to think that, no, it is not possible to pay private school fees simply by "going without"?

[nameymcnamechange]

Of all the many thousands of things that annoy me about Mumsnet, it is this myth that more people could send their children to private school if they prioritised school fees over "extravagant lifestyles" and made sacrifices including but not limited to

• running one car or no car
• not going on holiday, or camping
• economising with food
• buying second hand clothes and not being interested in designer handbags

No, those small economies are not going to make the difference between a state or private education for the vast vast vast majority of families.

So can we please stop posting this kind of nonsense?

I think the general point that Kerala is making is the importance of parenting. I have little faith in the school that dd goes to or the secondary that follows. I do have faith in her and in our abilities as parents. Therefore we will educate in the state.

Well we could do it by going without - but it would be without a 2nd car, holiday, nights out etc. I dont/cant buy designer handbags.
I dont look at these things as being frivolous items but rather part of living a life (and we are lucky to have the opportunity to have these things)

It depends on your circumstance and what value/benefit you put on private education

QuattroCentro - wrt to the earnings: is that all state educated in comparison to all privately educated? Or is it based on a comparison between stae and privately educated with the same number of GCSEs, or A levels?

And

There could be many factors at play there, given that many parents with the capacity to pay fees will also be able to offer a position in the family business, or facilitate a position in a family friend's practice or bring other influences. Which may not be possible for parents who have to eat nettle soup, roadkill pheasants or pigeons snared from the balcony of their HA flat.

So it may not be about the actual education at all.

My family could not have afforded private school for us even if we stopped eating. So it's ridiculous to say people could afford it if they made cutbacks. It depends on income and expenditure.

I went to an ordinary state school and a lousy, run down 6th form college. I'm now a solicitor. I wouldn't worry too much about affording it or not. The overwhelming majority of children in this country don't receive a private education.

It also comes out in the wash. When I was at university, many kids had gone to the best public schools. They had the same a-level grades as me and received the same degree class. But how much money had their parents spent on their education to get the same qualifications as me?!

I was thinking about this thread while stuck in a particularly dull traffic jam earlier. And I thought that actually it may do quite a lot of harm to our children if we sacrifice our lives to their education. What a huge amount of pressure. What if they (despite best efforts) don't do very well? What if they hate it and get Es? Will you resent them/will they feel you do?

Scary stuff

I was in a big traffic jam earlier, too ladyb. Maybe we're in the same place :)
Just very very unusual for a Saturday afternoon around us.

Yes I agree with that about the pressure. Also I went to university in the US and most students at this particular university had been privately educated. I was not. I was still at the top of my class and never struggled to keep up with work or do anything. I didn't feel they had an advantage over me. Not ever.

Star - doubt very much it was the same one. I was stuck in roadworks near Victoria station which sadly are not an uncommon occurrence

I'm glad to hear what you say. As I said earlier in the thread, I did go to private school. And chose to go to a university which wasn't full of ex-public school children. So I was more embarrassed about my background than proud :o

Haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this has been pointed out, but the whole "sacrifice" myth really annoys me. All the private secondary schools near me (Manchester) charge on average £800 a month - I have researched their fees on their websites. I'm sorry, but buying own-brand baked beans is not going to save me £800 a month, and nor is giving up our one (cheap) holiday per year. We are over the threshold for an assisted place (which is usually something like combined income of £25-30k)and there is no way we could find an extra £800 a month after mortgage, bills, food etc are paid. And of course if you have more than one child you can hardly send one and not the other, so that's £1600 a month.

Agree with Ladybiscuit I dont think a familys life should be sacrificed for education. Particularly as its not necessary for a successful life.

If we were to sacrifice enough to pay private school bills it would certainly do harm to our children. Quite a lot of harm. How long is it they reckon you can live without eating?...

i also agree with ladybiscuit rethe sacrifice thing too

See I'm not convinced about sacrifice being a bad thing per se.

Many times when you read about someone's life, they are in awe of what their parents' did for them and didn't feel it as pressure. I'm thinking here of people that left their families and homelands for example, in search of a better life for their children.
Or parents who went the extra mile for their children to follow their dream.

I think of my own Mother who wore second hand clothes and worked on a market stall so I could stay on and do A levels...and I only feel pride that she did that for me.

no igree with that Litchick, sacrifice is to be admired, but i disagree with it being rammed down the childrens' throats re private education. After all, it is usually the parent who has made the decision to pay for it, rarely the child.

I've been ruminating this thread for a few days, and I think you are completely right, OP.

We are in the camp of not being able to afford all those other things because we are paying school fees. It does not mean at all the same thing as "anybody could afford school fees if they cut out those other things". Also we do not have a mortgage or rent to pay, and my mother in law pays for our son. We are extremely fortunate in every way. People on average salaries with average commitments will never be able to afford private school.

Kerala - there are parents who pay school fees but leave the raising of their children largely to boarding schools or nannies. (Of course there are very involved parents who use either or both, but some people just don't make much effort or spend much time with their children - if they are wealthy, all they do is sign the cheques.)

You can't tell how supportive a parent is by their bank balance.

MABS - then we are in agreement.
I dislike anyhting being rammed down anyone's throat.

What I don't agree with though, is that sacrifices made for private school being in a different category to any other sacrifice.
Children, as they are fond of telling us, don't ask to be born.
Once they are, our lives become, for a short period, about them essentially.
Children understand this, and expect it. They don't feel it as 'pressure' if it is lovingly given.

Office of Nat Stats states that UK nat av household final income for 2008/2009 was £53,900. Here

For most 'normal' earners cutting out an average of £10k (per child) of 'extravagant spending', is not really realistic. I shouldn't think most average income families come close to spending £10k per year on extravagances that can be cut out.

Of course there are people who earn more and spend it on education (and some who use continue to use state provision) and there are others who will scrimp every last penny to use the indy sector; but in general (and that is what the OP is talking about) the average earning population is unable to fund private education for their child/ren by simply cutting out 'extravagances'.

That's true edam - my sister's husband was packed off to a very prestigious boarding school from a young age because his parents couldn't be arsed with him. It wasn't about wanting what was best for him at all.

And litchick - I think that there's sacrificing your own time like your mum did and putting the family's financial security at risk by remortgaging your house which is what a posted mentioned further down the thread.

And tbh your example is exactly the point that the OP was making - while your mum doing shifts on a market school and wearing 2nd hand clothes made enough cash to allow you to do your A levels, it wouldn't make you enough to buy the PE kit at a lot of schools. So it's not about 'going without' any more - fees are simply beyond reach of 99% of the population (and I'm basing that on the fact that only 1% earn over £75k a year).

That's it, isn't it? £10k is the basic fees. It doesn't include uniform (often very expensive) and extra curricular stuff and an examination fees which are not included in the private sector.

sorry for random 'an', having a conversation in RL too.

Lady Biscuit- yet 7% of children are educated in private schools. Most parents of children at private schools are using elaborate and complicated funding methods for their children involving grandparents, trusts, second incomes, etc... It's not as simple as needing £75000 per household. We certainly don't earn anything like that yet we have 3 at private schools.

Our school uniform is £5 for a blazer in the school second hand shop, normal white shirt, standard grey trousers available anywhere. Most expensive standard item is the girls' kilt, available at £4 or £5 in the second hand shop, or £30 if you buy it new.

That sounds like good value to me duchesse given that the schools around here demand specific school coats/blazers/boaters etc.

The wool winter coat for one of the middling girls private schools here for a 5 year old was over £100. Prices in the school 2nd hand shop are still high too.

Friend of mine paid around £500 for her DD's first batch of school uniform for aforementioned school, including shoes (which can only be from a choice of 2 styles for each gender and from the most expensive shoe shop in the city).

If 53k is the average household income then i think more parents could afford pe by prioritising fees over other costs. There seems to be an assumption through this thread that if you have more than one dc you should pay for all or none, which i dont get. Why not just have bigger age gaps between dcs? This was one reason i spaced mine out.
Also pe doesnt need to be all or nothing. You could wait until they are 11/13 to send them which gives 12/14 years to save up.
I think in general some people consider some expenses to be essential when others dont eg pension, insurances, capital mortgage payments, car loan, broadbabd, landline, central heating, abedroom for every child, a garden, dentistry. Also the amount some people waste on gas/ electricity is 100s a year. These examples, over 12/14 years would add up to a big chunk of 4/6 years of fees.
For lone parents or carers though thetevarevonly burseries to rely on. What surprises me is that so few low income familiesvapply for 100% burseries ( the ones i know of also cover uniforms etc).