To think people who say that they wouldn't have children if they couldn't afford to educate them privately are ...

[seeker]

.....bonkers?

And before anyone says that nobody has ever said that, there have been plenty of threads on here with people saying they stopped at one, or advising people not to have a 3rd because they can't afford private school for more. So presumably they wouldn't have had any if they could not send them to private school.

weeping with laughter at some hyperbole? Any irony there?

I shall read this when back from the school run.

YABU.

I don't care what people's reasons are for having or not having children. But wanting to give them the best education you can afford does not seem like too bad a consideration.

Some people don't have children because they think they can't afford them. They would want to be able to give them a bedroom of their own or be able to afford to buy them a bike/computer/university education. Rightly or wrongly, it has no impact on anyone else whatsoever.

Lots of people I know are putting off having children until later in life so that they have some money behind them. This might mean that they run out of time to have children or have to limit their family. But they are doing it because they want to have what they consider to be the best start for their children.

Couldn't give a flying fuck tbh, private education can b crap and can be excellent same as in state system but there are less regulations with private schools.

All my 4 were state educated, 2 at uni and 2 doing well at school, state comp.

My sil spent thousands on private ed for hers,older one failed a levels and younger one dropped out of 6 th form at 17 and is lazing at home.

I think it's expectations and encouragement needed rather than cash.

theoriginal I defy you not to laugh out loud when seeker tells posters they are going to die!!!!

I'll let you know!

I didn't read it as an actual death threat, so no. Maybe I've missed something.

Wordfactory- did you actually think I meant that I would send the hit squad out? How very strange of you!

A little puzzled that you feel the need to use deliberate misunderstanding, selective memory and ad hominem attacks against me. Have you no well reasoned arguments in you locker?

Anyway, back to the subject. People say they will not have a second or third child if they can't educate it privately. Does this mean that there are people who choose to have no children at all because they know that they will not be able to afford private school for even one?

And I know, of course that people limit their families for all sorts of reasons, including financial ones. But there are a lot of people on mumsnet who give this as the main, or even only reason for limiting their families. I have read sentences like "I would love another child, but we couldn't afford the school fees" So basically they are saying that a child would be better off not existing than going to state school.

I can understand people saying they wont have more than 2 children because they cant afford to provide them with the things they think they need.

However I cannot understand people saying they wouldnt have children at all or even just sticking to one child.

a child would be better off not existing than going to state school

From the other side, would the existing child(ren) be better off having an extra sibling, or going to state school when they are currently going to a private school?

Seeker - So basically they are saying that a child would be better off not existing than going to state school.

That is a ridiculous statement. A child doesnt exist when parents are simply thinking about having one!!

For some parents a fee paying education is sacrosant and they cannot contemplating compromising on that. That is fine as is not having any more children because your house isnt big enough and you want to stay in the city.

Life is about choices and we make them by weighing up what is important to us - we are all different so our choices are different.

You are coming across as a little hysterical about this subject - why does it bother you so much?

You are a slave to the state, seeker

The only person being deliberately obtuse and misunderstanding other posters is you seeker. Which you do on every single thread about private education, which frankly seems to obsess you.

I'll spell out my position, even though you frankly don't deserve the courtesy because you do have a slightly Marie Antionetteish streak to you on this subject. DS is already at private school. DD will be going there too. We can afford that. If life changed so that we could no longer afford it, due to external factors like redundancy, illness or death then they would go to the local stats primary and that would be fine.

If we chose to have a third child we could afford three set of school fees. So we would either have to decide to 1) send none of them to private school, removing FS from a school he loves 2) send DC3 to state while DC1 and 2 go private or possibly 3) send all three to private prep but state secondary, whereas as things stand both our children can go private all the way through.

I don't see why my children should have to bear the sacrifices of my desire for a third child.

Right. That might not be a position you agree with, or even feel much sympathy with. But I'm sure you're intelligent enough to understand it.

Could *not afford three sets of fees

To me I guess it is the thinking and assumptions behind the idea of a private education as sacrosanct that are suspect. The whole your money your choice thing isn't as simple as it is sometimes made out to be, because the private option very often seems to be based on some assumptions about state schools which are irritating or infuriating to those of use who use them. I've read on here in the last few days that state schools are full of biting snarling punching jeering 'weeds', and that people who teach in them must have no self respect, for example. It's the implicit lack of respect for state schools and everyone in them which is the nub, for me.

And I will also add my name to the list of those who would not use private education if they won the lottery. And I already know I'd have to have a bit of a debate with dp about that one! But we shall cross that very unlikely bridge if we ever come to it!

Thank you chubfudder. That was very clear and I understand it completely. Would have been better if you had been able to resist the Mary Antipnette dig. But as I said, I have grown used to the ad hominems.

If you had not been able to afford private education at all, would you have had children?

seeker 'So basically they are saying that a child would be better off not existing than going to state school'

OK, so?

How does that make them any more bonkers than any other reason for not having a child? I really don't get why you are so concerned about all these non-existent children.

If you are reasonably well-educated and come from a well-educated family you might easily hesitate about bringing children into the world whom you could not afford to educate in the manner of their relations. It is not easy to be a lot less educated than your parents/aunts/uncles/cousins etc.

Would I have had children? Yes. We hoped to be able to afford private education, but at the time ds was born we couldn't have afforded it right then. I was training for my current career - if I had failed my exams or been unable to find a job in my chosen field he would have had to go state. And that would have been fine. But having sampled what private had to offer, there is no way on this earth I would take it away from him deliberately in order to have a third child, which is an essentially selfish thing to do anyway.

TheOriginal I think your view is a little bit chippy.
My DD's will most likely go to private secondary, its not that I look down on the state option, it is that it doesnt offer my DC's what I want.
Its like me saying the fact that I drive a Renault means that everyone who drives a Merc is looking down on me and thinks I am a loser. I doubt they do and even if they did, I really wouldnt care.

A lot of it is down to timing though, would I have had a child in my twenties when I couldn't afford private education or wait until 30's when I can. No brainer for me.

I don't look down on state schools and I don't accept that most private educating parents do either. There are some great things going on in state schools. But there are also nearly five times assent children in the class ds would be in at our local primary, plus it's a mixed year group. I don't think ds would do as well in that environment as he is doing now.

Assent = as many

Stupid phone