to think boarding schools are no longer ok...

[BaklavaRocks]

Inspired by another thread, and some old YouTube documentaries I've recently watched, I can't help but feel boarding schools for under 13's (i.e. boarding prep schools) have had their time.

Maybe they used to be an acceptable option, but with all the research we now have available, showing the damage done by separation of young children from their parents, do you think boarding for v young kids (8/9/10/11) will eventually be banned except in v exceptional circumstances?

And if our politicians including past PMs like Johnson and Cameron were not a product of boarding schools, do you think they'd have more compassion and be less cut off from emotion and feelings? and better able to relate to us common folk?

@OhCrumbsWhereNow but that community doesn't have to be served by a Dr with a disabled wife and child who needs caring for, sorry I don't mean that to sound harsh, the point is that your parents made a choice, you're happy with that choice so that's great, but others may not agree or sympathise with it if they would choose differently.

Agree - just as I think it's terrible to send children to nursery or a childminder before the age of 4, yet hundreds of thousands of people see that as a valid choice rather than sacrificing their careers for a number of years.

@OhCrumbsWhereNow that's your opinion but it just sounds like projection (and a little like denial minimising the decision tbh...), it's irrelevant to this discussion, I could rattle off all sorts of parental decisions I don't agree with but this is a thread about boarding school.

This study is interesting.
Im afraid I can’t link but here’s the title page and conclusion

The study looked at age of students and type of school for example rural and non rural
It also researched all types of development.

Ok but how is it relevant to a discussion on Boarding Schools?

Ah but it's exactly the same with people talking about banning boarding school (generally people with zero personal experience).

One could say it's borderline child abuse abandoning your non-verbal baby/toddler/child, who cannot even tell you what they have done each day, with complete strangers for the majority of their waking hours (and not just for academic terms but all year round), just so you can afford the mega mortgage or keep your career on track.

After all, it's only 4 years. Very selfish not to move somewhere more affordable, or perhaps save before you have children so you can afford to stay at home. Or just don't have a career at all?

I mean, it's totally reasonable to say that isn't it?

Or you could say that parents are free to make the decisions that work best for their children and lifestyle.

My father was sent to boarding school age 8 and was physically, mentally and sexually abused. This was at Stonyhurst Catholic school, and Catholic schools whether private or state had these issues as endemic. I’m not convinced you could compare a modern day holistic independent boarding school to the 1960’s style of boarding schools to be fair.

I know people who went to boarding school and, like with any school, some loved it and some hated it, some of the schools were great and others awful. Some had good outcomes and others bad.

I had a good childhood but would have loved to go to boarding school at secondary age! I wrote off for a prospectus off my own back! Couldn't afford it though.

I feel more strongly against nurseries for babies.

I think people think boarding schools are all big leather trunks and off you go for the term.

Many of them (including the one my DD15 goes to) have a whole range of boarders, week nights only or flexible (1 or 2 nights)

My DD flexi boards 2 nights, I travel for work and she does after school clubs. If I'm in the US she stays for the week.

As a lone parent and only child (DD) it really works for us.

I agree that boarding should only be secondary age up though. I only started boarding her age 12 and she loved it.

@OhCrumbsWhereNow I don't know why you're talking about something completely unrelated. I'm sure there are people who disagree with nurseries and boarding schools, my opinion on nurseries is irrelevant because they are completely different situations with different research outcomes.

Why are you bending over backwards to defend boarding on the basis of something completely unrelated? I would bet many of those boarding school families with mega mansions also utilise early years childcare, but it's by the by, completely separate things. It's like saying boarding school is ok because some kids get their ears pierced at 12 months or are allowed to drink coke, two wrongs don't make a right and all that.

Again, feel free to not answer as its the game I hate not the players but what would you have done if your DD hated it?
And do you think she fully understood that hating it was an option?

At my school most Boarders were at most "ok" with it and understood why it was necessary (even when it wasn't)

Does it matter if the parents aren't at home? No one seems to be up in arms when dad's go away for weeks on end with work and don't do any 1:1 parenting, it's always on the mums to do the important parts of parenting. Even when the child is asleep apparently.

Conversely I know several kids/20's who would have been much better off out of their family environment and would have flourished at boarding school, with people actually looking out for them.

It's not unrelated at all.

Both scenarios involve children being away from primary caregivers for extended amounts of time.

Just at different ages and one seems to be totally accepted and one seems to be demonised.

I would have been totally happy to send DD to boarding school at secondary age, and was absolutely not prepared to send her to be looked after by other people in those crucial early years.

You seem determined to try and bat away any argument that young children need daily love and affection. The situation in your scenario is not true for the majority and rather outdated - there are plenty of stay at home dads or those who work part time these days as the mother is often the higher earner. In my own family it was my husband who picked up the children and fed them in the evenings as I had a long commute back from London. As long as they have a loving parent there for them each day that’s what matters.
Also so what if it is always the mum? Tea time, bedtime story and cuddles from a mum who loves you are infinitely better for wellbeing than a “goodnight” from matron or whoever at boarding school.

@OhCrumbsWhereNow you don't think the teen years are crucial? I would argue my teens need me more now than they did when they were under 5, when they were preschoolers the care they needed was predominantly practical, nowadays they need their mum, they need reassurance, support, advice, their hormones sends their mood all over the place, I am their stability, their cheerleader, I help keep them grounded. I feel much more valued now than I did when they were under 5.

On the contrary, I'm suggesting that 0-5 is far more critical to attachment and brain development yet society is less bothered about not seeing their kids for hours every day at those stages, en masse.

Many studies show men do far less parenting and housework to make the house a home. I don't ever see men berating the fathers for their choices with boarding schools.

We all have reasons for the childcare/schooling options we choose but demonising boarding schools and suggesting they are banned when they provide some of the best academics in the country and plenty of balanced individuals while state schools continue to have knife attacks, SEN issues, behavioural issues and a MH crisis as well as crumbling buildings is ridiculous.

Nonsense! It's because the children have all read Malory Towers and St. Clare's.

Boarders are not away from home for weeks or months at a time though. There are very few full boarding schools left, even at 13+, and even those are set up so they see parents at least every 3 weeks (in reality, much more, as parents visit). Particularly at prep stage, boarding tends to be on a flexi basis where children only spend part of the week away from home.

@Hoppinggreen if I'm right your question is what I'd do if she hated it?

Point is she doesn't, a lot of them flexi board for them it's just a sleep over with their mates.

Now given that boarding/day/private schools often serve a really broad geographic area, it gives them a chance to do something they wouldn't do otherwise.

Also a different school I know a lot of them sleep over/board Friday nights too as they are up early for rowing/hockey/rugby. It's a sports centric school.

As I said, I think a lot of people still perceive that this is all leather trunks and off you pop....and this might come as shock but actually the vast majority of the full term boarders at her school are Chinese. International boarders make up the vast majority.

It's a rare thing nowadays to find a boarding school with majority UK boarders.

Point is does she really understand that hating it is an option?
So many kids at my school were all a bit "meh" about it and would have said it was fine BUT it had been sold to them as necessary in the majority of cases and it really wasn't.

In the UK there are 497 mainstream schools that offer boarding to 75,000 pupils.
On average, two-thirds of pupils at boarding schools are day pupils. 4% of the total boarding population is younger than 11 - so 4,000 pupils. 87% of all boarders are at a senior school.

About 80% of boarders are full boarders. The rest are weekly boarders or flexi board. So the vast majority of boarders still stay at school all week, going home for holidays.

For all those saying that they know of emotionally troubled and unhappy adults who went to boarding school, there are plenty of adults who didn’t go to boarding school who have mental health problems. There are plenty of adults who hated school who didn’t board. There is a huge mental health problem amongst teens and young people. We should be looking at the causes of that rather than trying to blame boarding school, which very few (far less than 1%) of children attend.

They aren't remotely comparable.

6% of all boarders are children of UK Forces parents.
A further 6% are children of UK parents working overseas. A significant 37% of boarders are foreign nationals.
51%, of the total boarding population of 75,000 pupils are UK parents not working overseas or in the military.

At junior level, which is what the OP was mainly talking about, the picture is very different. Only 35% or so are full boarders. Even at senior level, “full boarding” does not mean that children only go home for holidays either. I don’t know of a school which doesn’t offer exeat weekends, and full boarders often go home for weekends in between.

Many boarding school pupils have been at home for 3 days this weekend, as it was exeat. They’ll be home again in 2.5 weeks for almost a month off at Christmas. It’s worth noting that school terms are much shorter, and school holidays much longer, at boarding schools. It’s not unusual to have 9 weeks off in the summer, 2 weeks in October, 4 weeks at Christmas, a week at half term, another 4 weeks at Easter, and another week in May. 20 odd weeks of the year are spent away from school. The idea that these children are packed off for weeks on end simply isn’t true.