To ask how you afford private school fees

[Elephantslovetofly]

We have a young DD, and although it's a while away yet we are thinking about school. The area we live in does not have a good local school, and we are considering an independent school for her

Disclaimer - I went to a private school and for what it's worth had a great education. I enjoyed being there and did well in exams. I believe my parents decided to send me there also because of a lack of a good local state school. I might have done fine at a state school, but will never know I guess

We are probably 45 min drive from the school I went to - further than is ideal. DH doesn't mind driving her there if we decide to send her there though (if she is fortunate enough to get a place)

The issue is whether we can afford it. The fees are about £9k per year for junior and £12k for senior. Assuming we therefore need to find £1k per month for fees

My cheeky question is this - if you have a child at private school, what does your household earn and how difficult is it to find the money each month to pay the fees? Our income is about £60k, and at the moment I don't think we can do it (along with our other current expenses). Wages might go up a bit before we would need to start paying, but if this is always going to be a pipe dream i'd rather get over it now

I know we could move closer to a good state school, but am exploring my options at this stage. Don't really want to move, as we have a good house here and are settled

Thanks for reading

Bertrand
"No. But the governing class are private school parents. A small but significant difference."
Surely most Labour MPs and the Shadow Cabinet send their DCs to state schools? I mean, when they don't - Diane Abbott for example - it is widely reported in the press. The Blairs and Harriet Harman got slated for using selective state schools so I'm sure we would know if other Labour bigwigs used private schools.

Fancy - I have posted this before. The richest in society are not scattered evenly throughout England. They tend to live in particular neighbourhoods (e.g. Kensington and Chelsea where 50% send their children to private schools). These areas already have very good state schools (K&C, Richmond) and making them use the state primaries would not benefit the rest of the country as you assume. What would happen is that areas struggling with lack of places would see a worsening of that situation and the children in the struggling state schools will experience FA in terms of improvement.

I live in a very nice leafy area of London which great state schools used by a significant portion of well-heeled middle class parents. It also has about 30% of students in private schools. One of the most bandies-about state school names has an extremely small catchment area principally made up of £3 million houses - many of which do not use the school. If they were forced to use the school, there would be no loss to the children in those £3 million homes, but here would be a loss for the children in the estate on the fringes of the catchment which are able to access that school because so many of the £3 million home children go to private schools.

Your idea, whist idealistic, is not very well thought out.

Think very carefully about how your children will feel being educated with children who are wealthier than them.

Belonging is very important to teenagers.

I went to a private school. My parents are divorced. My wealthy father remarried and immigrated. He paid for my school fees. I lived with my mum (a teacher) and my stepdad (a compulsive gambler). We were skint, never went on holiday, had new clothes etc.

It was very, very hard being the only girl in the class wearing the same cheap jeans 3 years in a row while all my classmates had skiing holidays, new cars for their 18th birthdays and lived in huge houses.

Yes I got a good education. But socially it was very hard. A feeling of belonging is also a good thing to give your children

Mominatrix - have a look at Finland; it doesn't have to be this way.

Who do so many of you here want so badly to have something BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE? Why is a level playing field and equality of opportunity such a threat? Are you afraid that if you weren’t able to buy privilege your children would somehow fail at life? I'm genuinely asking.

England is not Finland and to compare the 2 is naive and wrong footed.

Education will never be a level playing field. The majority of inequality is established even before a child sets foot in a school. People are not afraid, as you are stating, just realistic. To truly equalise outcomes, children need to be taken from parents at birth and randomly distributed out. Would you propose this? It would be the most fair in terms of ensuring equality of opportunity.

Basically if you have £1k disposable a month per child then you can afford private school no matter what your salary and outgoing are

I earn good money but no way do I have a spare grand a month - maybe every few months (300ish a month if I'm good)

As I said previously I think paying private at 2/3yr is a waste of money

Far better to put in a state nursery /school and move at 7yrs to state if want to

Move to private at 7 😳😳😳😳😳

haha, fancyshrew.

I like the questions, but I don't like your shot at getting any answers.

fancy I like having meaningful choice in my life.

I like the freedom it gives me.

I don't want to be just like everyone else and to live just like them.

I have chosen a school for my DC that we cannot ask the tax payer to fund. I am willing to pay for it. I pay for it out of hard earned cash after I've paid my taxes.

To truly equalise outcomes, children need to be taken from parents at birth and randomly distributed out. Would you propose this?

Maybe we should just start at leveling the education playing field.

And, if that doesn't work, maybe we should then look at the random redistributing of children.

But I really think we should give the education thing a shot first. Getting the child redistribution law through parliament could be a real bind.

Would my children fail at life without it?

I doubt it. We'd still be rich, wouldn't we? They'd still be clever? We'd buy into a good catchment or apply for a SS grammar school. We'd spend money and time on tutors etc.

It wouldn't be as good as the current situation but not a tragedy.

Fancy - I grew up with no privilege whatsoever.

Through a combination of intellect, graft and luck, I am now in a position to 'buy privilege' as you put it and having seen both sides would like my children to have an easier path though life. I agree that in an ideal world that wouldn't be a possibility but others have pointed out in reality it is always going to be the case - if not private education then buying a house near a good school, hiring tutors etc...

As for tax, I may well already be paying more tax than you. The wealthier you are the more you pay and of course I am not using any publicly funded schools.

I do not in any way object to this. I whole-heartedly believe the wealthy should subsidise the less well off. I would willingly pay a higher rate of tax and vote for a government that promised to introduce this.

Aside from a full redistribution of capital so that we all have the same amount, some people are always going to be more privileged than others.

Harry - I agree. Start by equalising opportunity for the 93% who use state provision. Harping on about private schools distracts from preventing the very real discrepancies within the state system.

What's with the redistribution of money and children notions?

Why not just level the education playing fields so we all have an equal shot at privilege and we can all keep our own children?

Agreed, Mominatrix.

"Maybe we should just start at leveling the education playing field. "

Quite.

"Harry - I agree. Start by equalising opportunity for the 93% who use state provision. Harping on about private schools distracts from preventing the very real discrepancies within the state system."

We can do both surely?

Particularly important when the 7% who are at private schools at currently massively dominating positions of influence in law, industry, politics and the arts.

People's attitudes to private schools make me think of the sort of discussions the rich have about tax avoidance. Yes it's legal. Yes it's their right to do it. Yes it's lovely to be rich. Yes people have always done it.

The fact that it's bad for society is not an issue for tax avoiders, just like structural unfairness towards children other than their own is also not a concern.

Yes, by all means lets equal the 'education playing field'. Just tell us all how to do it please.

^Abolish private schools?

I'd be looking to buy a house in the catchment of a grammar school pretty quick sharp as would many others so still not fair.

Abolish grammars too and make all state schools identical?

Whilst schools draw from catchment areas they won't be equal because schools in areas with high property prices will have more wealthy families so then we are back to schools for the rich by default (have a look at the Tatler guide to state schools to see how this one works).

Go the other way and introduce more selective state schools?

A two tier system again but at least a meritocracy. Except that wealthier families will have a better shot at getting in because they'll all hire tutors.

I just don't see how it could be done in reality. Wealth will always give kids an advantage it would just be more indirect.

Let's just go fully Communist while we're at it and call the schools School 1,2,3 etc

Is that before or after we have redistributed wealth and children, Iris?

To answer Fancy's questions:

Who do so many of you here want so badly to have something BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE?
Because it is available and we can afford it. I couldn't give a toss about being better than anyone else. I just want to give my children the best I can and believe in education for its own sake.

Why is a level playing field and equality of opportunity such a threat?
It isn't. But there'll never be one (see previous post) so it's a moot point

Are you afraid that if you weren’t able to buy privilege your children would somehow fail at life?
No. They will be absolutely fine. We've made various investments on their behalf so their futures are secure whatever happens.

So you see the problem isn't the school inequality. It's the wealth inequality.

DH and I talked about this when we were discussing whether to have more DC. The options were to have one more on the possibility that in a few years time our financial position will have moved on to afford two at private school or stick where we were with one and definitely be able to afford it. If you live in London or the surrounding area you're already paying in excess of £1,000pcm in full time nursery fees so you just reallocate those spends, and cut corners a little for the extras.

We went with have another DC and move. The £150k (£300k on two...) we'd spend on school fees will pay off a hefty chunk of mortgage in the catchment of a good state school. Plus we'll have an asset at the end of it.

These threads are always the same !

A load of bilge sprouted about how society is destroyed because people who can, choose to spend their money on one of the most important things education.

These types of threads about selective/private or faith schools also show up many posters as hypocrites . This is because most of the posters on here have benefitted from these types of schools.

The very fact that many posters are able to articulate a 'marxist' view of society is down to the education these types of schools gave them. I.e the abilty to go on to higher education. I wonder has anyone asked themselves why the number of posters on here modern/ sink comprehensives is so low.

Maybe thats because most of the kids from sink schools did not find themselves in 'office' or professional careers thus abled with the time and money to fart around posting 'sociallist' bilge.

Why does any parent have to feel an obligation to society to other people at a cost of giving their child the best they can afford.

P.S Why cant parents have/use grammar / private /faith /academies /or single sex if they want to without being maligned as part of the 'im alright
brigade' .

It also seams on here that some posters see a school that achieves more than 51% GCSE and has lower 25% non english speakers or less than 40% FSM, its a school that is corrupting society.. !
Certainly