Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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?

112 replies

lolstevelol · 12/09/2025 06:11

This has come up in family debates over the years, where the eldest child is sent to a private school or given the opportunity to do an expensive extracurricular activity, such as karting, but there isn’t enough money left to offer the same to the younger siblings

OP posts:
Longtimelurkerfinallyposts · 12/09/2025 08:59

KpopDemon · 12/09/2025 06:33

We have an inverted situation - dc1 is academically gifted and goes to an excellent all-girls state secondary where she is aiming for 9s at GCSE (and likely to get a good clutch of 8s and 9s in reality). We could not have afforded to send her to a private school at the time she needed to apply and why would we, when she has a fabulous free education on our doorstep? We boost her with extra curriculars, nice vacations, private dental work etc. So she is living a very good life.

Ds2 came along later after an age gap and an upturn in our family finances. Ds2 is not academically inclined and there are no great options for mixed/boys’ secondary school locally. We could now afford private school for him.

It was actually my dd who said that her db will need to go to private secondary if he is to have any chance of a good education. We are considering it. We know it isn’t “fair” but nothing in life is fair. We give dd a very good life and we will subsidise her at uni, buy her first car, give her a chunk of cash for her house deposit. Over the years we will make it up to her perhaps not exactly same in £££ but definitely in support and guidance too. I am trying to decide: Will ds2 appreciate us sinking “his” money into his education? Once it’s spent there won’t be as much left to help for, for example, set up in a trade or start a business.Or should we accept he’s going a non-academic route in life and throw our cash into investments so he has those to fall back on in adult life?

I don’t want to create reasons for one sibling to resent another. It’s a hard choice and we would have to be very mindful of the risk dc1 becomes bitter about it when she realises that part of her own inheritance will be spent on her db, in effect. But then again it’s our money and our choice how we invest and spend our money.

I’m still very torn because I know it’s unfair but the reason for it are based in logic.

If your son isn't all that 'academic' and you think he might be better off pursuing a 'trade' rather than university, why waste any money at all on a private school for him?

They don't neessarily provide a better level of education (and don't even have to hire properly qualified teachers!) and it seems unlikely that they'll be well set up to encourage/ motivate someone to become eg a plumber, rather than focussing on A level results/ their position in some school league table.

Surely you'd be better off exploring what kinds of career your ds is actually interested in, and look for ways for him to get work experience/ make contacts in that direction? if you feel rich enough to invest £ in it, then buying him a van and tools in the future might be much more useful...

cd

Cinaferna · 12/09/2025 08:59

KpopDemon · 12/09/2025 06:33

We have an inverted situation - dc1 is academically gifted and goes to an excellent all-girls state secondary where she is aiming for 9s at GCSE (and likely to get a good clutch of 8s and 9s in reality). We could not have afforded to send her to a private school at the time she needed to apply and why would we, when she has a fabulous free education on our doorstep? We boost her with extra curriculars, nice vacations, private dental work etc. So she is living a very good life.

Ds2 came along later after an age gap and an upturn in our family finances. Ds2 is not academically inclined and there are no great options for mixed/boys’ secondary school locally. We could now afford private school for him.

It was actually my dd who said that her db will need to go to private secondary if he is to have any chance of a good education. We are considering it. We know it isn’t “fair” but nothing in life is fair. We give dd a very good life and we will subsidise her at uni, buy her first car, give her a chunk of cash for her house deposit. Over the years we will make it up to her perhaps not exactly same in £££ but definitely in support and guidance too. I am trying to decide: Will ds2 appreciate us sinking “his” money into his education? Once it’s spent there won’t be as much left to help for, for example, set up in a trade or start a business.Or should we accept he’s going a non-academic route in life and throw our cash into investments so he has those to fall back on in adult life?

I don’t want to create reasons for one sibling to resent another. It’s a hard choice and we would have to be very mindful of the risk dc1 becomes bitter about it when she realises that part of her own inheritance will be spent on her db, in effect. But then again it’s our money and our choice how we invest and spend our money.

I’m still very torn because I know it’s unfair but the reason for it are based in logic.

In that situation, I'd hesitate. If he's not super academic, he may be better off at a local state school, with tutors in core subjects, and set the money aside for helping him launch into adult life - driving lessons, car, apprenticeship, flat deposit etc. You could spend hundreds of thousands and he'd still get a handful of average GCSEs and have no interest in 6th form if he just isn't academic. He might even feel bad if everyone around him is achieving and he's constantly bottom of the class, whereas in a state school, he might be more in the middle.

Sharptonguedwoman · 12/09/2025 08:56

MyLimeGuide · 12/09/2025 07:11

Absolutely YES unfair.

Well….. I went to a good grammar school, my brother had all sorts of challenges my parents struggled to meet (1970s, things were different). Went to a state secondary, truanted, parents in desperation moved him to a local private school to try to help him. The reason being the private school would at least ring them if he walked out. Not everything can be fair and equal.

Mugfills · 12/09/2025 08:48

I've never seen it happen the way you describe. IME where one child was privately educated and other not it was either because one child passed the 11+, so private education was deemed necessary or because finances changed so private education (or extra curricular activities) became possible for younger children where it wasn't for older ones.

I can't imagine deliberately setting out to create such and imbalance.

BananaPeels · 12/09/2025 08:48

Mydoglovescheese · 12/09/2025 08:45

As a teenager I’d asked for music lessons for years but my parents couldn’t afford it, so refused. My DSis is 5 years younger than me and when she wanted lessons our parents were in a better situation financially so she had lessons. For a long time I was resentful but then somebody asked me if it would have been fair for my DSis not to have lessons just because I couldn’t.

I think you need to weigh up the reasons why you would like to give the DC different opportunities and be prepared to explain it to them when they are old enough to understand. However, there is likely to be major resentment issues to deal with.

PS. It turned out OK, I found a way to learn as an adult and now we can both play.

Honestly if I were your parents I would have proactively sat down and explained this to you. I would also have costed up the full cost of the lessons your sister is going to get and gave you the money. It is then yours if you want to take lessons now as you are older or invest it in something else but it recognises that you missed out.

Chompingatthebeat · 12/09/2025 08:48

Lafufufu · 12/09/2025 06:36

You really shouldn't be.

My parents raised me and my siblings with several principles but one we heard a lot was "fair doesnt mean equal"
As children we eyeballed but its true.

I find this modern parenting insistence everything he precisely equal so babyish.
When my kids share snacks the baby discreetly always gets the bigger half /portion because hes underweight.

This and your situation are both excellent examples of fair doesnt mean equal.

Edited
Show quote history

Does that apply to inheritance as well

Mydoglovescheese · 12/09/2025 08:45

As a teenager I’d asked for music lessons for years but my parents couldn’t afford it, so refused. My DSis is 5 years younger than me and when she wanted lessons our parents were in a better situation financially so she had lessons. For a long time I was resentful but then somebody asked me if it would have been fair for my DSis not to have lessons just because I couldn’t.

I think you need to weigh up the reasons why you would like to give the DC different opportunities and be prepared to explain it to them when they are old enough to understand. However, there is likely to be major resentment issues to deal with.

PS. It turned out OK, I found a way to learn as an adult and now we can both play.

TheaBrandt1 · 12/09/2025 08:38

Exactly three. That’s the situation for the families I know. Younger Dd diabetic and struggling with mean girls older super healthy with great friends and teachers at state. No way did the older resent the younger going to private school.

It’s quite childish and binary to insist “all equal all the time”. Life isn’t like that. It’s not like doling out treats to toddlers when all has to be equal it’s more nuanced.

stichguru · 12/09/2025 08:37

Are you meeting all your children's needs to the same level? If you are you are being fair. You wouldn't deny a child medical treatment because their sibling didn't need that treatment, or refuse to buy a child say gluten free food, because it's more expensive than the gluten alternatives that you buy their sibling. If one child's needs are being well met in state school, and the other child's aren't, then sending one child to private and not the other is fair.

herbalteabag · 12/09/2025 08:35

KpopDemon · 12/09/2025 06:33

We have an inverted situation - dc1 is academically gifted and goes to an excellent all-girls state secondary where she is aiming for 9s at GCSE (and likely to get a good clutch of 8s and 9s in reality). We could not have afforded to send her to a private school at the time she needed to apply and why would we, when she has a fabulous free education on our doorstep? We boost her with extra curriculars, nice vacations, private dental work etc. So she is living a very good life.

Ds2 came along later after an age gap and an upturn in our family finances. Ds2 is not academically inclined and there are no great options for mixed/boys’ secondary school locally. We could now afford private school for him.

It was actually my dd who said that her db will need to go to private secondary if he is to have any chance of a good education. We are considering it. We know it isn’t “fair” but nothing in life is fair. We give dd a very good life and we will subsidise her at uni, buy her first car, give her a chunk of cash for her house deposit. Over the years we will make it up to her perhaps not exactly same in £££ but definitely in support and guidance too. I am trying to decide: Will ds2 appreciate us sinking “his” money into his education? Once it’s spent there won’t be as much left to help for, for example, set up in a trade or start a business.Or should we accept he’s going a non-academic route in life and throw our cash into investments so he has those to fall back on in adult life?

I don’t want to create reasons for one sibling to resent another. It’s a hard choice and we would have to be very mindful of the risk dc1 becomes bitter about it when she realises that part of her own inheritance will be spent on her db, in effect. But then again it’s our money and our choice how we invest and spend our money.

I’m still very torn because I know it’s unfair but the reason for it are based in logic.

I also have a large age gap and had a situation where eldest kept insisting youngest should go to private school to do as well as possible. Eldest did well at uni but had mediocre GCSEs and decided his sibling should have the best chance possible.
We didn't go for it because youngest didn't want to and was adamant he wanted to be with his friends, but eldest didn't view it as unfair at all.

ThreePointOneFourOneFiveNine · 12/09/2025 08:33

Very much depends on the circumstances. I was bullied really badly at school and had severe depression. My parents scraped together the money to send me to a small private school for the last two years to get me out of a really bad situation. My sister did not have the same problems and was fine all the way through state school.

Fabrikick · 12/09/2025 08:30

Mommyfor4 · 12/09/2025 08:26

I can't understand how anyone can even ask such an immoral question?!!?? CHILDREN WILL ALWAYS BE TREATED EQUALLY!!! It should go without saying! I know that unfortunately this is not always the case. It makes me both sad and angry.

We have 4 children, 3 of whom are biologically ours. In addition, social welfare has placed a child with us who was 6 months old at the time. Even though he is not biologically ours, we ALL still consider him as our own. Our own children always introduce him as their brother. Our biological children are all adults now. Yet, for example, at Christmas, birthdays, etc., we have always made sure THAT EVERYONE RECEIVES A GIFT OF BROADLY EQUAL VALUE, also placed with us, (now 8 years old) which we consider as our own. I couldn't think of giving him less because he is not biologically mine.

Mother's love is not tied to biology. The unequal treatment of children leaves deep scars on a child!!! It should be banned!

Treating children equally doesnt always mean the same though. It should for 'fun' stuff, but if children have additonal needs etc then sometimes by spending money on support, education etc actually gives them a more equal chance at life.

Fabrikick · 12/09/2025 08:28

If its because its unaffordable rather than in the best interest of all of the children then it feels more unfair especially for extra circulars. However life isnt always black and white, my DB struggled a lot in school and so my parents paid for him to go private whilst I went to the local comp; I didnt begrudge it as knew he wouldnt have coped where I was. If it was an exciting hobby though and meant I couldn't do any I would have been annoyed.

Mommyfor4 · 12/09/2025 08:26

I can't understand how anyone can even ask such an immoral question?!!?? CHILDREN WILL ALWAYS BE TREATED EQUALLY!!! It should go without saying! I know that unfortunately this is not always the case. It makes me both sad and angry.

We have 4 children, 3 of whom are biologically ours. In addition, social welfare has placed a child with us who was 6 months old at the time. Even though he is not biologically ours, we ALL still consider him as our own. Our own children always introduce him as their brother. Our biological children are all adults now. Yet, for example, at Christmas, birthdays, etc., we have always made sure THAT EVERYONE RECEIVES A GIFT OF BROADLY EQUAL VALUE, also placed with us, (now 8 years old) which we consider as our own. I couldn't think of giving him less because he is not biologically mine.

Mother's love is not tied to biology. The unequal treatment of children leaves deep scars on a child!!! It should be banned!

jeaux90 · 12/09/2025 08:26

Sometimes treating everyone the same is the most unfair thing to do though. If I had two kids, one very academic and got into a state grammar for example, then another with SEN who would benefit from small class sizes and drown at a big secondary school then absolutely I would.

You find the school that is right for your child!

My DD16 went to private school, AuDHD and it was brilliant for her. My NDN went to the local secondary school (bright and sporty) her sister went private as she had SEN.

Makes sense to me. It’s about equal opportunity not treating everyone exactly the same.

marnieMiaou · 12/09/2025 07:55

Yes, seen it several times and it often causes resentment in adulthood.

Flamingos89 · 12/09/2025 07:54

Yes unfair

Ally886 · 12/09/2025 07:53

Theroadt · 12/09/2025 07:40

Pay for daughter fully through uni but do not pay for DS’s uni would help even it up. My oldest son left indy to go to state sixth form and younger stays at indy for sixth, and that’s how we’ve cut it, with their agreement.

Show quote history

That would impact the sons personal finances, borrowing scope and entire future where the daughter would have a career without the student debt.

Your son would have to vastly out earn your daughter to give them the same quality of life in the long run.

Children have no autonomy at 11 but to hold your decision against them as an adult is vastly unfair

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 12/09/2025 07:50

Sometimes people's circumstances change and they just can't give the same opportunity to a younger child.

Sometimes they can't find the money to pay VAT on private schools, or they have a surprise third baby and can't be in three places at once. Sometimes they just get a bit overexcited with the first and then realise that it's not sustainable for all their children in the long run.

But yes, on the whole I think it's unfair to do something for your eldest child without at least thinking about whether you will be able to give your younger children equivalent opportunities.

Ally886 · 12/09/2025 07:48

I think in some conditions it's okay.

In areas where there are grammar schools the top 10% are isolated and tend to do very well. Local comprehensive schools then naturally have a lower level of academic students.

I passed my 11+ and went to a fantastic school but my sister didn't pass so was left to go to disruptive comprehensives or private. My parents chose the latter and there is no bitterness from me

Motheranddaughter · 12/09/2025 07:47

Of course it’s unfair and will breed resentment

damemaggiescurledupperlip · 12/09/2025 07:45

I have known two families whose sons have been sent to private school, and the daughters to the local state school. State provision was the same for both sexes in terms of quality.

one example was ages ago, when I was a child, another much more recent

StaringAtTheWater · 12/09/2025 07:44

@Kpopdemon I really wouldn't feel guilty about this at all. I believe the research says that bright kids from happy homes thrive at any decent school (so the uplift from private school would likely be minimal) You'd be better off saving it for future house deposits.

Where the right private school really makes a difference is for average and below average kids (which is why my children go to them!)

Theroadt · 12/09/2025 07:40

KpopDemon · 12/09/2025 06:33

We have an inverted situation - dc1 is academically gifted and goes to an excellent all-girls state secondary where she is aiming for 9s at GCSE (and likely to get a good clutch of 8s and 9s in reality). We could not have afforded to send her to a private school at the time she needed to apply and why would we, when she has a fabulous free education on our doorstep? We boost her with extra curriculars, nice vacations, private dental work etc. So she is living a very good life.

Ds2 came along later after an age gap and an upturn in our family finances. Ds2 is not academically inclined and there are no great options for mixed/boys’ secondary school locally. We could now afford private school for him.

It was actually my dd who said that her db will need to go to private secondary if he is to have any chance of a good education. We are considering it. We know it isn’t “fair” but nothing in life is fair. We give dd a very good life and we will subsidise her at uni, buy her first car, give her a chunk of cash for her house deposit. Over the years we will make it up to her perhaps not exactly same in £££ but definitely in support and guidance too. I am trying to decide: Will ds2 appreciate us sinking “his” money into his education? Once it’s spent there won’t be as much left to help for, for example, set up in a trade or start a business.Or should we accept he’s going a non-academic route in life and throw our cash into investments so he has those to fall back on in adult life?

I don’t want to create reasons for one sibling to resent another. It’s a hard choice and we would have to be very mindful of the risk dc1 becomes bitter about it when she realises that part of her own inheritance will be spent on her db, in effect. But then again it’s our money and our choice how we invest and spend our money.

I’m still very torn because I know it’s unfair but the reason for it are based in logic.

Pay for daughter fully through uni but do not pay for DS’s uni would help even it up. My oldest son left indy to go to state sixth form and younger stays at indy for sixth, and that’s how we’ve cut it, with their agreement.

RhaenysRocks · 12/09/2025 07:37

OneChicRoseRobin · 12/09/2025 07:26

Perhaps another option: children who go to private schools have no inheritance rights. That way, both children would be offended.

Edited

Is that serious suggestion? So a child who is sent to private school because they are ND or have some other additional need then get punished for it? I would hope the sibling would be counting their blessings that they've had such a comparatively easy time and are capable of thriving in the world without an additional benefit.