Not to send my children to private school even though I can afford it

[AdamRyan]

I believe in comprehensive education and think children should all be educated together, to improve social mobility and prevent a "brain drain" where less privileged children go to some schools, and more privileged go to others.
Am I in the minority and being naive?

YANBU - comprehensive schools are the way to go
YABU - I'd send my children private if I could

You can believe in them all you want but it all depends on whether you consider your local school a good option for your children. I watched multiple people send their children to the local high school a few years ago because they wanted to support it and I can tell you now that they completely sacrificed their children in terms of education, mental health and future prospects all because they wanted to adhere to their own ideologies. The school was terrible but the parents put their egos before their children and they also came from a place of privilege that gave them a serious blind spot when it came to just how bad the repercussions would be. I didn’t go private but I did put in a placing request for a better school and ended up moving into the catchment. I don’t regret it at all.

when privately educated kids go on to do nothing special with their elite education, just get a run of the mill job, it must seem a waste of money

when privately educated kids go on to do nothing special with their elite education, just get a run of the mill job, it must seem a waste of money
The people I know who have gone private have done for many reasons:

• poor quality local state schools and not being in a position to move house and do the Mumsnet-approved buy a nice house in an expensive catchment (see also just top up with private tutoring and a full suite of extra curriculars, which is also approved)
• lived rurally with limited choice on schools and the secondary school was either not very good, or their children would have had to miss out on all enrichment because there's only one school bus at the end of the day and no public transport. A private school in the town where one of the parents worked/that was on a bus route meant their child could have enrichment opportunities.
• their child was struggling in state schools for a range of reasons and a smaller, non-pushy private school was a better environment for their child
• they liked that wraparound was included in the prep school and their DC could do clubs on site before pick up, which made it easier for the family than having to a separate wraparound provider
• they preferred the curriculum offer at the private school they chose and felt it was a better match for their child(ren)
• their child had medical issues and they felt it would be easier for their child to be seen in a smaller private school, where they can get caught up when they miss school for hospital appointments
• they wanted their children to be able to learn in an environment where most of the children also wanted to learn, and time/resources weren't always being redirected picking up the slack from other services on the brink of collapse

None of them had any expectation that their children were exceptional and going to go and run the country. They had the financial ability to choose, and they chose what they believed was right for their children at the time.

DH went to a private school where bullying was so rife that it became headline news in national papers. DH was a generation older than the people who raised the issue and had similar (dreadful) experiences. His parents had no idea, I mentioned it once and MIL seemed shocked but DH changed the subject very quickly. Similarly my Mum never told her parents how distressing it was to be sent to boarding school aged just 7. I think both cases show that children who went to private school often protect their parents from their reality because they know how much money their parents are spending on their education. Private schools are no better than state schools and sometimes worse.

But the fallacy of sunken costs kicks in and so the perceived benefits of private education and the dreadful nature of the local state options are emphasised. Would be interesting to know how these people who can afford to spend hundreds of thousands on their children's education also seem to end up in living in very deprived areas with sink schools with no pastoral care. Quite a few of the parents are my DCs primary school sent their kids to private. DD said the kids who went private all boasted about how they were going to a much better school. I'm sure the parents would claim the local state schools are no good. But they are in leafy suburbs and get very good results. The one my kids are at does a good job of stretching the top set and providing the kind of special interest clubs that people pay for private for, e.g. the DDs have beaten private schools in regional choir competitions and are off to the Shine awards tomorrow with their school newspaper.

I went to private school. I left 6th form with no concept of the real world. I'm embarrassed how I must of come across then.

@JaninaDuszejko Would be interesting to know how these people who can afford to spend hundreds of thousands on their children's education also seem to end up in living in very deprived areas with sink schools with no pastoral care.

For us it was part of the calculation when we moved here. The amount we've paid in school fees is surprisingly close to the extra cost of a house in the catchment of a decent state school compared to where we currently live.

What a ridiculous post. The state school I went to wasn't in special measures. Neither of the state schools my kids are in are in special measures. Most state schools are not in special measures.

93% of kids in this country go to state school. Do you really, genuinely believe 93% of kids in the country are getting a completely inadequate education?

This Mumsnet idea that you either spend thousands and thousands of pounds a year that you could potentially spend on better enhacing your and your children's lives in other ways or you are 'sacrificing them' just does not stand up to any kind of real world scrutiny.
.

So why choose to live in a bad area?

0021andabit
Of course it isn't a case of spending thousands Vs sacrificing your children

But it is also very telling how many people claim that they send their children to state on principle, but then it always comes with "but obviously we made that choice because the schools on offer were good".

For what it's worth, I do think a lot of children are getting a poorer quality of education than they should.
I know I'm a good teacher and get good results, but honestly I could offer pupils a lot more if our pupils could get the SEN and EdPsyc referrals, if we weren't struggling to fund things, if I wasn't spending my non-contact time following up behaviour issues from other classes, if more time wasn't spent dealing with situations emerging from parental decisions out of school (eg unlimited social media on an evening, arguing with the school, fielding phone calls about why it's unfair that Mrs Smith gave a detention), if the families who needed support could access it, if we weren't having to lose curriculum time to drop down days for whatever issue is in fashion/whatever new topic has been added into PSHE, if more of the children arrived to secondary with literacy levels in line with chronological age (not a criticism of primary colleagues, but the reality is that these gaps start from before school age).

Mine went to state comp but they were privileged compared to many in their class (music, sports, cultural trips etc) and I admit if we had the money they would have been sent to private school

@JaninaDuszejko because London is a tale of two cities. A place where the houses worth millions are a hop, skip and jump away from local authority estates.

To be fair, it's not quite the situation you described. The local comprehensive (which isn't great) is huge, and has a very wide catchment. Its catchment includes some nice parts, but the house-prices are surprisingly low there because of the school.

@FridaRose I agree rich doesn’t equal bad, but it also doesn’t equal “good”. As I said in my first post, I went to a pretty elite private school. It was closely linked to one of the big boys’ public schools. I now work with many of these people. I would not consider them good husband material, in general. They have money, yes, but they are also entitled hooray Henrys who drink too much, work too much and like to grab hold of younger women, which gets worse the older they get. I deliberately chose not to find a partner amongst them and I have never regretted it - their attitude towards girls was terrible, even when we were teenagers.

Now, I appreciate not all privately educated men are like that by any means, but a lot are. The idea that this is a completely fantastic pool in which to find a partner is misplaced, in my opinion. The characteristics it encourages, particularly in top tier boys’ schools are not what I would like in a husband.

As for Pippa’s husband - he would not even have got to proposal stage, or even a date, if he wasn’t a multi-millionaire. She is leagues above him in attractiveness. If a gorgeous man who I was massively attracted to but was relatively poor proposed to me, or a very rich guy who I wasn’t, I would not pick the rich one. I say that as someone in their 40s, married to a non privately educated man who I absolutely love, watching friends who married with money in mind go through all kinds of problems.

Equip your kids to make good choices and you can save yourself the £20k a year and go on a nice holiday instead

I think anyone spouting this hasn't seen what the Tories have done to the state system, particularly in the last few years.

The idea that that this gap in per-pupil funding doesn't buy you a better education is fucking ridiculous.

The state system doesn't have enough teachers. Class sizes are increasing (some of our classes don't have enough desks in the room), subject offerings are being cut, kids are being left without a teacher at A-level and having to teach themselves, GCSE classes have supply teachers instead of subject specialists.

You're paying for smaller class sizes, for kids to have a stable teaching workforce, for there to be enough resources to teach effectively, for the school to have IT that actually works. And hopefully, for buildings that are actually safe to work in.

My god, if I could afford private education for my kids they'd be there in a shot! A calmer learning environment, better facilities and more opportunities. Sadly we can't afford it and our local state schools aren't brilliant and it's an uphill struggle sometimes. But I can dream! It would be the first thing we'd sort out if we won the lottery.

Both our dc are teaching. One as an academic in HE, post PhD, one in a specialist school specialising in Autism and ADHD. They are doing what they love and giving something back.

They have no difficulty dealing with people from all walks of life. I think it's harder to socialise up than to socialise down to be honest. DS is the sort of chap who can walk into a pub on his own when we are on holiday and end up clubbing with the locals, DD is far quieter but has an eclectic mix of friends through uni and work.

“drink too much, work too much and like to grab hold of younger women, which gets worse the older they get.”

This is far from exclusive to wealthy men.

You can find good men and shitty men in all social and economic classes. If we stereotyped each group by the worst of them then well, you could just write off people altogether tbh.

State is so varied. If you have a type of selection going on chances are the experience will show that.

We are able to compare the two sectors. Parents flock to, and pay for in other ways, the state version.

Of course it’s not exactly the same but students achieve well in our comp, going to good universities including the very top

We have plenty of money, but private schooling is unethical — I wouldn’t even consider it, unless a DC had some additional needs that could only be met in a specific school.

Both of my DC go (or went) to the school where I work (at at 50% discount). I sometimes wonder how things would have turned out for them at a state school, but there's no way of telling. My guess is that the resilient sporty all-rounder would probably have been Just Fine and flourished. But the somewhat shy one who found joy in obscure academic subjects and art might not have done so? Not that we really knew that at the time.

All I can say is that when we've hit difficulties, the school has bent over backwards to help (which isn't the feedback I've heard from local state places; obviously there's a huge range nationwide).

I myself went to a private school on a full-fees scholarship, was the first in my family to go to uni, and don't regret anything about my own education for an instant. But I also have no idea how well I would have done had I attended the "naice" comprehensive in town instead!

I have no principles or judgement on the state vs public debate. I believe you choose the best school for your children. My DC go to a state primary because it has the supports for DS's autism, is small and the staff culture is fantastic.

However, hell will freeze over before my DC go to the feral state high school we're catchment forced to enrol them in. It grates that we are forced to pay for a safe school environment, especially when the state high is walking distance away. We just booked DS into a small, affordable, private high school where student wellbeing and inclusivity are of utmost importance and bullying is zero tolerance. The reports are all fantastic, the staff I've met do not look down upon anyone & other parents chatty and polite. DS slotted right in on our visits and was smiling and happy. I'll pay for my children to thrive, rather than try to survive.

Mine were state educated - we could have afforded private, with some sacrifices. Many of their friends are from similar backgrounds. It's been a real mix, which is exactly what we wanted for them.

I don't know that I'd do the same if we were back at the start now because I see how much financial pressure their school is under and it really concerns me. That said, I know teachers at our local private school and not all is rosy there either.

My two have just left but I'm about to contact the head to ask if we can make a contribution to help in any way. It's a lovely school and I'd like to be able to give something back.

@glasswall I don't believe it's unethical to send one's dc to private school.

I can't see anything unethical about paying shed loads of tax from income (from which multiple others benefit) and stepping out of the state system so it had to.provide no contribution towards my dc's education.

Also our dc probably would have got into the Kingston or Sutton grammars had we thought them right for them. However, the fact they didn't take one of the extremely oversubscribed places meant that place was available for a child who may have had fewer choices. May is the operative word because it is regrettable, and far less ethical, imo, if a child without choices were denied a grammar place because one with choices did a smidge better in the entrance test.

I sent my eldest to state primary for similar ideological reasons. If I had the time again there is no way I would repeat that mistake. They were due to start state secondary but had a breakdown and now home ed.

Private school or home ed. State school simply isn’t a choice I’d make these days.

I think that’s laughably self-justifying.