Mumsnet Talk

We chose to go private because we don't have any grammar schools in our catchment and the local. comps aren't brilliant. Other choose private because their state schools have to work hard just to be not brilliant. Many of us would love to put the fees towards reducing out mortgage or holidays for e.g. if only we had decent state schools to send our kids to.

Of course there are those choose private imply because they have the disposable income such they don't have to carry out a cost benefit analysis. They do it for the same reason you like a nice hotel while on holiday complete with room service, big pool and a kids club ie nothing to do with avoiding less well off families.

As for the parents, away from places like Eton, they tend to be accountants, dentists, estate agents and the like. So not much opportunity for social climbing at most indies

The above is the preamble to the question in the subject because judging from the views expresseb by various anti private posters, very few of you actually know an indie family.

I mean, all they seem to go on about is how indie parents are snobby, social climbing and don't want their kids to mix with less well off kids. Maybe those generalisations are true for places like Eton but most indies that trade on their academic record are full of ordinary albeit well paid people.

So the next time you go on about how some parents think that the state system is full of underachieving DCS born to unsupportive WC parents, have a good look at the mirror. I suspect the person that you see isn't that different from the person you are complaining about.

Incidentally, there is another school gate politics thread going on at the moment. Apparently state school moms can be bitchy and clique-ey. shock horror

And your point is?

Seriously, I have no idea what you are getting at.

An 'indie family'? Wtf?

If you mean do I know any families in which the children go to private school, yes.

We know lots but there isn't all this MN angst about it all where we live. At least half of people I know with children in private school have 1 in private and 1 or more in state.
That may be because their DS got into grammar but their DD missed out. Or DD got into great girls' comp but the great boys' comp is too far away for them to get a place or has changed its admission criteria.

Private school people are often the unkucky ones who've lost the great comp lottery or, at primary age, are the ones who want childcare built in 8am - 6pm (most state schools here have no wrap around care at all and the ones that do have waiting lists of 2 years).

I suppose that's why the lack of angst - the difference between a great comp and a good private school is much less that the difference between a great comp and a crap comp so, in their mind, it is fairer to use private schools to provide what the other child (by luck) gets for free.

You get a few who are totally deluded about what state schools are like and send all their children private from daay 1 but more often people aren't boasting about escaping the state school kids at all, they are miserable they've lost out on a good, free school place and feel 'forced' to go private for at least 1 child.

Lost. Sorry. What is an 'indie family?' Is it something to do with bullwhips and rakish grins?

I honestly thought you meant something to do with indie music.

Indie is a vomitacious word. I also hate playdate and school run.

I went to Indie school. Both my brothers are sending their kids to indie primaries (although one brother will send his to grammar at secondary)

Mine will not be going to Independent school.

Your paragraph about look in the mirror is highly offensive.

I'm not sure what you mean. What is an indie family? Is it one in which both parents went to independent schools and all the children do? My father went to an independent school, my mother went to a state school. DH went to a state school; I went to an independent school. Our children go to state schools; quite a few of their friends go to independent schools.

In this household an Indie family would be one that wore Doc Martins, Alex Chung fashions and spent the summer in tents at pop festivals listening to Alex Turner. I wish ;-) and it has the stamp of approval of Grandmum, ex Deputy Head, because he seems like a very nice boy. Just saying.............

I though my point was crystal clear. Apparently not. Let's start again.

In threads about private education some people inevitably make the point that some parents chooose to go private because they are social climbers.

My point was that away from places like Eton the parents are accountants, dentists and the like. If you think that parents go private to social climb then you obviously don't know anyone who actually privately educates their DCs.

The other 'inevitable' point is that parents choose private schools because they don't want their kids to mix with less well off kids. In reality a lot of parents go private because their state options aren't brilliant. Others go private for the same reason that you pay extra for a hotel with a nice pool or a kids club or a spa ie you like your comforts and you can afford it so why not?

My point is that if you think that parents choose private because they are snobs then you obviously don't know anyone that privately educates their DCs.

Basically people generalise a lot about people who choose a private education. Those generalisations are so inaccurate that I can only conclude that you don't actually know anyone who has gone private or you don't really understand why they made that choice.

That aside, the comments was directed at those who generalise about parents who privately educate their children so I've no idea why posters who are privately educated or are privately educating their DCs are taking offence at my comments

Most families I know in indie school are fairly normal, but like state some are always judging, some you avoid and others are pushy. Don't see much difference tbh

I dont know what to say about your point.

Are you sure you are all right?

You are assuming one heck of a lot on behalf of other people.
You are in fact assuming other people have lots of prejudices. I think you should look in the mirror, perhaps.

I dont educate my child privately. Most of my friends do.

[Confused] Lose the y & your NN is probably the most apt I've ever seen on here

Pure - I don't know what to say about your confusion. If you don't recognize yourself in my comment then the comment isn't directed at you.

At the moment it's a bit like me saying that Americans speak funny and some Brit going - I don't speak funny. Why is Totally saying that I speak funny?

Oh, I see, so you are directing your prejudices against other prejudiced people.

Well, I shall leave you to it then!

Pure - stop with the . You are posting a seies of non sequiturs. Time to sleep it off.

<takes off Teenage Fanclub t shirt>

<crestfallen>

Have you missed a paragraph out?

FWIW I know plenty of families that use the Independent sector (they are not 'Indie' families FFS, that would be a family that listen to Indie music!) and some of them are indeed snobs, many are not. Some of the families I know that use the maintained sector are snobs, many are not, though it's probably very easy to look down on others when your home is worth £600k more than theirs!

There is definitely a weird crowd here tonight. Oh well, maybe the crowd over at AIBU will be more sober.

Now you're just being offensive in addition to incoherent!

In the past I have been lectured on the correct (and respectful) way to refer to a child with learning difficulties. This is the first time I have been lectured on the correct way to refer to a family that makes use of the private system

Methinks I'll sit back and wait for the day shift.

Your posts come across as very antagonistic and condescending. Did you mean them to? They're actually a very poor advert for private education.

"My point is that if you think that parents choose private because they are snobs then you obviously don't know anyone that privately educates their DCs."

Well, I know a fair amount who do - I live in an affluent part of surrey - and I can assure you that a fair few do educate privately simply because they like the snob value. Local schools around here are excellent; you would really struggle to significantly beat their educational value at private. Yet people do pay, in many cases because they believe it makes them "better" than those who don't. We could easily pay, yet don't, as I love the fantastic state ours attend (so I am not posting out of jealousy.) I'm happy to admit I would pay if I felt the education they are getting was poor; it isn't.

You may not send your kids private out of snobbery, and many don't, I totally appreciate that. But an appreciable number do.

Patricia - I should have done a better job of qualifying my comment. I accept that certain areas like Surrey and Chelsea have a catchment that is very snobby and very rich but maybe I lead a sheltered life but I see little evidence of that at my school and at the ones i have connections to.

... I meant I see little evidence of snobbery.

Being rich does not equate to being 'snobby'- you are perpetuating inaccurate generalisations.

And yet another non sequitur from montmartre.

I was responding to your post of 00:42:18.

Are you being deliberately obtuse or is it your natural state?

I was making the point that anti private school posters make the unfair generalisation that well off parents are all snobs. But yet here you accusing me of equating rich with being a snob???

The problem is OP, that although your overall point is probably right - parents privately educate for a variety of reasons - the structure and substance of your argument is undermined by your own assumptions and prejudices. You have presented a number of points as factual which is confusing and unhelpful to your case.

For example, the conclusion that a social climber is not and cannot be a dentist or an accountant is just strange. Surely people can desire a higher social status whatever your job?

But we get it. You think we should all appreciate that not all people choose private school because they're snobs. Ok. Probably a bit of a truism to be honest but point made.

Moving on...

Sorry - 'whatever their job.' Freudian slip.

i thought this fred was going to be interesting about hippies living an alternative lifestyle thing

Yeah I thought it was about families that were into Sonic Youth and Tame Impala.

A couple of my DSs mates are a bit indie,maybe not though,more hipster than indie.

OP, how many of your friends have children at Eton? If the answer is fewer than five or so, then you seem to be making the sort of generalisations that you are complaining about.

There is definitely a weird crowd here tonight

Yes, and you appear to have been one of them.

I'm gutted , thought I was going to find a school that would teach DD about the genius of The Smiths.

And WTF is an "indie family"? Are they in some way different from other families?

I don't know any "indie" families. I do know a lot of families where some or all of the children go to private school. Is that what you mean?

I know many families who send their DC to independent school. I equally know many families who send their DC to state schools. The beggest difference between them is that most of those who pay for their DC to be educated are able to afford it. Those who do not cannot and no way ever could - so income is the biggest divider (taking out those DC who might get full scholarships that is).

This income gap often ( but not always) means that the DC who are privately educated tend to belong to a particular social grouping.The behaviour of the DC therefore tends to be more compliant and they tend to accept, if not fully buy into ( pardon the pun) the idea that they should dowell in their studies
(as far as ability allows) and if they do not, then they do not disrupt the learning oportunities of others. Hence often it is said behaviour is better in such schoolsor if you prefer the pupils are teachable.

The over riding characteristic of many DC who attend state school is one of disrespect and disdain for education gained from parents who belong to different social groupings. Whilst some of those whose income level prevents them accessing private education do value education ( enter many MNers), by far the biggest issue with DC of state education is the very wide range of social groups and equal social skills and attitudes in such schools.The ethos therefore is morelikely to be one of selfishness and ensuring they get what they want from the system and in doing so ensure no one else has access to anything else. Hence the large number of behavioural issues in classrooms - which largely are nothing more than sheer rudeness and poor manners and culture of those groups. In short,regardless of many things, the underclass rule supreme in the environment ( no mater how few of them there are) and their values and culture are the biggest leveller being often transferred to other DC whose family lives may not always reflect the same values. Dont under estimate the power of peer groups in school dear parents.

Well, Op your username is fairly suggestive that you're not entirely serious?! or are drunk/a shitstirring journo

Different day, same old bullshit, eh, Ronaldo?

Wow Ronaldo. You've actually left me speechless. Must be because of the embedded rudeness and lack of respect which my state school education has saddled me with...

FFS.

Limelight, Ronaldo has "form". I would avoid engaging if I were you. You'll just end up with a massive bruise on your head from bashing it against the brick wall.

Ronaldo: I haven't found that to be the case at all. At DS1's state secondary school, the pupils are well-behaved and hard working. A lot of them either came to Britain within their lifetime or their parents did and there is definitely an ethos of putting education as a very high priority, along with respect and obedience towards their parents. All of the pupils know they are lucky to be going to the school (six applicants per place) and they make the most of the opportunities it has to offer.

Thanks for the heads up Seeker.

As you were Ronaldo.

Ditto.

I think you talk mostly weirdy bollocks. And you have implied people are drunk. I think perhaps you may be drunk and as such are having a rant? And indie family around my area is the definition of Unconditional Parenting, lots of Pj Harvey being listened to , and generally lentil weaving. You are American I take it.

Here's a generalisation for you: posters who start off by making obscure and unfounded comments invariably become rude AND condescending when it's pointed out to them that they are in fact in error

I thought this was a thread about Hipsters... but since I have clicked on it I will reply.

I do know plenty of people who use "indies" thank you. Most of them are ultra rich and just see private school as "normal". They inhabit a different world from the rest of us, want their children to make nice friends and networks for later in life. If I was very rich I would probably feel the same. I have two cousins who went to Eton, they are not mega rich but as no-one in their (part of my) family had ever been to a state school, they would simply not consider it. They both have good jobs which I think they got via family connections and networking rather than inate ability - I doubt they would have those jobs if they went to the local comp.

Since I don't have an income in 6 or even 7 figures I opted for the state sector. I am lucky I was able to access good schools. One child is at an outstanding comp and the other at a super selective grammar. I have no problem with people without access to those, scrimping and saving to get their kids a decent education.

What I do object to is being looked down on as a lower form of life. One awful snob physically recoiled when I told her which school my younger child went to. I was also gleefully told by another mum that her friend had rejected my child's super selective for the "superior" indie down the road - in fact the latter gets far inferior results.

I have used the private sector during primary which was to escape from bullying - though my child got a full scholarship and I paid for my other child. I was lucky I earned enough then to have the choice. In fact I think my child got the scholarship because I knew how to put on the charm and smarm my way in. Some parents had to leave because they could no longer afford the fees. I feel desperately sorry for children and families who are stuck in schools that are inadequate and they have to stay there because there is no choice. I don't class "not brilliant" comp in that category. My child's comp - Holland Park - is outstanding now because parents stuck with it during its transformation in the last 10 years or so.

I knew people with dcs at private school before I decided to choose that for ds. Not sure what the OP's point is. As for Ronaldo, I think their comment is barking. Where I live the social demographic is pretty much the same whether you choose private or state schooling (very wealthy area) and parental interest the same.

Everyone is entitled to express an opinion ( within the limitsod the law) and I have expressed mine. You can either adress it or ignore it. You do not have to bad mouth me because of my "ID". That is precisely the kind of argument that shows no manners and gets us nowhere.

The OP asked if posters knew any families who went to independent schools. I do. So I answered and gave my experince. Thats all one can do in this kind of thread.

That some disagree does not make the comment any less valid.

Here's the thing; parents use independent school for their DC for lots of different reasons.
However, the resident self imposed experts on MN will never accept it. They know you see...

In the same way they know that most parents who use private school have no real sense of what state school is like. The fact that most private school parents have used it in primary is, apparently, not evidence enough.

In RL most folk don't really worry about it. Most folk would accept that they cannot say what goes on in other people's minds. Certainly not on a macro level...

Oh and yes, I know loads of parents who send their DC to private school. Their reasoning seems to be individual, ranging from the completely understandable to the bonkers.

Ronaldo. You could have answered the OP's question without being so gratuitously offensive. Which I why I exercised my right to call bullshit when I see it. And I exercised my right to warn others that your brand of bullshit is particularly intransigent.

So what you're saying, Ronaldo, is that you send (/would send?) your kids to private school to keep them away from the common types in state schools? you have come on the thread to refute TotallyBS' OP? Fair play to you.

The only private-schooling families I know (primary) use it because they were private schooled themselves, have well-paying jobs, and have never really considered the state option.

Wordfactory, I have a particularly ditzy friend who chose her daughter's private school "because of the darling Madeline hats" I kid you not!

I think this is on part aimed at me / what I said on another thread, so I'll bite...

I have a very 'diverse' group of friends, from single parent students in housing association flats to 'multi millionaire property developers who holiday with Richard Branson (and just about everything in between)

I know loads of people who privately educate. You aren't an alien species you know?

As a socialist I disagree with it in principle. I understand why <some> of my friends havee put their children through private schools.
Interestingly none of my skinter friends have 'opted' to go down that route. So there is a decision based on how much cash you have, and it's bollocks to suggest otherwise.

And an accountant and a dentist (whilst hardly premiership footballers) are more 'aspirational' than the woman who works in Marks and Parks cafe, if you're that way inclined....

I went to an independent school as did my brother. I guess that made us an "indie family" in your terminology. However, I choose not to send my children to private school. So, no, I don't meet your assumption that those of us who are anti-private haven't met or understand families who do choose private. And I'm not anti-private because I had a bad experience at private school but for the ideological reason that I don't believe in buying an advantage for my children in something as fundamental as education.

SecondComing - I usually skip past a post when the poster declare herself/himself to be a socialist because, based on past experience, what follows tend to be mutterings of double standards a la Diane Abbot.

So, since I'm not familiar with your posts, no this was not directed at you.

BS redefines disingenuous!

My brother and a good friend both send their DC to private schools.

My brother and SIL do so because they have lots of family money and both went to private schools themselves. They frankly never even considered state (they claim they did but disregarded it as their local schools have "such poor" results. Which would have been a fine reason except that I looked up their local schools out of interest to find that they both get extremely good results, so this was clearly just an excuse). Whilst we get on and fine I have to say that they are the totally out of touch stereotypical private school parents often mentioned on mumsnet (and I often find myself biting my tongue). SIL openly says that she can't understand why so many mothers at her DC's school work full time and seems unable to grasp the concept that they may well be doing it to pay the fees. She also (genuinely) couldn't understand why I was rendered speechless at being told her DC's school uniform cost £600.

My good friend only chose private school because she was offered a large discount (the school was trying to expand and chasing pupils). She openly says that the private school is lovely, has amazing facilities and the teaching is great but she is not convinced that the cost justifies the benefits and has made the decision to move her DC to state at secondary. So she probably more fits the "normal" type of parent mould?

Fayrazzled I do think your ideals are very noble, but I wonder if you would tempted to abandon them if your children's only option was to go to a horrible sink school. Just saying.

Ok so BS clearly just wants a great big 'indie' vs state cat fight where we all have a go at each other and explain in triplicate why we're better than each other. Which is frankly just tedious.

As you're so fond of generalisations BS, and in answer to your initial enquiry YES, a lot of MNers will actually know an 'indie' family.

The vast majority of us are probably also able to grasp the idea that individuals make individual choices. They might not be choices which we ourselves would make, but that is neither here not there. There are a variety of reasons as to why parents choose the 'indie' over the state sector. Just as there are a variety of reasons as to why parents don't. Some reasons will be more prevalent than others of course, but still a variety will exist.

Variety is in fact the spice of life!

So does that answer your question and can we all go merrily on our way now?

I seriously thought this was going to be a thread about families that all happily head off to Glastonbury or Reading festival together. Now they're the kind of indie families I'd like to know

There aren't that many "horrible sink schools" you know!

'Here nor there' - sorry. Stupid phone.

Amused at Totally's stout defence of parents who privately educate their DCs - all except those who send their kids to Eton!

Total lol at 'indie family'.
What kind of twat defines their whole family by whether they pay for education or not.
And yes, I thought it was about music too, or I wouldn't have clicked.

<knocks head on the table>

As I said upthread, my comments are directed at people who think that private school parents base their decision on snobbery, opportunities to social climb etc

If you are anti private BUT you are none of the above then you don't need to tell me how many rich people you know.

By the way Second , I am impressed that you know somebody who knows Richard Branson. I know someone who know someone who served Tom Cruise. That's my only claim to fame.

I know lots of people who have gone private for secondary school, but the one woman I know who sent her child to private primary is constantly justifying her choice unprompted and 'couldn't possibly contemplate sending her child to a state school after private'. Blah blah blah. I don't care what she does but she is always trying to pick a fight about it. If I ever say something like: 'well some people believe in state schools because they want their children to mix with people from all walks of life', she jumps in with 'Oh but they are all ordinary middle class people' Probably non-aspirational accountants and dentists .

...if you think that parents choose private because they are snobs then you obviously don't know anyone that privately educates their DCs.

Xenia is adamant that she educates privately to make sure her DC only mix with the right sort. Then again, maybe she's a figment of MNHQ's imagination just to keep us all excitable.

DH's boss (so a mere small company director) sends his kids to private schools for snobby reasons. It's their choice.

We sent DS to private for 2 yrs and some of the parents sent their DC there for what I think of as snobby reasons. Plenty not, too.

I don't have any strong ideological opinions about education, but I think it's silly to pretend that snobbiness doesn't come into the private option a lot of the time.

I don't have a choice about where to educate my child. Most people don't. Stop talking about it being a choice/decision. That's the thing that pisses me off about these threads the most.

Anyway, that aside. Yes I know lots of parents who educate their children privately. Most didn't even consider state education for whatever reason - it was never even on their radar. Of the rest, some base their decision on not wanting to mix with the wrong sorts, most for boring reasons like class size, better results, better sports, better wrap around care etc.

Well, that's a very specific group of people you've chosen to direct your wrath at, BS, and I wish you well with it.

Indrid - why is it that posters can take the position that state schools are great and that sink schools are not representative of the comp experience?

But I can't make the argument that public schools like Eton are not representative of the private school experience.

Isn't that double standards? I don't see many examples of double standards in threads about private education hence my request for clarification.

And just to make some posters stop whinging, please feel free to substitute 'indie families' with 'families where one or more child or parent has been educated in the private sector'.

By the way, assuming that you are serious, why did you think that a thread in Education would be about music??? Or is that you being deliberately obtuse?

'wrath'???

I struggle to understand why people like to watch Jeremy Kyle. But that hardly means I am directing my 'wrath' at them.

Similarly I struggle to understand why some (pls note the 'some') people like to generalise about people that they don't know.

Increasingly, BS, I suspect the list of things you struggle to understand would stretch quite a way.

OP why do you keep saying "deliberately obtuse"? Do you think that sounds smart?

" "As I said upthread, my comments are directed at people who think that private school parents base their decision on snobbery, opportunities to social climb etc"

Well, I do actually know people who have sent their children to private school for those very reasons. But as far as I can recall, only one poster has expressed such opinions over th past 24 hours. And you have already said you didn't mean her.

So who do you mean?

Well done for keeping going, Totally

Although you've used 'deliberately obtuse' twice now, so you may want to look up another phrase in your I Spy book of arguments. You little tinker, you.

<ruffles Totally's hair playfully>

I don't know anyone who could afford to sent their children to private school and it's simply so far off my radar I cannot be bothered even thinking about it!

Why am I even on this thread? I thought it meant indie as in alternative living types! Do you refer to it as "indie" to not have stigma of the phrase "private" tho? Like you're not like all those social climbing Eton types?! See nothing wrong with stereotyping the next ladder up like you feel hard done by stereotyped?!?

was in response to Tether's message

Oh, this is a wind up thread?
Right.

PS I only 'bit' and assumed you were aiming it at me as it was me who said social climbing on the thread you refer to.

Not sure what the Tom Cruise thing was about. Were you trying to be funny?

I think I've sussed who you are/were btw. [Wink]

Well thank you for the laugh I have had reading this thread!

at tether!

I use independent education.

I am not an "indie" parent.

Ps. Op....the thread pops up in the 'most active' list so I for one had no idea that it was originally posted in Education until I started reading it and worked out that I was not going to find out about the alternative music scene

"Well, that's a very specific group of people you've chosen to direct your wrath at, BS, and I wish you well with it. "

It's an interesting twist on the straw man argument, isn't it?
"If you aren't this weird parody I've invented, then don't respond to the thread <bangs head on table>"

Totally you can make whatever arguements you like, however, this thread is about the parents - how and why they choose private and what their social background is - not about the quality of schools.

I'm just saying that on the whole Eton parents are no different from parents at other independent schools in those respects.

I know loads, thanks.

Still want to state school educate my kids.

Tbh in our village, since the state and private schools are all much of a muchness it comes down to what parents are familiar with from their own childhood and money.

There doesn't appear to be any bitterness or snobbery from either side and there are annoying rude parents at both.

" I accept that certain areas like Surrey and Chelsea have a catchment that is very snobby and very rich"

IME, the kind of person who thinks that all parents who send their children to private school are snobs and social climbers are also the kind that subscribe to the above-quoted point of view.

Oh yeah... My village is south surrey...

My DB sends his 2 DSs to a private school (Steiner). As he is my DB I would say I know him pretty well TotallyBS.

He has always been utterly condescending about state school, despite the fact that both he and I went on to be university educated, and he runs his own successful business. He and SIL decided that they didn't like the other kids and parents at the local nursery and decided to go private. It was basically snobbery that motivated them.

And now I have to keep my own snobbery to myself as my state educated DS1 flourishes academically, while his DSs seem to learn very little other than tree-climbing and bonfire-building (y'know, those essential parts of the curriculum).

Horses for courses really. I couldn't afford private for DS, but genuinely wouldn't want to as I don't believe in the whole principle. They can afford it and decided that their DCs would flourish better in that environment.

Well, I don't have a thesaurus handy and I can't think of a substitute for 'obtuse' so I have to stick with that.

As for the Tom Cruise thing, I was making the point that it's no more relevant to the topic than you knowing someone who knows Richard Branson.

seeker - i'm not aiming my comments at any particular poster or thread. I have been on a number of threads where these comments had been made. Apart from yourself I don't really remember who said what.

obtuse - lacking in insight or discernment; "too obtuse to grasp the implications of his behavior"; "a purblind oligarchy that flatly refused to see that history was condemning it to the dustbin"- Jasper Griffin
purblind
undiscerning - lacking discernment

obtuse - slow to learn or understand; lacking intellectual acuity; "so dense he never understands anything I say to him"; "never met anyone quite so dim"; "although dull at classical learning, at mathematics he was uncommonly quick"- Thackeray; "dumb officials make some really dumb decisions"; "he was either normally stupid or being deliberately obtuse"; "worked with the slow students"
dumb, slow, dense, dim, dull
stupid - lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity

HTH

Indrid - You do know that I am the originator of this thread?

I'm asking because you just told me that I can make whatever arguments I want but this isn't what the thread is about.

Disingenuous redefined again!

You're twisting my melon man

I heartily object to anyone choosing to go private because their state schools are not good enough.

If this option was not available to the 7% of the students who go privately they would have to go state and the state sector would improve as it serves the entire population: politicians who make educational and financial policies would have the same experience of education as you, me and the people who people social climb to get away from.

Middle earners would not be stretched to keep up with those who earn more

Children would not grow up to feel entitled

Schools would improve

So yes I object to private education, it is not a meritocracy, even the tests and interviews are subject to the wealth of the family and ability to afford private tutors

I work in state sector education, in one of the most deprived areas in the country.

My children are in state education - one is an academic high flyer and another is average with mild SEN. I support their schools and their education, I support their social interactions with every type of person, child and adult alike. I am a snob in this way, I think my children are rounded, pleasant individuals who are not privileged by anything other than their own abilities, effort and endeavours.

To answer your question though yes I know a number of families in private education, my children have friends in private education - yes I am somewhat jealous of their education and the benefits of their grounds, i find that all children are snobbish about their own schools which is endearing but I couldn't take the same route and hold fast to my social and political ideals.

at boul's "weird parody" comment.

Upthread I have secondcoming thinking that this thread was directed at her because she has been going on recently about social climbing parents. Even my old 'friend' admits to seeing these views albeit not in the past 24 hours.

And here you are going on about straw arguments. If you were to stop skimming posts you may find that these are real comments made by people like secondcomming

Similarly I just click on Active to see what the latest frothing is about. If I'd known the tone was: 'Do you actually KNOW an indie family?', I wouldn't have bothered. [Wanders off in hope of finding my definition of an indie family]

To answer your question OP, I don't always look at the topic in Active Convos.
Also, why wouldn't a thread about music be in education?
I assume they teach music at your 'indie' school?

<Bez-dances off the thread>

If this option was not available to the 7% of the students who go privately they would have to go state and the state sector would improve as it serves the entire population

Rather naive IMO. If you remove the option for private schooling all that will happen is that the very wealthy "home school". Or they buy their way into the best schools via property, thus squeezing out those who can not afford to do this.

I think my children are rounded, pleasant individuals who are not privileged by anything other than their own abilities, effort and endeavours.

But they aren't. They are also privileged by having at leas one able, actively involved and supportive parent.

When I saw the thread title my initial thoughts were:

1. It's about festival going indie music loving families
2. It's about families with unusual lifestyles eg green/sustainable living/communes
3. Families who take the Independent

The above despite dm going to a high profile boarding school in her young days

Totally - Oh yes, I know that you are the OP thank you.

Upthread you seem to claim (the double negative does make it a bit confusing!) that whilst other posters are able to argue the fact that not all state schools are the same, someone is preventing you from making the arguement that not all private schools are the same. I merely wanted to point out that as far as I can tell you may put whatever arguement you like here.

As to your OP I thought that I had understood your point to be that not all parents who privately educate their DCs are social climbing snobs, a point I happen to agree with. However, in two of your posts you go out of your way to point out that Eton is an exception to your view. You clarify later that this is because Eton is not representative of a typical private school.

That may be true, but in my experience some Eton parents are social climbing snobs but most aren't, and that the choices and decisions they made are reached in exactly the same way as anyone else making the same decisions about other, less well-known schools.

No I think that a large proportion would join state as not everyone is suited to home schooling. Although you would probably get a load of free school proposals based on"people like us"

Although its a pointless and unprovable theory we have private and state education it will never change.

Yes I agree they are privileged by having 2 highly educated and involved parents as are many in the state sector.

I have a charming friend whose son is at Eton. She doesn't like people to know because they make judgments based on it, so she says vaguely 'oh yes, Gussie* is away at school'. Similarly, even though her DH is very very high ranking in the navy she never mentions that, just says he is 'in the forces' and chats merrily away with other forces' wives. I have never seen her put anyone down in our whole acquaintanceship.

My own dm is also as unsnobbish as you could wish and I doubt many people would imagine she is of the background/school she came from.

However, I object to private ed because I think it is socially divisive and our dc will not go private.

* not his real name

I think you'd end up with private and state education even if you banned' private schools. The dividing line would just be higher up in terms of "wealth".

I dont get the argument that "we were forced to go private as the local state schools aren't good enough" (to paraphrase).
What is one person's not good enough, is another persons outstanding.

So what you're saying, Ronaldo, is that you send (/would send?) your kids to private school to keep them away from the common types in state schools? you have come on the thread to refute TotallyBS' OP? Fair play to you

I dont actually have my DS in a private school. I have not stated any reasons I may have for making a choice for ( or not) private over independent for my own DS at all here. (you might be surprised at those reasons anyway).

I have just based my answer on the question asked by the OP - do I know people who send their DC to private schools ( Iknow many.I also know many who send their DC to state schools). I just stated my experience of that.

What is one person's not good enough, is another persons outstanding.

And one person's "not good enough" is more often lots of other people's "utterly shite and failing"

Oh, I mentioned that I knew all sorts so you weren't under the impression you were something special OP in your ability to pay for schooling.

Nobody really cares.

PS there's just the one 'm' in 'coming'

Op , so you know what everyone thinks of certain kinds of people and you have decided to educate us all!? Why thank you, i certainly didn't know how to form my own opinion.

You do realise you are coming across just like the very people you are claiming 'indie' are not.

Indrid - I excluded Eton from my view for the same reason that I exclude sink schools from my view of state schools. Neither is representative of private or state schoolsm

I'll second that notadragon. I remember writing on a thread once how frustrated I was with my then DS's state school because they had little or no homework (so did not know what he was doing at school), I was immediately swopped down upon by state school teachers/parents telling me that homework was the work of the devi;l and citing one research or the other blah blah blah

so people want different things in life.

Pend - what are you going on about? I am trying to engage posters who think that private schools are full of snobby parents.

If YOU don't think that private schools are.full of snobby parents then you and I are on the same page so to speak

You're trying to 'engage' them by telling them to 'look in the mirror' and understand that they are the problem? Good engagement skillz there, BS.

What do you want to engage them for? Do you have anyone in mind? How are you hoping to change their minds? And do you see that, where you try to argue that private school users are just the same as anyone else, not rich, not snobs, just normal etc etc - you completely undermine that point by using the definition 'indie families' as though there is something innately different about them and they belong in a different category from everyone else!

at secondcoming. How did you go from me saying that people don't necessarily choose private for snobby reasons to me saying that I think that I am special because I can afford the fees?

I started this thread because I couldn't sleep and the only active threads were about baby names and breast feeding. I

I thought that it would be interesting to engage parents who had bright kids but were put off going private because of all the talk about snobby parents or social climbing parents.

Instead I got a lot of either deliberately or naturally obtuse people going on about how many rich people they know or how I wasn't using the right term to describe people who privately educated their children or how they know someone who is friends with Richard Brandon.

Too many lunatics in the asylum for my liking so off to see what is going on in Breastfeeding.

I know families who educate privately. Most of those do so because they think it will give their children better opportunities (and many have issues with state schools not having enough discipline and spending too much time on those who don't care about 'real' education). Many speak about the diversity though most of it comes from overseas families looking for education.

I know families who educate state. Most because they feel it is the best option and opportunities for their kids and better connects to their community. Some have moved schools to be in a district that will give their children better opportunities (and I live in a city where the lines are obviously drawn by class and race so the mix with everyone doesn't always work. Even Ofsted have made complaints about it).

I know families who educate at special schools as they feel it will give their child better opportunities to use their abilities the best they can and staff that can fit their needs because other school options either won't take their kids (mostly private) or don't have the resources/experience/time for it (mostly normal state).

I know families who educate online because they think it will give their child better opportunities. Most do it because of issues at schools, both private and state, and it suits their child needs.

I know families who educate at home because they think it will give their child better opportunities, more connection with family and local community, and fits their child needs. Most I know who didn't start out that way had problems at normal schools that wasn't being taken care of - both state and private (typically bullying and special needs being ignored). This represents most home educators in the UK. Of those who started educating from home from the start, it's usually issues with the quality of local schools or the quality of the national curriculum/constant meddling in it, or wanting an education that fits their family/child that they couldn't access any other way. Or live too far away from schools that travel time would eat into everything else.

I know families who flexi-school and I know families who educate in more than one of the above to fit each child's needs.

It's annoying to feel your choice (or lack there of) cause you to be stereotyped, and in the end all each family wants is the best for the kids. However, if that's your biggest problem that you need to bash people over not seeing it your way, then I would say you are quite blessed.

<Muse playing in the background, Alex Turner poster on wall>

It does make me annoyed when people post that the middle classes should put their children in state schools and that it would result in their improvement. It is simplistic and ignorant.

Some of us would love to but we live in boroughs who have a deliberate strategy of deterring parents into the private sector. Our borough only has school places for half the school age children. Come allocation day hundreds of families find themselves without a school place for their children. When this happened to us and I was in the midst of the rigmarole of appeals etc. I uncovered the Council Education Committee minutes that said that given the 120 surplus pupils in just three local wards the proposal was to set up an extra class in a portacabin at an unpopular ofsted failing faith school, because it's numbers were low as a result of parents fleeing it in the older year groups, and it would ensure that the numbers of surplus pupils would reduce to the level that the class could provide for. The strategy wasn't then even implicit, it was explicit. Now they are a little more careful what is said in public but the proportion of pupils in private education in this borough is one of the highest in the country. If the proportion leaving state primary schools and going on to private school was the average for the ten most affluent London boroughs (and it isn't one of the most five most affluent) then it would need two new five form entry secondaries. If it was everyone forced into state schools they would need to double the number of school places!

This problem is going to become a crisis in the next two or three years as a population bulge hits the London secondaries which Councils have failed to plan for and school place provision is now subject to the vagaries of the Free School process

Nor are the middle classes the magic pill that will improve schools. Ofsted highlight that some comps in deprived areas are able to be outstanding, so there is no excuse for a school in a deprived area to be four times more likely to be failing. In London they are demonstrating that the gap in attainment between poor and middle class children can be narrowed. In fact Ofsted are highlighting that their biggest worry is the attainment of poor children in schools where they are the minority i.e otherwise filled with middle class children

<stomps off singing "They will not force us,
They will stop degrading us,
They will not control us................ "

I thought that it would be interesting to engage parents who had bright kids but were put off going private

Why does state-private choice matter more if the children are bright (or not)?

Are we all supposed to buy into the myth that state schools don't cater for "bright" children?

People go private for all kinds of reasons. The private school DS attended had low attainment levels (below state school avg, even). DS still shakes his head in disbelief about it. Not supposed to be a low achiever specialist school, either, just turned out that way.

I was going to say I know an indie family because they don't own a television or a mobile phone
That's not what this thread is about, is it?

Ooh, do we have a flouncer!!

I have to say that the responses you have had are, in part, due to the condescending tone of your posts.

And also for deliberately picking a controversial topic.

Not sure what else you expected really!

Try next time posting about cake baking or the uses of industrial fertilisers if you want fewer people who don't happen to share your particular opinion 'lunatics'

I know several "indie" families, some of whom I like better than others, but on the whole are nice enough groups of people. I also know some awful people who send their children to state school.

None of that has any bearing whatsoever on my views on private education. Its rather simplistic to suggest otherwise.

Of course, there are a great many who would view aspiring to be a dentist or accountant as a bit of serious social and economic climbing, which they would love to be able to achieve. I'm not so sure about the estate agent bit, though... When you think you are a "mere" dentist who cannot climb the social ladder and who is "ordinary albeit well paid," I think you must have confused your status with someone else's considerably lower down the social ladder and therefore have fooled yourself into thinking you mix with "ordinary" people - risking making you a snob who actually thinks that the vast majority of the population are in fact, "underachieving DCS born to unsupportive WC parents," because they aren't ordinary dentists and accountants.

What Mintyy said in the last sentence.

Why are you only asking the parents of 'bright' children?

Mine are at fee-paying school (cringes at Indie description or overt suggestion of little club) they are there because they are not very bright as it happens.

I know lots of people (obviously) who send their children to private school and none of them do so for snobbish reasons. Maybe it's because we don't live in Surrey <muses>.

Indie my a****!