Boarding school at four years old?

[mightybright]

SIL works for the MOD and BIL is in the navy. We were at their house on the military base today and she told me that her neighbour has put her 4 year old daughter into boarding school. I said 'four, that's young' and SIL completely freaked out then stormed away from the table.

I'm not judging their neighbour, I don't even know her, I just said it was young which perhaps in hindsight was insensitive but I do feel she overreacted, aibu?

"their parents have a slightly indifferent attitude towards parenting"

Good God

One of my paternal aunts went to boarding school (full boarder) when she was five. I don't think she has ever forgiven her parents, even though there were extenuating circumstances (her parents lived very rurally and there was no suitable school in the village - this is a long time ago).

Nobody is putting a gun to their heads. They think it is the best thing for their child.

One must assume they think they would be sacrificing their children's futures, which is different to sacrificing their own jobs, careers etc.

I don't think it's sad for all children at all. I think it's possible to have quite an old-fashioned idea about boarding school, as if they were all like Gordonstoun in the sixties, whereas the reality is different. Some children don't suit it but many do, and often thrive. Some people say they are closer as a result: I can imagine that. Some people say it's a disaster: for some the success and happiness of the child makes the sacrifice of familial proximity a price worth paying.

There are lot of generalisations and assumptions on the thread which simply don't apply to real lives.

"They aren't putting their child second, they are putting them first in a way that you happen to disagree with."

Oh yes this is it manic. This is the way it is.

I was at school with quite a lot of forces kids - including one who had boarded from 5. She'd loved it, and at 18 was probably the most confident well-travelled person I think I have ever met, who had a great relationship with her parents, and seemed absolutely fine. In fact, that pretty much goes for them all. Get the right boarding school for the child and why not, if it's right for them as well.

Horses for courses and all that?

No, she said aged four, not year four. Maybe she is 4 now and is starting in September when she will be 5? Or perhaps ther have special arrangements due to the circumstances? I really don't know.

The mother was going away on a 6 months navy stint (not sure what the official term is!)

I don't think that mother's should go off on 6 month stints-unless the father is going to be at home as primary carer.

sorry about apostrophe-I get carried away.

I think 4 is too young too. Rather wrong actually.

Okay! Have just conferred with DH and SIL's neighbour did put her DD into boarding school when she was four years old but she is now 13, the same age as SIL's DD

Isn't there a law against sending 4 year old children to boarding school?

Thanks mightybright! That's a helpful clarification.

Thanks for clarification.

Any idea why SIL stropped?

Lots of people are saying that if you work in the military you might not have a choice

Well given there aren't any schools we can find that take 4yo boarders, it would seem other military parents manage somehow. Also, what changes when the child reaches 4? Or are there parents out there sending their 1,2,3 year olds to boarding school.

I hve a 4 year old. It seems to me he's only just started talking and got the hang of using the toilet. Sometimes when he's upset he just wants me or his stuffed giraffe. He's a baby.

Queen Ethelberga's is Year 3 (7/8 yrs old) for whoever said further up that they took them at 4.here

That's fees for armed forces which I believe don't fund kids younger than Y3.but this shows the prices for non forces families with boarding starting at Y1.But elsewhere it does say they are prepared to board younger children.

For those saying no boarding school takes Reception year children - I know of one in Cornwall (can't remember the name). I have a friend who is a single parent with health problems, she has bad patches and the school agreed then when she is too ill to look after her Reception Year DC they will allow boarding. So DC is not a permanent boarder, and the school is seeking to help, but it does show boarding can happen at 4 in exceptional circumstances. Maybe the OP's example is similar and it is not constant boarding but on an "as needed" basis,

Okay - I stand corrected fairydoll .

this idea that you are doing "the best" for your child by sending them to boarding school (at whatever age) is odd. What I can only assume is that you think "the best" equates to academic/social advantage. And that of course assumes that your dc will be happiest in a life/career that a private school education buys. In my personal (and professional opinion come to think of itl) is that a Russell group education and "professional" career does not make people happy per se. Usually when I give this argument the retort is that "yes, but I want them to have a choice....." A statement which I am always sceptical of because a) honestly , really really you'd be happy if your expensively educated ended up working as a care assistant? And b) if you really don?t care what they end up doing as a job then why not send them to state school, it doesn?t automatically remove ?choice?...

OP, a Navy married quarter WITHIN the camp compound? Are you quite sure about that? The RAF and the Army keep their married quarters behind the wire. We do not.

Military funding is not offered for boarding school until the child reaches 8. Before this, if both parents serve then they will not be drafted to the front line together/at the same time. The drafting is staggered on a 3 yearly basis, with a 4 month overlap. One parent may also take 100% of the front line drafting; that is to take the other parent's front line time. This is common. One parent will always be at home as primary carer.

hettie I think I'd be right in saying that the vast majority (apart perhaps from families who have a good private income) of forces families feel that boarding is the only option to provide stability.

Now for us, I'm currently not working and until 2 yrs ago, we made the decision for me and the children to follow and move with DH (army) whilst they're still young-ish. However, although we're supporting him and moving away for the next 2 yrs, we're then coming back to our own home and will be separated from dh in the week. This is the only way for us to have stability for the children as we couldn't send them to board.

However, for many forces families, the wives do not want to spend the week away from their DHs and so move every couple/3 yrs. The only way to provide stabilty other than weekly commuting is to board.

Many forces families would not choose this option if it were not for the CEA payments.

Artichokes - In those circumstances I can see its a good plan and probably one thats best for the child. I mean what would her other alternatives be - the care system and even with foster carers, if its care on an adhoc basis, there would be no continuity for the child, just new random foster carers as and when. In fact the more I think about it, in the case you talk about, it seems like it probably is the best option in that families circumstances.

We had a neighbour who was in the military and his wife died leaving him with a DD who was 6yo but almost 7. He had no family support and he applied to the allowances board for early CEA for his DD, thinking it would be the best solution all round whilst he looked for another career etc. He was turned down on his application for CEA on the basis they do not allow it for children under 8yo. This was 5 years ago now. He ended up going AWOL instead as he had no other option for help with caring for his DD. He got charged and left the military with no job or home, last we heard he was in a hostel with his DD. Not sure what happend to him after that.

Seems in some circumstances boarding school may be the best of some shit options.