[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

I'm slighty confused here.

You say if someone is attacking you, you defend yourself. How do you suggest they defend themselves then if you would not teach your child to respond to violence with violence - because that sounded very much like that is exactly what you meant by ''if someone was attacking you, you would defend yourself''. It is still condoning violence.

Then you say you have not taught your children to respond to violence with violence - as they have not been in that situation - but if they were hit by another, you would go to the school.

That's on the premise that it happened during school hours and on school premises surely?

What if it happened outwith the school? That you did not know the child, who their parents were, were they lived? How would you tackle that?

I'm telling you I have never taught my children to respond to violence with violence, what's hard to understand about that? I have never sat down and had a conversation with them about an event that has never happened If they came home from school and said someone had hit them I would go to the school about it, if they came home from somewhere else other than school and told me someone had hit them I would go to that childs parents.........what's difficult about that to understand?

And yes 08Marsh, that is what I meant