Do you think it’s unfair to send one child to a private school or an expensive extracurricular activity while not offering the same to the other?

No because hobbies are based on interests. My DD has two expensive hobbies, my son has one and they both have a few cheap ones. As long as the opportunity is there so the other knows that should they also want to do something they could that's fine. Having one expensive hobby and saying no to the other child isn't fair.

That is a good point @PurpleThistle7 DS loves watching sport and we decorate and did up a room with tv reclinable sofa etc and he watches a lot in there with DH.

then DD and I go out to the theatre, sometimes for lunch/dinner or too the shops. He had an initial investment then she is getting money spent on trips

With the go-karting thing, each child should get the same amount of opportunities, but they don't have to be exactly the same options as people are different.

If the first sibling tried football and loved it, then the second should also get the chance to try football but shouldn't be forced to keep attending if it isn't their thing just because the older has a strong preference/already goes so it is easier for lifts, they should get to go to a different hobby of similar time & money value if they prefer.

I think there’s an awful lot of nuance in most decision making. My children have very different needs and wants and we do our best to meet all of the first and a relatively decent amount of the second. Our daughter is more expensive as she’s a dancer and all her classes are pricey. My son does football and taekwando - much more budget friendly but a huge investment of our time as he has to get driven to everything. My daughter loves the theatre and musicals and such so I take her to loads as I love it too. My son would rather stay home and watch Star Wars with my husband - he’s again cheaper but isn’t getting any less of our time and he doesn’t want to go to the musical anyway.

So yes our children have different amounts of money from us but that’s not really the whole story or a fair assessment of how much we love or take care of them.

I spend different amounts on all of my children. Treating them fairly doesn’t mean spending the same amount of money on them.

Yes. I don’t understand why any parent would do that.

Yes, I agree with that. This isn’t that situation though and that’s what I’m replying to.

As someone who went to state school with a brother who went to private school, I honestly can't understand all the "unfair" and "life-long resentment" comments.

Surely it's only unfair if both kids WANT to go private and the parents' circumstances are exactly the same?

Otherwise it's just silly hyperbole. I liked my state school, came out with top grades, went to similar RG uni as my brother. Why would I have any resentment about my parents' financial circumstances changing?

My niece goes to private school and her brother goes to state. The difference is that nephew is at a good state boys school which caters to his hobby. My nieces only school option is the state version of St Trinians and she was bullied and her mental health was suffering. Sis and bil moved her to a private school. They offered my nephew too but he refused.

It has worked out fine as he is off to Harvard via his sport/hobby pretty much all expenses and tuition paid. He wouldn’t have had that opportunity at a different school.

Yes it’s unfair, and I know quite a few families where this caused massive long-term resentment despite there always being ‘reasons’ for the unequal treatment.

I think it’s unfair, but I know a lot of families that do it. Examples being one passed the 11+ and one didn’t so the one that didn’t went to private school. Or one child wasn’t progressing well at state school so that one went to a private school.

School - yes very unfair
Activities - I think that depends on if what each child wants to do. My eldest does karting. His sibling is 4 years younger so not yet into any hobbies but when the time comes, we will do everything to afford her the equal opportunity her older DS had. We spoke about it before we even started DS karting.

Fair doesnt mean equal.

My parents have always needed to give more money to my sister. That's totally fine, she needs it more in many ways. They give more practical help to me. It's not equal, they are looking to give us each what we need/is best for us.

Having said that, its hard to imagine spending the staggering amount that is school fees on only one unless there is a very good reason e.g. excellent SEN provision, a particularly musically gifted child....

Example one
Child 1: went to local comp, was happy, had friends, was popular, picked everything up in class, sailed through GCSEs.
Child 2: went to local comp, unhappy, lonely, lack friends, bullied, classes went too fast, struggled to learn, only got weak passes in a handful of GCSEs

Example two
Child 1: went to local comp, was happy, had friends, was popular, picked everything up in class, sailed through GCSEs.
Child 2: went to small private school; was nurtured; was happy; had friends; was helped to learn well with TAs, passed GCSEs well.

Anyone who says that example one is fairer, is like child 1 and thinks that anyone who isn't doesn't deserve a good life.

My sister 3 years older went to grammer school. I didnt pass the grammer school so i went private. My younger brother also went private as he didnt get into grammer school. My parents obv didnt wish us to to local state. We all went state primary. I dont feel ny sister had resentments she did better academically and actually out of us three she did more fancy school trips abroad. But we all had outside extra curricular . Families need to make decisions on each child.

I personally don't agree with privatised education in general, but I think it's only something I would do if I had the means to offer the same to the second child, or if they had no interest and had different needs then I would probably try to find equity in it by adding more to their long term savings or providing them with an extra hobby or similar and giving the other child the option to continue with the one they enjoyed which is more costly or switch to two cheaper hobbies. I think it's important children learn the value of money in that respect. I think it depends on the needs of the children and how it impacts the family unit as a whole.

Because my children are individuals with different needs not as I said a homogeneous lump all treated the same.

fair and equal are not the same. Children deserve what is right for them - if by treating one the other doesn’t get what they need is different

DD went to grammar DS the idea was floated about private school as it happened the local comprehensive suits him down to the ground. He hates extra curricular stuff so DD also get a lot of dance etc.

both are happy both feel their needs are met that is what is important. If he has bombed out of the school and needed either private or online private schooling I would pay in and instant and DD would understand entirely

It’s not always about money. I have one in a state grammar and one in a private school. It’s pretty common amongst their classmates. The state grammar is higher performing than the private school. In fact, it always comes out as one of the highest performing state schools in the country. It’s the most academic school within reasonable travelling distance for my DS. It meets his needs and that’s why we chose it.

I think the private school is unfair but Expensive extracurricular seems a bit different if it’s for a shorter period. I’ve often paid out for one child to do something for a few terms. If another child was keen then I’d pay for them to do it at the same age. Fair doesn’t necessarily mean equal but it balances out in the longer term.

Well of course it is.

DD2 chose a private secondary. We had mentioned the option to DD1 but didn't actually take her to look at any. DD2 knew of a specific school and asked to go. At the time DD2 started we also offered DD1 the opportunity to move but she chose not to. It's very hard to be totally fair, I feel we did the best we could under the circumstances but with hindsight I would have taken DD1 to see more options.

The amounts of money are irrelevant. What's relevant is whether both children get roughly equal amount of the things they need/ want.

DS has swapped to rugby this year. I have been pleasantly surprised to discover it is cheaper per year than the sports he played last year. I have not downgraded DD's activiteis to be "fair" nor have I told DS he MUST do something else so he can have the same amount spent on him. Both DC are doing activities they enjoy and are happy with.

But if I allowed DD to do an activity but told DS there was no money for him, that WOULD be unfair.

My ds is at private.school. just gone into year 11. My dd has just started year 7 at state.

Reasoning

Fees have gone up at lot in the past 4 years. Was circa £1670 a month when he started and now £2300 a month. (Fee rises and VAT) If it was that when ds started he wouldn't have gone. We dismissed one school at the time as it's fees were too much.

DH got made redundant now has a job but is earning about £120k a year less.

DD has a very expensive hobby £800 a month

Not sure it's fair but can't get blood out of a stone. Ds is leaving and going to state 6th form.

This happened in my family. The brother and sister in question were supportive of the reasoning behind it however, it was about personality and what was available locally (single sex), it wasn’t a money/prioritisation of the eldest or the boy thing. The privately educated one got a very good job, married someone with the same very good job, and is now a very happy stay at home parent. Their younger sibling also has a very good job and has no plans of having children and is smashing their career goals. Both were happy then, and are happy now. Sadly I’m the poor relation and cannot relate to a lot of what I’ve just typed 😅

I believe in fairness when it comes to money spent between children not equality. Eg parents who can afford to do so should absolutely be encouraged to send their child with SEN / Disabilities / a particular talent to private schools that would benefit them. They can then adjust their estate to benefit their other children in different ways.