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?

I went to Boarding school at 5 -17 overseas tilll 10, then Uk from 10-17
I am in touch with only one friend from school now. I’m mid 50’s now.
You get on with others because you have to , but you wouldn’t choose many of them as life long friends like you do when you’re older.
It causes avoidant attachment styles and extreme independence, a detachment to people also.
It’s amazing how resilient children can be and how they just get on with it when in that environments.
In china, children used to board from 2-7 during the week to allow both parents to work.
I didn’t send my children, people who went young that I know, all chose not to send their kids. That should say something I suppose.

@Givinganopinion i doubt most state schools will care if private schools stop them using their playing fields occasionally. Although it will expose the lie that they care about their wider community.

It seems like you kinda DO give a fuck, since you're on Mumsnet writing angry posts about how you don't give a fuck.

And I've thought that parents who send their children to boarding school are neglectful and inadequate parents since before the current government's very recent election.

Your 'wooden historical door' type comments make quite a clear and distasteful point about the type of people who can come out of private school. But this isn't about that. I'm fully in favour of private school actually, not withstanding some of the types of people that it can produce. I'm not in favour of boarding, which is paid-for foster care for rich people, and the terrible damage it does to their children.

The whole 'schools have changed since those days' is a lot of marketing from modern-day boarding schools that want to change their image. The premise is still exactly the same, even if the rooms are colourful and the children appear in marketing brochures romping about on the lawns.

And speaking of marketing, do remember that the day pupils who BEG to be allowed to board are a victim of marketing too. Speaking from experience, day pupils (and boarders) are given a relentless narrative that pushes independence, separation from parents and 'all the fun you could be having if you boarded'. Why? Because the school is a BUSINESS and boarding COSTS MORE. Your child is the product and them thinking boarding is a fabulous idea is MORE PROFITABLE.

That's true but holiday camps push that narrative too - "LOOK AT ALL THE FUN YOU CAN HAVE AT OUR CAMP". There's not really a lot of difference between a boarding-school at the weekend and a holiday camp, and yet people think holiday camps are fine for children who enjoy them. Some children, without having uncaring parents or coming from broken homes, really do enjoy boarding.

Apologies for quoting unnecessarily.

@ForRealTurtle Actually it's a lot more than that. Eton for example contributes to over 1,000 local projects, Winchester is partnered with 17 different state schools.... But if it's not seen as charity by the Govt and it gets to the stage where all the benefits of charitable status are taken away, there is absolutely no reason to engage in such a way. I wouldn't pay for a luxury holiday for my children (and also pay for others to go on holiday using my taxes) and then say ah yes, don't worry you can join us on this too. It's no different.

@Givingmetalktalk Except it's something you clearly know nothing about apart from the occasional bad headline. It's like saying "you are all going to die as soon as you get on a plane" because the occasional headline highlights times when planes go down. And it does make me angry because you are making such judgements on such things with such little knowledge and not only keeping it yourself, but supporting people who are inflicting those policies on others because it serves their purpose. As I said previously, they can't "get" the public schools through the wallet, so make it more taboo. Set parents up against parents. Does their job for them.

I get your point, but a holiday camp is something your child goes to for a few hours and then returns home. It's not really comparable. Of course all children's activities market and project it as being something that kids love to do. My point is that unlike state schools, boarding school is a product, and that the argument 'but they have so much fun/my day pupil begged to board' doesn't mean that's reality. It could equally be marketing. A school can't be trusted to be promoting what's in your chlid's best interests if that school is also a business that profits (hugely) off your child going down a certain path - in this case boarding.

You're making a huge number of assumptions about what I know or feel. Maybe try being a bit more open minded. My children went to private school. My sister works at a boarding school. I don't agree with boarding and think it's terrible parenting and very damaging in almost all cases.

I do agree with you about charitable status though - it should be stripped from private schools and they should rescind any charitable works that they do. Schools aren't charities and them being treated as such or expected to behave as such to keep that status just so they can accept charitable donations from wealthy patrons is a nonsense.

Indeed. Private schools are businesses and parents are paying customers. That has benefits and disadvantages, and yes they may prioritise fee income over children's best interests in some circumstances so it's up to parents to assess whether what they are offering is actually in their children's best interests.

But state schools also have their own agenda in many cases, and the focus isn't necessarily on what is best for individual children. And the parents have a lot less clout to protest if they're unhappy.

Except it's something you clearly know nothing about apart from the occasional bad headline. It's like saying "you are all going to die as soon as you get on a plane" because the occasional headline highlights times when planes go down. And it does make me angry because you are making such judgements on such things with such little knowledge and not only keeping it yourself, but supporting people who are inflicting those policies on others because it serves their purpose. As I said previously, they can't "get" the public schools through the wallet, so make it more taboo. Set parents up against parents. Does their job for them.

There's a lot more evidence that boarding school is harmful to children than there is aviation travel, actual research, not headlines. Yet again with your mental gymnastics, there comes a point where you come across defensive and it undermines your position. You also have been told a couple of times now to stop conflating private and boarding, I have few opinions on private school it's not something I get get up about, and what I do have is political, boarding school is a parental discussion, more serious in my view, it's not about divide and rule, firstly you'd be rather outnumbered due to the small number of you. Thankfully.

You’re quite right of course re use of facilities, scholarships, burseries and exhibitions.
Our school started lowering the numbers substantially as soon as there was a wif of Labour getting in.
They also no longer offer free music tuition, use of sports facilities and all sorts.

This policy has pitted one against the other and is making private schools far more elite.

If you look at the research piece I posted carried out by an independent body you will see there is not a lot of evidence.

@StandingSideBySide I'm not looking into it these days but there was certainly a lot when DH joined the military.

I think many schools in the past state or private had a bad reputation. The past is the past.

Speaking from experience, day pupils (and boarders) are given a relentless narrative that pushes independence, separation from parents and 'all the fun you could be having if you boarded'.

Speaking from experience, with children at a school where there are more boarders than day pupils, this is not at all what we’ve experienced. At no point have we, as parents, or the children as day pupils, felt that we are being encouraged to go down the boarding route. To be honest, they don’t need to do this as the boarding houses are full anyway. Everyone (parents and children) see that both day and boarding has their own advantages and disadvantages.

Which is quite clear that the school do not give a fuck about the local community except to hit the qualification for charitable status. After all there is zero reason to reduce use of sports facilities by outsiders.

And Eton is part of Eton Community Association who establish and run many local projects. These would happen anyway.

I do not care if you send your children to a state or a private school.
I do think boarding schools are bad for children, unless their home life is abusive or really shitty.
There is a lot of evidence that institutional care is bad for children. It is why the state moved from children's homes to using foster families wherever possible. Children do far better when brought up within a family.
And if it was working class people mainly using boarding schools, they would already have been banned for the sake of the children. It is because it is rich people using them that it is still allowed.

@corkindigo Oh I have been "told" have I? That is exactly what's happening here. The Labour party are looking to destroy the private sector by telling people. By diktat. That's fine. But let's not be coy and pretend they aren't doing anything else... It's like me being "outnumbered" so I have to change my position you have rather given yourself away there. Make it more taboo and then it gets quietly closed as an option.... So afraid I think you are a sheep. Following a political lead you have been given and yum, yum. Ain't you lapping it up?

My work means I know how you set someone up down a road and then let them run...

I won't use any examples from that mind as it's a bit outing but I will use the case in Sense and Sensibility where when Henry Dashwood dies and he makes his son John promise to care for his stepmother and three half-sisters. Soon enough the wife, Fanny, goes to work convincing him that actually he didn't mean that it was supposed to be financial support and it ended up being that he shared with them a trout or two from his stream I think it was. Set someone off who is narrow minded, and it's amazing where you can go.

@ForRealTurtle and why the fuck should they? Really? I would love to know.

The school supports the local economy in millions every year.
Hotels and restaurants when parents come to stay for example.

The issue is the school would have to ask much higher fees in order to support other peoples children. In the past they did that because historically they didn’t have to pay this tax.
Now the tax has made it impossible and unfair to expect parents to continue to foot that bill.
Reducing these free services means the schools bills reduce and more parents can continue to use it.

@Givinganopinion Because lots of local independent businesses do care about their community. I know just in my area the pub runs fundraising events for a local hospice. A cafe will provide a free meal to anyone homeless. Another local business is very involved in a local scheme to improve the environment for local wildlife. They do it because they care about the issues and the local area.
Private schools who abandon any attempt at doing anything for their local community as soon as it does not benefit their profits, makes it clear that the only thing they care about is profits.

@ForRealTurtle Nope @StandingSideBySide has it exactly right. It's the parents who foot the bill not the business and when it gets that unmanageable the school has to stop and think

@StandingSideBySide Saying the school supports the community because parents spend money in local businesses is disingenuous.
I deliberately quoted one of your examples of something the school is stopping i.e. use of the schools sports facilities, which has no or a very low cost to the school. You came back explaining why they can no longer provide free scholarships - the highest cost activity you quoted.
Lots of private schools did local community things to keep their charitable status as it saved them money. Overall it helped them make more profit. And that is all that mattered. As soon as those things do not help them make more profit, they ditch them.

I would be full of self shame if I honestly thought an institution could raise my child better than I could.

@ForRealTurtle
Doing good deeds didn’t help with profit or raise money. It was an expense to the school and the fee paying parents.
The schools never had to pay this tax, it is a completely new tax. There was no saving previously on the school not having to pay it because it never existed.

It is not disingenuous to say local businesses make money from the school. If the school didn’t exist parents wouldn’t be coming to stay in the hotels, spending money in the restaurants and shops. Flying in from abroad. Renting cars, using taxis etc the list is endless.
Also, of note, you will find whilst many schools are significantly reducing benefits to local state school children, they haven’t stopped entirely.