Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to not want to pay for other kids to learn to swim?

284 replies

tomdayleymum · 31/08/2012 12:58

DS about to go into Year 3. Got a letter from school saying that from now til next July Year 3 will be going swimming and please can we have a voluntary contribution of £3.25 per week?

He can swim very well thanks to me paying for him to have private lessons. If other parents haven't bothered (or can't afford) to teach their kids to swim outside of school hours then fine, let the school teach 'em. But I don't want to pay for him to go in school hours when he could do with catching up on his reading instead.

AIBU?

OP posts:
ToothbrushThief · 31/08/2012 13:34

tbh I think the short course of swimming lessons made compulsory by education authority are pointless and waste time which could be better used in the classroom.

I don't see how children can become effective, safe and good swimmers in those lessons.

So YANBU to wish he was in school

To assume you are paying for others and he won't benefit is unreasonable

WelshMaenad · 31/08/2012 13:35

Oh, you're absolutely right, the school should completely reorganise their academic and sports provision around your son's abilities and needs. How utterly selfish of them to expect him to take part in activities he's already quite good at. Jeesh, bastards.

NovackNGood · 31/08/2012 13:35

Why is everyone giving the op are hard time instead of just pointing out that she does not need to pay at all and the boy can still go swimming and everyone will be happy.

Elephantshavewrinkles · 31/08/2012 13:37

The cost will be for the transport.

Am a TA who has in the past gone in the water with the children.

I help those children who find it very difficult or need a confidence boost.

I do not teach them the swimming instructor does that.

The more able children partied their stoke etc.

YABU

mumnosGOLDisbest · 31/08/2012 13:37

they have to go swimming as part of pe. they wont be teaching swimmers to swim but pushing them further. it's part of his weekly exercise and will replace a pe session. will you remove him from football or basketball because he already knows the game or allow him to be taught to improve and practice?

the cost does sound a bit steep though. is the pool far away?

Elephantshavewrinkles · 31/08/2012 13:37

Practice whoops

Waitforit · 31/08/2012 13:38

Novak apart from the school who will have to use funds that could of been used for something else to pay for a child with parents who can afford to contribute, and the parents of children who stretch themselves to pay but do so in the belief that the lessons are important and that they have a social obligation to pay their way when they can.

ToothbrushThief · 31/08/2012 13:40

To clarify my pov.... our school provided the bare minimum for lessons and kids had a long coach journey, time changing, got wet and got out...long coach journey. It was only a matter of weeks ? 6

All bar 2, in the class could swim anyway.

I still paid and would support the concept - I just think it was ineffective in it's aims.

Cokeaholic · 31/08/2012 13:41

YABVVVVVVVVVVU.

What a self-centred little world you operate with your family.

I'll try and explain how the school swimming thing works for you........

Once at the swimming pool the staff/swimming structor involved will evaluate all the children's ability and put them in groups.

Your mini "tomdaley" will be in the most able group (natch!). He and his group (there will be other parents who have paid for out of school swimming lessons too you know) will then be given suitable coaching/teaching to bring them on further. Your ds will be taking up a seat on the coach (my dc find the short coach trip fun in itself) and receiving swimming lessons appropriate to his ability and getting exercise in a more varied way than being in the school hall/gym with his class teacher. Your £3.25 will help to ensure that the school has sufficient parents paying to enable all children to have a chance to learn to swim, you do care about children not as fortunate as your own don't you ?

Here's the nice bit, be sure to read this section of my post.

It should be fun to have swimming lessons with class mates rather than doing literacy or maths with them etc. etc.
If he is behind his classmates in reading it may give him a lovely confidence boost to find that he is ahead of them in something else like swimming (unless you are over stating his ability gained from the private swimming lessons)

I'm curious that you can afford to pay for swimming lessons but not to pay £3.25 once a week for a nice bit of exercise with his classmates. You could recoup the money by cutting down on his out of school exercise sessions and with the time freed up do some additional literacy work with him then.

SugarBatty · 31/08/2012 13:41

Yabu its a voluntary contribution so you don't have to pay it. I hope you haven't voiced your concerns in front of your ds as you have on here. It would be a shame if he took your negative attitude into school with him as it might cause a bit of upset with his friends.

Part of the fun will be sat on the coach singing songs and waving (pulling faces) at other drivers! Grin

I'm sure their are other kids in his class who are good swimmers too they might pair them up with the less able ones to help them which would be a nice opportunity for your ds to help others.

janey68 · 31/08/2012 13:41

Novack that's exactly what many of us did suggest!

I said - don't pay, and withdraw your ds if you don't even want him going.

She could then come on here and moan when the school cant offer him individual tuition during that time......

Original poster
tomdayleymum · 31/08/2012 13:41

OK, I am BU.

He will be going swimming with the class and I will pay the voluntary contribution.

Thank you, MN Jury Flowers

OP posts:
NovackNGood · 31/08/2012 13:43

The lessons are part of the curriculum and the tax payer has funded the school. The OP is under No obligation whatsoever to pay and the is no social obligation whatsoever to pay for state schooling.

WelshMaenad · 31/08/2012 13:43

Um, Novak, because refusing to pay £3 a week when she can clearly afford private swimming lessons, thus forcing the school to dip into it's reserves to cover the cost of taking her child swimming, reducing reserves of cash to spend on other things that will benefit the kids, makes you a selfish shit. IMHO.

Waitforit · 31/08/2012 13:49

Glad you've seen sense OP Smile

NovackNGood · 31/08/2012 13:50

So do the kids who get English class at that time have to pay more. NO because it is all funded as part of the curriculum. This is just a head pulling a fast one saying oh they need a voluntary contribution knowing full well they cannot expect people to pay up for what is a compulsory part of the curriculum for that stage that has been paid for. It is not an after school extra activity it is the curriculum and the tax payers have already funded it-

StealthPolarBear · 31/08/2012 13:50

I presume that he can read and so therefore does no reading at school? Can he play football? If so, that's out.

NovackNGood · 31/08/2012 13:51

The other things will benefit some kids and this money spent on swimming will benefit these year 3's in this instance. Swings and roundabouts and no need for an extra charge.

bagpusss · 31/08/2012 13:52

YANBU to feel annoyed at being asked to fund something that ought to be provided free of charge.
YANBU to feel irritated that refusing to pay would put you in an odd position.
You could look beyond the lack of actual value in the swimming lessons for your son, and be happy that he has a fun activity outside school walls with his friends.
It does not make much sense to mix it up with another area of school life, like reading. School is no buffet. If everyone felt they were entitled to pick and choose the amount of time their child had at any given activity or subject it would be a right old mess.

Waitforit · 31/08/2012 13:53

Oh for fucks sake, it's not 'pulling a fast one', it's trying to stretch budgets to cover as much educational provision as possible. And I say that as a teacher at a school that does cover swimming lessons as we have a relatively healthy budget due to the size and demographics of the school. Other schools don't have the luxury that we do.

NarkedRaspberry · 31/08/2012 13:57

What is going on with MN lately???

Glitterknickaz · 31/08/2012 14:02

Well there is a demographic around here that thinks carers like me shouldn't get state money you see.... to make more money so people who can afford to contribute to stuff like this don't have to.

HTH

MoreCrackThanHarlem · 31/08/2012 14:11

Just to point out- I am a Learning Mentor and sometimes accompany children swimming. I do take a group on my own, but no "ineffectual bellowing", I have been trained and have an ASA Primary School Teacher Certificate for the teaching of swimming. Most teachers/TAs will have some kind of training if they are the lead instructor of a group.

NellyJob · 31/08/2012 14:13

The lessons are part of the curriculum and the tax payer has funded the school. The OP is under No obligation whatsoever to pay and the is no social obligation whatsoever to pay for state schooling
that is true, but it doesn't sound as though OP has a money problem, which other parents will have.

MoreCrackThanHarlem · 31/08/2012 14:13

Just to point out- I am a Learning Mentor and sometimes accompany children swimming. I do take a group on my own, but no "ineffectual bellowing", I have been trained and have an ASA Primary School Teacher Certificate for the teaching of swimming. Most teachers/TAs will have some kind of training if they are the lead instructor of a group.