To wonder if its fair that some forces children get fees paid at private schools?

[scruffybird]

A few old friends of mine have their children at good private boarding schools due to ninety percent of the fees being paid for by the forces. I am perfectly aware that I may be being unreasonable for even questioning this, but it just seems wrong?
One of the girls has gone to a school hundreds of miles away from where her family live so that she would be eligible.

YABU

YABU. It is one of the benefits, like company cars in other jobs.

On the face of it would say YANBU but such is the world we live in.

This comes up again and again. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and explain that it's not because they're 'good' schools, it's because they're boarding and therefore education isn't disrupted every 2/3 years by yet another move.

That school hundreds if miles away may have been closer when she started, or closer to their next predicted posting, close to grandparents or simply the best fit.

It's very seldom an easy decision to make.

Why is it 'wrong?.'

Is a perk of the job. Seems fair enough to me.

Yabu. It is a perk of the job, like decent pensions for nurses. Oh........

yabu.

I think you are BU. it's so the kids don't have to move around every couple of years and it's a perk if the job. They are risking their lives for us so you can't really complain!

YABU.

1. The forces do not pay 90% of the fees.
2. Which is better for the child - moving schools (and LEAs and countries) every 2-3 years or settling in one stable environment?
3. YABU.

I was one of those.
You are a forces child, your parent gets posted every year or so to a different location. OK.
But your friends are forces children as well, whose parent gets posted every year or so. Thus like cogs in a machine, you never establish stable friendships.
Your schooling, your home and often your country changes on an irregular basis, and you have no relatives within reaching distance.
You face losing a parent if they are sent to a war zone.
So some families see boarding school as a way of giving a child some sort of stability in their lives.
So if you are jealous of the opportunity, are you willing to take the whole package?

YANBU; why is it reasonable for this one public sector group to get these benefits?
Members of the armed forces are not conscripted and have chosen this career; presumably understanding the risks that accompany it. Before arguments are offered about the need for so many members of the armed forces it would be better to consider the nature of British involvement in world affairs.

My father was in the army, we moved every 1 1/2 to 2 yrs around the uk and the continent. The international school that I attended with the rest of the forces kids only went to 12 yrs old. I would have had to go to boarding school at that age to carry on my schooling but my dad left the army and moved home so we could have more stability. It is very hard and disruptive to keep changing schools, especially when the child gets older and the curriculum gets more serious, exams etc.

What? no more shite to read on the Daily Mail site?

you have to come on here and start such a silly pointless thread?

YABU, it gives the kids continuity in their education rather than changing schools every couple of years.

If it's a perk - why is it not taxed like other perks?

But I still think YABU, nothing looked at in isolation is fair, it would be just as "unfair" for a child to have to move to a different city or country every year, etc. etc. It's just the way it is, part of the remuneration package.

Its not about paying for a 'better' school, its about paying for a boarding provision which is necessary if the parents are posted all over the place. There are some state boarding schools (not many but some) and these are used for the same purpose. Many parents would certainly disagree with you that boarding schools are a 'perk' or the 'better deal' anyway...

g33k 'world affairs' have naff all to do with the powers that be assisting Forces Personnel in providing a stable and continuous education for their children.

btw. a number of companies also pay for private schooling if the employee is on an expat deal, even if they land up spending 20 years in the same country/location.

Don't understand your point...it is just a part of the compensation package, why single out one element?

YABU - boarding school allows for continuity of education for a family that is constantly on the move.

It's not a 'perk' though is it? It's necessity to stop disruption to a childs schooling.

We used to have one here (we live a stones throw from the Woolwich barracks) one of theComps in Greenwich had a massive boarding arm for military kids, so they could go to mainstream school. Thats long since closed, along with selling off all the army accomodation. but it was a state comprehensive with boarding facilities. It used to be a brilliant school, it isnt now though.

"g33k 'world affairs' have naff all to do with the powers that be assisting Forces Personnel in providing a stable and continuous education for their children."

Not at all; world affairs can be used to identify areas in which our armed forces have been deployed when perhaps they should not have been (note enquiries about the legitimacy of invasions). If we consider this fact we could argue for a reduced armed forces.

It is not the government or the taxpayers job to provide the continuous or stable environment; that should fall to the parents.

Can I also say that if you go to a local school it is often full of small-minded petty bigots who have an established pecking order and don't take kindly to intruders? And many teachers aren't keen on an influx of itinerants, especially if they have any kind of need or are G&T or don't know how things are done in that school?
So you either end up unhappy and withdrawn or in a lot of fights. Which you usually win, having had so much practise.