Bigdaddyjug wrote:
That's why I recommended going with one of the disciplines that focuses on grappling, like jiu-jitsu. Grappling is more like a street fight and would actually prepare a kid to defend themselves if they got into a fight.
It depends. Teaching self defense is tricky. Many places don't properly simulate real fight conditions; the demographic of their clientele doesn't permit them to do things with the force or speed that one might actually encounter. Instead they'll just drill moves slo-mo, with little resistance. There's only so much one can learn that way, and sometimes it does more harm than good. A lot of what they do isn't practical, grappling or no. The moves are too complex, and/or too dependent upon your opponent being incredibly accommodating.
Grappling is a ton of fun to train, and it can have very practical self defense applications. But you really have to be careful about doing it for the right reasons, and you have to shop around for training centers like you're looking for a new house. It's not as simple as simply picking a martial art that you think might be relevant, and then going to the nearest place that's got it.
More to the point: in most cases, I'm not sure that there's any point to teaching a kid martial arts as self-defense. I can't say that I see a situation in which it's in their best interest to ever use them. They should be extraditing themselves and finding an adult. If they can't, they're probably better off just trying to endure until they can.
I don't mean to suggest that it's a concrete rule or anything, or that you're implying any of the stuff I'm complaining about. Kinda just soapboxing, I suppose.