I almost missed the terrifying email that arrived from my daughter’s secondary school on Tuesday morning.

Now she’s in Year Eight, I rarely pay attention to the missives from teachers that land in my already-overburdened inbox, reasoning that if it’s really ­important, they’ll give me a call.

But when notifications from the class WhatsApp group began flashing up on my phone, I knew I needed to read whatever had caused the flurry of concerned messages from other parents.

The innocuous-looking email stopped me in my tracks.

It was about an extraordinary social media trend known as ‘school wars’, whereby children are encouraged to film ­violent attacks on pupils from rival schools, particularly in ­London, and then send the ­footage to ­specially created ­TikTok accounts, where said ­violence is not just published, but glorified.

The message explained that the police were offering special ­support to the schools mentioned in posts and that ‘as a precaution, we are ­asking all parents and carers to ensure children go straight home after school’.

I was horrified. As a parent, you expect messages about school plays, football matches and PTA bake sales. But warnings that your child might be part of a ­violent ambush orchestrated by gangs on social media?

It didn’t take long to find out more about these incitements to gang warfare ­taking place on ­TikTok. Though the platform quickly banned the search term ‘school wars’, I was ­recommended a host of other phrases related to the trend, such as ‘war schools’ and ‘red vs blue schools’.

It’s all too easy to find the ­posters dividing rival schools – even entire London boroughs – into warring sides. Dedicated fight accounts have been running polls asking ­followers to vote on which school will win in a fight, while kids are encouraged to plan altercations so they can capture the ­ultimate ‘ambush’ content.

Some of these videos have had thousands of views, while ­posters being shared on Snapchat urge children to use their compasses in violent attacks. All this just weeks after two children were stabbed at a school in north London.

No wonder, then, that headteachers across London have been sending messages to parents, with police now present around named schools at the start and end of each day.

In the week that ­Reddit was fined £14.5million for ­unlawfully using children’s data, I have to ask: what, exactly, is it going to take for the Government to learn its lesson and finally ban social media for under-16s?

As a parent, I am ­absolutely sick of the stalling by our Prime Minister, who was last week accused by the online safety campaigner Baroness Kidron of appeasing big tech companies and being ‘late to the party’ in regulating social media and AI.

The crossbench peer pointed out that most of the proposals for a ban had been put forward in the House of Lords and could be accepted by the Government this week, if it wanted to. Instead, said Baroness Kidron, the PM was ‘rubbing up against the tech bros’, adding ‘we’re giving away our kids to Silicon Valley to please Trump’.

Meanwhile, a group of bereaved parents, whose children’s deaths were linked to online harms, held a press conference on Tuesday with Kemi Badenoch, who accused the Government of ‘dragging its heels’ over a ban.

The argument against an ­Australian-style ban seems to be that some children would circumvent it, potentially ­leading them to even darker places. (What, darker than platforms where they’re encouraged to be violent to kids from rival schools?).

But I’m afraid I find this lily-­livered. When I was 15, my friends and I got around the ban on ­selling cigarettes to children, but it would’ve been absolutely laughable to suggest such a restriction be scrapped entirely as a result.

Just because some kids won’t obey the rules, does this really mean we shouldn’t have any at all? We’ve inadvertently allowed teenagers to lead on this issue, and the result – somewhat ­predictably – has been a Lord Of The Flies-style disintegration of order that’s led to things like the school wars ‘trend’.

Increasingly, though, I’m not even sure children are that keen on social media. I won’t allow my daughter to have it until she is 16, and luckily most of her friends are also banned.

Only one member of her social circle has TikTok, and while I’d expected my daughter to be ­clamouring for similar apps, such as Snapchat, I’ve been ­surprised by how averse she is to it all.

‘Social media seems kind of scary to us,’ she told me. ‘We’ve been told so many dark things about it I think most of us would rather not have it until we’re grown-ups.’

How long will this reticence last? Hopefully as long as it takes for the Prime Minister to get his priorities and principles straight.

What I do know is that ­children need rules – crave them, even – as it’s rules that allow them to feel safe and secure. It’s time we as parents laid down the law when it comes to social media, even if our ­spineless Government won’t.

It’s been lovely to see pictures of the Duke and ­Duchess of Sussex in Jordan, where they met with ­refugees and delegates from the World Health Organization. A ridiculous fuss was made when the couple left for ­Montecito, but I’ve always supported them. Now we know about the disgraceful antics of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, their desire to get away from the Royal Family makes even more sense, don’t you think?

Pity poor Sinitta, who’s admitted her failed marriage to Andy ­Willner was a revenge move aimed at her ex Simon Cowell. ‘It’d be, “Well, if he’s done that, then I’ll date Brad Pitt, I’ll date this model”.’

Oh honey: a woman must never make life decisions to spite an ex – not even dating Brad.

According to research, four in ten couples aren’t happy with how household bills are split. The only thing that surprises me about this is that it isn’t all couples. I had a hilarious conversation with my husband the other week as I looked into booking our annual fortnight away during the summer – he told me he would treat us this year, and later transferred me £500. Where did he think we would go on holiday to? The year 1983?