Discussion over private schools brings out illogical viewpoints, sheer hypocrisy and the worse traits in people?

[ByPeachJoker]

First off, not that it should impact an objective debate, but we do send our son to a private primary school but would consider ourselves middle income earners.

As you can imagine, this is linked to the PMs debate just now, but having read a recent MN thread on a lady who wanted to know how she might be able to avoid paying VAT on school fees should Labour come into power, I was shocked at the vitriol thrown her way. As far as I could tell, the issue wasn't so much that she wanted to avoid the VAT but the majority of comments were coming from people who essentially felt like this lady was somehow getting her comeuppance, that she automatically deserved to suffer some form of penalty just by virtue of choosing to send her DC to a private school. She made a 'bad' choice and should suffer the consequences.

One comment was simply 'how about sending your kids to a state school like 93% of the population'. It completely disregards the fact that there is a child at the heart of this and that a fairly arbitrary tax change is a) going to lead to an additional cost for exactly the same thing and b) for many parents, this change will mean they cannot afford the fees and this may lead to a child's education and social environment being uprooted. I'm not here to necessarily discuss the actual fairness of VAT being imposed on private school fees but more that there is this automatic reaction by a majority of people whenever private schooling is discussed and that this reaction is rooted in nothing logical and is based on the worse of human emotions such that people ignore the fact that many parents are making a financial/lifestyle sacrifice for their children.

Much of it comes from this completely incorrect assumption that you must be wealthy to send your child to a school. I get the impression that many are misinformed and assume that most private schools are like Eton or Harrow and have fees in excess of £20k a year which really is not the case. I think the negativity comes down to the fact that it's people's children that are involved and so people naturally come to see parents who send their kids to private schools as paying for some form of advantage and this being inherently unfair. Now I accept that there are a lot of people who simply could not afford private school fees BUT (and I know this will be incredibly unpopular) to be quite frank, most middle class families can but the parents simply aren't willing to make the financial and lifestyle sacrifice to send their kids to private school and yet they are happy to try and hate on those that do.

Ultimately they might choose to spend their money on a more expensive car, a bigger house, a nicer holiday etc. I used to live in a new build housing development where people in one bedroom flats had brand new Range Rover Sports parked up outside. It was ridiculous that people who could seemingly 'only' afford a 1 bed flat were buying or leasing cars that were almost a third of the value of their home. However we let them make their choice and move on.

Now you can argue about the ethics of private school education but I think those who automatically view parents who send their kids to private school as people who should endure some form of suffering or deserve whatever is coming to them need to look at the hypocrisy they show when compared to their own lifestyle choices but also understand that we're not all millionaires and have actually made a sacrifice for what we hope is the benefit of our children - have you done the same?

I don’t disagree with what you’re saying at all.

But adding VAT to school fees won’t improve any of this.

Wouldn’t it be better to have a discussion about how to improve the issues you raise rather than saying let’s tax the rich because they can afford it - knowing it will make the situation worse and not better?

@ICantThinkofAnythingClever Actually, if little Archie has SEN and has already suffered at a mainstream school, thus forcing the parents to put him in private school (often with bursaries and then financial sacrifices) it would be very detrimental to him to lose his private school place.

@noblegiraffe 'And I certainly object to the idea that people should vote fucking Tory who will continue to screw over the vast majority of children so that a minority of children's parents can continue to buy their way out of the mess and continue to not give a shit about all the other kids.'

Exceptional summary. There is simply not enough discourse given to the prospect of what the political 'alternative' is. Essentially what these posts are doing is asking readers to vote Tory so that a small number of middle class families can afford to continue to send their children to private school and escape the system. They negate to consider that this means 5 years of education being decimated even further for the 93%.

Which is the lesser of to evils for the population, really?!

Many have private diagnoses as their parents can't accept they just aren't that bright. And I say that from experience in a private school!!!

Investment in your child’s education is not a luxury. It’s baffling that you deem it as such.

Actually as somebody looking at both state and private schools currently… I do. How incorrectly presumptuous of you.

Not sure what this golden ticket status nonsense means..

@Janedoe82 As a teacher or parent?

I’ve never met any children that are ‘not bright’ and who have diagnosis because of this. Every single one I’ve ever met meets the criteria of the condition they’ve been diagnosed with. You are also suggesting that there are many unscrupulous health care professionals who will just give out a diagnosis to an unintelligent child, which I do not believe is the case either.

It is a luxury. I have done it. I could have used the local state schools and chose not to. I am not so entitled as to believe I should have that choice subsidised.

I'm not convinced scrimping and saving for a private education is going to give the average child the same leg up that the equivalent money would as, for example, a deposit for house purchase, money spent on supplementary tutoring, money for university expenses.

OP you may find other people are making "sacrifices" to help their children in other ways that they perceive to be more valuable than a private eduction.

DS like most children under 6 got his diagnosis privately because there’s a 3 year waiting list in most areas & it’s most effective to begin treatments for managing anxiety / socialising before 5.

DS’ diagnosis was actually spotted by his private school (they have 4 teaching assistants with years of SEN experience) because his nursery used to let him do whatever he wanted.

If I could afford it I’d send my DD to private school…
what is wrong with the rich sending their kids somewhere and giving them an advantage?? Wouldn’t we all give our kids an advantage in life if we could afford it or had the right connections to?! I sure as hell would…
Of course the majority would give their kids the best education they could afford…

@OvalLemon it's baffling that you can't grasp that when you choose to pay for something when it's available free, it is a luxury.

Well I know many who have been diagnosed, my own child included, with 'mild' 'processing issues', 'mild dyslexia', 'mild anxiety' 'mild add'. It is almost like a badge in private schools, generally to get the child extra time in exams- you seem a little naive about the lengths pushy parents will go to give their child an advantage. In fact I know of several parents who have been outraged that the NHS then refutes the private diagnosis!!

surely Private education is a privilege rather than a luxury ?

Our nearest school is £32000 a year I would say that is a pretty luxurious experience- well you bloody hope it would be at that price!

@Janedoe82 Nobody is diagnosed with ‘mild’ anything, that’s simply untrue. That diagnosis does not exist in the DSM-5. You either are dyslexic, or you are not. You are autistic or you are not. You have ADHD, or you don’t. Whoever told you that their child has ‘mild’ anything, does not have this diagnosed by a health care professional.

The NHS absolutely should accept private diagnosis, I have private diagnosis for my own child (not ‘mild’, an actual diagnosis) because the waiting lists are years long and the system is broken, CAMHS for instance is not fit for purpose.

I personally know children with SEN who have left the private sector to move into state because their needs were not being met, on the other hand.

SEN needs vary don’t they? The majority of children learn better in small classes with teachers who know them well whatever their needs. Many private schools have high academic demands that kids with SEN can’t meet. Some of them will expect kids to do a mountain of extra-curricular stuff that kids with some SEN will find overwhelming. Kids with SEN needs that run beyond what a generic private school setting provides won’t be welcome by many. Those kids remain in the state system.

I didn’t choose private school for the academics. Frankly if all I was interested in was grades I would have homeschooled DS.

For me it’s the whole package of small class sizes, daily sports, motivated kids that made me choose it for my adhd son.

He’s only 4 but he doesn’t listen can be incredibly disruptive - in a state school I’m sure he would have been dismissed as a problem within days (like my nephew was). At his school, however, the teacher had time to delve deeper and they realised he’s bored and so gave him extra work and responsibilities.

My point is there are many children who have private diagnoses who are absolutely NOT profoundly SEN. The ones I know who have been rejected by the NHS has been because the NHS have actually disagreed with the private diagnosis.

I’m not convinced a private education would be of more value than the holidays we have taken. We are currently frantically trying to save for our son to head to uni next year, there is no way we would forfeit that for private secondary.

@Janedoe82 Again, your use of language, ‘profoundly SEN’, is simply incorrect.

SEN children will never get the help they desperately need and deserve if we continue to use the terms ‘profound’ and ‘mild’!

I know a lot about SEN. It is a significant part of my job. And the fact is there are many children not getting the help they need as waiting lists are being clogged up by children who are absolutely not the greatest in need and are being labelled needlessly.

I don't really care who you would want as a parent at your dc's school, it is totally irrelevant to me. If it offends you that I'm not seething with jealousy, then so be it. And if I can't counter the repeated insistence that my beliefs about tax on private school fees can only be inspired by envy or resentment without pointing out that I have nothing to envy or resent, without being described as "smug", then that's fine too.

Fwiw, I have no interest in making private schools unaffordable for anyone. I actually think that the vast majority of private school parents will just suck up the additional cost, however unwillingly. I honestly don't care if people send their kids private or not. I just want to see it taxed in a way that I believe is fair.

Can we have a silo side topic so posts on this subject can be put there like Royal Family / Covid etc? Not sure can bear another month of this hand wringing.

It will being in more money, about a billion when adjusted to account for a 3-5% drop out rate from private schools. But it's a drop in the ocean.

Adding National Insurance to investment income would raise about £8 billion, equalizing capital gains with income tax £14 billion, a wealth tax (depending on where it was set) up to £262 billion.