(or completely old-fashoned) to feel a bit shocked about this?

[Countingthegreyhairs]

As I'm not overly-confident about my own parenting skills I'm currently addicted to those Tiny-Tearaway/Super Nanny type of programmes. Anyway, I was watching one of them last week which featured a father talking to his four-year-old son. The conversation went like this ...

Father: Did you have a good day at school?

Son: Yes but x hit me.

Father: Did you hit him back?

Son: Yes

Father: (said very casually) That's my boy! What do you want for tea?

This has been on my mind ever since. The conversation wasn't even alluded to in the programme and it was the casual acceptance that 'hitting back' was not only acceptable but expected that shocked me. Am I being unreasonable or is this what we are supposed to teach our children nowadays?

I've always been strict about smacking and DS1 knows that it's not acceptable. However I don't intervene if he's defending himself against other smackers. Although I don't condone it, and never encourage him to hit back, I'm happy to turn a blind eye as it's good for kids to stick up for themselves.

I've taught mine that hitting is wrong unless they have to no option. They have my permission to defend themselves. Like gdg I was bullied for a short period by an older girl and it only stopped when I slapped her.

I do agree with hitting back - theres no way anybody will touch my child without fighting back. My preference would be for her to report it though

Both my boys hit back if they are hit first.
They should be encouraged to defend themselves.
If they always go running to teacher they will be picked on even more.
They are not aggressive but they know how to stand up for themselves, and I ma glad that thye do.

hippipotami sorry i got the wrong end of the stick.

Don't approve of teaching kids to hit back, violence just begets more violence (eye for an eye ultimately leaves everyone blind) but it is understandable if children do hit back in some circs. Parents shouldn't promote it though. And they do need to be able to defend themselves/escape in a real emergency.

those who teach their children to hit back - what if the original hitter has SN, for instance, and doesn't have the understanding to moderate their behaviour or the empathy to realise that hitting is not nice? Is it OK for your NT kid who should know better to hit an SN kid who may not have that ability?

I dont want to go into a SN conversation but I have experience at the moment that this is just as big a problem.

I'm with you Fio.
In an ideal world child would tell and all would be fine.
Unfortunately teacher/ parent isn't always going to be around.
My kids know that if someone hurts them deliberately then yes they can hit them back I don't have a problem with that.

This is such an interesting thread. I have seen ones like this that were so very anti- hitting back, there were huge arguments about it

At one time I would have agreed with not hitting back - however, based on experiences with all three of my children, I would now (and will) encourage GS to hit back. Both my girls were brought up with the don't hit - walk away thing. DD1 took notice and as a consequence was bullied all through comprehensive school and it has taken her until her mid-twenties to get over it. DD2 took absolutely no notice whatsoever of our thoughts on the matter - and defended herself (and others)whenever necessary - she developed into a confident, articulate teenager and young woman.
DS1 was bullied all through the infants and the first two years of the junior school by one particular person who was twice his size and nothing more than a thug. DS was regularly covered in bruises and even had his arm and bones in his foot. No-matter how we approached it with the school, nothing changed as the school were frightened of the other boys parents and entire family. The police were absolutely useless. DS became withdrawn, screamed when he had to go to school, wouldn't go out with his friends for fear of this other boy being around. We approached the parents - to no avail - they were as bad as their son.
DS took matters into his own hands, and whilst I wouldn't condone this particular type of action - it certainly worked... He waited in the school yard until the thug was running past and stuck his foot out. The thug tripped over it and went sprawling into the gravel, breaking his arm and taking skin off his face, arms and legs (which was actualy nothing compared to the stuff thet he had done to DS in previous years).
The parents threatened to take us and the school to court - so we told them to go ahead and then listed all DS's injuries and the results of the bullying from the previous four years. They became very sheepish and left. Their child actually stopped bullying the other kids and strangely he and DS eventually became friends by the time they moved on to the comprehensive school.

I went to a reallly rough inner city school.
If I hadn't learnt how to stick up for myself I would have been mincemeat!

as already said, teacher/adult not always going to be around. kids do need to be able to sort out thier own problems to a certain extent. I still don't feel comfortable about hitting and have never actively said 'hit' but it's clear that having a total 'no htiting' policy just isn't going to work int he real world in every situation, but is surely going to leave our kids feeling disempowered, as it did my son.

Anyone remember the Coward of the County?

I don't agree with that mindless thug, the father described in the playful boxing moves scenario, but not hitting back in most instances is simply not effective.

My DS is always being hit, punched, kicked and pushed at school. He tells the teachers. They half-heartedly tell the kicker/ puncher/ hitter/ pusher off. Boy apologises, then kicks DS again later on.

I've told him to hit back and he says "we're not allowed, I'll get into trouble". To which my response is "you'll get into trouble for five minutes, but it will stop all this punching forever".

IME schools simply don't supervise children closely enough to have a "never any hitting" policy in the RW. The anti-bullying policy in his school is very obviously simply a piece of paper to show to OFSTED and parents. It means sweet Fanny Adams to the kids in the playground.

It's not what you're meant to teach your children, but it is what a lot of parents advocate. So it doesn't surprise me.

It is a man thing. i assume the aggressor is, say, over 6, who clearly know it is wrong to hit. He hit, and got hit back. Don't think men tend to dissect too much.

My dh grew up in a comprehensive (not particularly rough). He says that to avoid being bullied, you have to stand up for yourself - at least once. In this way, even scrawny ones can avoid being bullied. The worst thing is to just take it or report it! Sounds scary, but thems the rules.

not just a man thing

Boys have been hitting each other in play grounds since time immemorial. I think it is a bit of a man thing; more of a father/son conversation/dilemma. Mothers aren't supposed to advocate it (and nor would I), but I wouldn't be unduly shocked if my dp said it to our ds, providing it was couched in terms of self-defense.

Hmm, i teach my DD no hitting. but then she gets thumped. she gets v v upset if the thumper is not punished. so i think i am going to maintain the 'no initiating violence but i won't get cross if it's self defence ' approach. FYI i was bullied at school, not physically but girl bitching, for 7 years. It was very very bad. It stopped when i gained the confidence from another physical activity (climbing) to laugh at the bitches. There is another answer to bullies; they are weak insecure people who can't stand up to more confident people.

i tell my dcs they can hit back if they think it's necessary, but only as a last resort.
teenage boys are strange - my 14 yr old is very popular and he and his friends more or less beat eachother up for fun