How do you justify seding your child to boarding school?

DS is starting boarding this Sept @13. His school is 2 miles up the road. I 'm a SAHM. He's boarding because he wants to, he wants constant companionship and we want him to get the most out of school. I'm hoping that he will want to come home every weekend. He won't miss out on any family occasions because he's so local. I can meet him for coffee if I want etc etc. I love him to bits but have chosen what we feel will be right for him. If it's a disaster we hopefully will be able to change to a day place. To slate boarding as a whole is IMHO a little bit narrow minded. We don't feel it would suit our DD but if that's something she wanted in the future we would look into it.

Like Maryz says, you make the decision that is right for you and your child. If you were to make a list of things that parents do to cause emotional and/or physical damage to their children, I think that sending them to boarding school would come pretty low down the order.

Personally I wouldn't have wanted to send DS away to board at age 7, although I know lots of children who board quite happily at that age. By the time DS was 12/13 it was completely different, and he was already turning into a young man and was ready for a bit more independence from home and from us.

DS is happy at his school, he is getting an amazing education with lots of other fantastic opportunities as well, he is surrounded by boys his own age, and he has gained a huge amount of self assurance and confidence to be true to himself. He loves coming home and is affectionate and good company when he is here, we have a great relationship and he is open with us. If that wasn't the case then we would obviously re-think.

Maryz

How old is ds2? if you don't mind me asking.
My dd would love to go to a boarding school, but we have said no until she is older.
As day pupil it would be similar to your ds2, except train journey at 6.30.

Sometimes it is the best school for your child and it happens to be a boarding school.
I agree, all schools are institutions.

Thanks Mini I was flamed once for calling nurseries and schools institutions.

I had a degree and was closely supervised yes.

I do know one family where weekly boarding works incredibly well- two very high flying parents, kids go to school on Monday morning, come home on Friday evening, parents get all work commitments done in the week, and the weekend is family time.

In fact the other option was a private boarding school (we didn't like the local private) but much prefer this school and it means we wouldn't need to jump the hoops for so much financial help which is also a bonus.

We're not mini fingers.
We're choosing a state boarding school over a state high school.
That's why these threads that come along and make blanket statements about why parents are doing things or how all children experience something annoy me.

I think for children from neglectful and/or abusive families both nurseries, care homes and boarding schools can provide a better environment.

I fail to see how they are as good as or better than a loving family home in terms of emotional development goes.

And I can absolutely see how an expensive boarding school could be a better experience than a grim state school but for most if not all parents who use boarding schools this isn't the choice they're making. They are choosing a boarding school over a private day school.

Dd is a day girl at a specialist dance boarding school. She travels 40 miles there & back each day.

Whilst I am glad that she still comes home each night in some ways I wish we could afford for her to board as she misses out on a lot socially plus the long hours & travelling make homework etc difficult.

She has boarded occasionally (during performance weeks eg) & loved it.

At her school there is an exeat weekend every half term plus half term itself do they come back hone every 3-4 weeks.

It's a highly specialist education only available at four schools (a few more if you count the non funded ones)

You were unqualified when you got the job?

Hakluyt - many of the boarders I have come across have more success getting boarding staff to put their needs first than their own parents.

And for the rest, it is true that they live at school. It isn't true that aren't in daily contact with their loving and supporting home base. Boarding staff communicate regularly with parents, daily or several times daily if the situation warrents it.

If they miss out on a part in a play, or a place in the first team children have a choice of who to turn to. Friends (just as day children would), academic staff, pastoral staff and their parents are also available at the touch of a button.

I was full time live in for four years before marriage etc... At a small girls school. And you are right in one respect, many of these type of schools don't have massive family accommodation (although many are working towards it) and as such it attracted a fair amount of 'single women' to the job. I dispute that these are by default maladjusted however! It is getting rarer and and rarer that these jobs go to unqualified staff however. All of the other people I worked with were qualified teachers and I did my qualification 'on the job'.

Now post marriage I work at a different school where boarding staffing is much more all encompassing. DH and I work in different houses and live in school accommodation (separate to the boarding house). All resident tutors and HMs are married, approx half with children and family accommodation is provided for all.

Boarding isn't right for all children. But then nor is any one type of school. I had a miserable time at a state day school and it was clearly not the right place for me. Unfortunately my parents had neither the money nor the inclination to investigate other options.

They value achievement of the sort that they believe can only be obtained by placing a child in an institution 24 hours a day for 5 or 7 days a week, above the value they place on sharing time together as a family during their child's very short childhood, after which they won't usually be living at home anyway.

And they honestly be
Ie e that it's emotionally and socially preferable and beneficial for even quite young children to be raised in groups and not in family units.

How long did you stay in the job?

I take it you weren't a parent yourself?

This is really going to sound like an inflammatory question. I don't mean it to be. But I don't understand any of the answers I have ever been given either in real life or online.

Why would you want a child to spend a significant amount of time- all their school life being cared for by someone who will be kind, and supportive but who cannot possibly love them. Why might you think being shown love on a day to day basis isn't important? Why is it OK for a child to live somewhere where there is, by definition, no one who can put their needs and interests first? (I'm not saying that is always a good idea, but surely it's equally not a good idea for it never to happen?)When my children are not picked for a team, or have a nasty falling out with a friend, or have some other childhood disaster they want a parent. Not a teacher, however wonderful.

No - it's most definitely not the same as parental love.

Children in boarding school are not parented in the same way as children who live in families.

Wonderful xpost with mini fingers. Thanks for the insult, always much appreciated...

Just been browsing boarding school jobs. Amazed by how badly paid they are, how few qualifications and what little experience they ask for compared to teaching jobs.

We had some right oddballs as house mistresses/masters. But then how many well adjusted people would want a job which requires you to live on site (often in single person accommodation) and be available through the night for much of the week, year after year?

I work in boarding now, and have done on and off for many years.

In my first term I was taught a very valuable lesson by a senior teacher who has now gone on to be a headmistress.

We were walking down a corridor together when one of 'my girls' came running up to us in floods of tears. I wanted to hug her but froze- all those safeguarding concerns/PC gone mad bollocks hit me like a ton of bricks as I was effectively stood next to my boss and I was only 21 and inexperienced. In that split second that I had frozen the senior teacher had leapt forward, enveloped the girl in a huge hug and told her that it was ok, whatever the problem was we could sort it out. (She then went on to take the girl to a safe place to discuss her issue and find a solution).

It has always been my experience that if a boarder is upset/worried there are staff on hand who genuinely care and will drop everything in an instant to help.

I'm 100% certain this wasn't true in all schools 30-40 years ago and is one of the many reasons experiences from then can't really compare to modern boarding.

Of course this isn't the same as a parents love and time and it is why boarders always have access to technology to enable them to keep in touch and parents are always welcome to visit the school.

Times between going home are also much much shorter now than in the past.

Of course most people who work in boarding schools are lovely, well adjusted people, with happy and fulfilling family lives of their own and plenty of time and love left over to act as proxy parents to the dozens of children in their care.

I'm wondering, when you take family and background out of the equation, what makes boarding school a better experience that being in local authority care? Because the cost of keeping a child in a care home is vastly more than the cost of boarding school. And weirdly, putting a child in care is considered the absolutely worst option - because there is absolute consensus among social work professionals that raising a child within a family, even if that family isn't perfect, is almost always better than raising a child in an institution. (Unless there is significant abuse and neglect happening in the family). Why is this the case for working class children but not for the children of the wealthy?

"I've worked in nurseries where children as young as 6 weeks old are left series 50 hours a week 46 weeks of the year with staff who at best are caring and knowledgeable but generalyy quite caring uninspiring and clueless about real life child development."

I think you would find it quite hard to find many people who think that's a good idea.