up in our family. My boys have been in jiu jitsu since a very young age, I take jiu jitsu as well. It's never really been discussed, but if anybody ever did anything to either of my boys, I'm sure they wouldn't hesitate to put the smack down on someone's ass.
I'm a big believer in communal justice. There was a time where bullies were disciplined by the other children in the class, not the teachers. I think bullies are worse today for various reasons but one of which is because they no longer fear their fellow students because kids are taught to "never fight". Tattling to the teacher isn't scary enough, the punishment isn't severe enough and the other kids lapse into worshiping the offender because they're so impressed by his power rather than getting a group of boys together to kick his behind. I think this tattle mentality goes against the very essence of boys.
My personal opinion that we will teach our son is that you never start it but you hit back, you don't hit girls and you defend the weaker child.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
