You missed the point. The article didn't state that none of those things mattered or that there would be no admonishing if any of those details turned out to be the case. The point is the fathers FIRST question was what did you do to cause this?  The victim was being blamed before any facts were in evidence. It's entirely possible the daughter did something quite serious and in need of consequences but on arriving at the scene was not the time to determine this. First make certain both children are safe, DE escalate, and begin gathering information. Find out fromboth children what happened from each of their points of view. The mother is 100% correct however, that absent any clear evidence the daughter began the violence, there is nothing she could have done which would justify the violence committed against her. Violence is only permissible as a defence against existing violence and only in measured proportion to that violence. Obviously children do not know this until taught.