in thinking that if it's generally accepted that the family is usually the best place to raise children....

[gabygirl]

...... (except in cases where there is serious abuse and neglect) when it comes to the care system, why so many people seem to abandon this principle when it comes to the issue of boarding school?

I haven't been able to stop thinking about this issue all morning. Last night I sat up until midnight watching that documentary on channel 4 about the boys who were abused at Caldicott. It stirred up so many sad feelings in me and made me cry. I felt so sorry for those men.

I went to boarding school myself at the age of 11 and although I wasn't sexually abused, I was so starved of intimacy and affection in my relationships for the next 5 years that it really affected my sexuality when I finally became sexually active at 15.

Did anyone else see it? The other thing that was sad about the film was the men's desperation to protect their parents against the knowledge that they'd exposed them to abuse, and in one case turned a blind eye to it even after they knew it had happened.

Putting aside the abuse issue, which as many posters have said can occur in a variety of settings, I think a child's experience of boarding school probably depends on the child, the age at which they go to the school and the school itself.

I have three male cousins whose parents were in the foreign office. The eldest and youngest boys thrived at boarding school; they were both academic, sporty and outgoing so it suited them to a tee and they have gone on to do very well.

The middle boy had a terrible time, made far worse, IMO, by the fact that his entire family went off to live abroad without him while he started at the school, aged 13. His elder brother was on a gap year and the youngest was too young to start at the school hence the middle son was the only one left to attend school here while the rest of the family stayed together.

This decision by the family has proved catastrophic for their son. He hated boarding school, was not very academic nor sporty. He had to stay at the school most weekends while his peers went home. He mixed with some of the more unsavoury students and began taking drugs.

8 Years later, he has failed to achieve anything after leaving school with minimal exam passes. He has spent the last 3 years in his bedroom, a recluse. He still has drug problems and is now on medication for his MH issues. He is fixated on this particular period of his life in which his family abandoned him at a school he hated.

I do love my auntie and uncle but feel they made a grave mistake in leaving their son at this school (a very good school with excellent reputation).

I try not to judge those who send their DCs to boarding school, even though it goes against all my instincts as a parent. I try to understand that for some families, it is the best choice. I do hope though, that parents who do make this choice take their child's individuality into account when making their decicion.

For Forces families particularly, boarding schools are important. If you are going to be moved every 18 months - 2 years, you have two choices.

1: The non-Forces partner stays in one place whilst you move around. This can work - we have done it on and off for 16 years; but it depends on where you are sent. We did two years of dh commuting between Brussels and Cornwall so ds could stay at prep and I could continue my career. In reality, it wasn't weekending, but ended up being six weeking, which puts a strain on a marriage. So, is divorce a better option than boarding?

2: You can move around with your Forces partner. These moves will be roughly 18 months -2 years, but you may not get much notice, say a maximum of 93 days to organise a move, a new address and a school. If you are going to be in a married quarter, you may not get the address until 1 -2 months before you move, down in some cases to a week before you move. You cannot organise a school until you have an address..the good schools will all be full, and you have to take what's left...special measures etc. You don't have a choice. You also know of course, that the Armed Forces won't move you in line with your kid's schooling - so you could be moved at the end of Year 10, or even in the middle of year 10, to the other end of the country. The appointers don't work in line with academic years or school terms, so again, disruption for the kids. Hence, boarding school is the option for many Forces families.

It goes against all my instincts as a parent and a teacher to constantly pull my ds around from one school to another, as I know how disruptive it can be.

Of course, parents carefully research their choice of school. There are certain schools that I know would not suit my ds at all; whereas I think he would slot into others very well. Just because some parents choose to board their children doesn't mean they are stupid or insensitive to their needs fgs.

As for judging those who send their kids away to school; I try not to judge those who don't have the common sense to see that for most Forces families it is a big decision, but one that has to be taken sometimes.

I don't think it is at all cut and dried. For every child who become emotionally detached because of boarding school (premature removal from family), there is another child who fails to mature emotionally because he/she is over cosseted at home.

A lot of posters have pointed out how boarding school is preferable to disrupted schooling, and I strongly support this. Nevertheless, I do think there are some children for whom boarding school, in whatever circumstances, will always be torture.

If your parents choose a career that means you will be moved every two years that's up to them but it is a choice..... That choice does not mean that in general it would not be better for a child to be nurtured by it's family.

I tend to think it is better for the child to stay at home with one parent - OK it may put a strain on a marriage but it is the responsibility of the adults to absorb that and deal with it. Because it's their career choice. Sending a child away to school could be letting the child absorb it - sometimes it's easier to do that because a child is malleable and does not cause problems.

sighs what about families where both the parents work long hours, the child is looked after by a nanny when it's not at school is that still better than a boarding school because the child still sleeps in his own bed?
Is weekly boarding ok?

As Anna8888 has pointed out, this, like many things is NOT black and white.

Loving care on a one to one basis from a nanny in your own home is not comparable to living in an institution.

It terrifies me that people don't value family life more and what it gives children. It is what they need. Let's not fool ourselves; adults may decide to send them to live away but that is not to meet a developmental need for the child, that is for their own reasons. Family is a developmental need.

It may be better for the child to stay at home with one parent, but have you tried weekending for years on end? You have no idea until you have done it of the strain it puts on a marriage - and many Forces marriages end because of it.

Of course, you could give up the career you have worked hard to build and become a burden on the state because there is no suitable employment for someone of your age and qualifications in the area in which you live.

Having also seen some very dysfunctional and abusive families as a teacher, and what that has done for some of the students I taught, I have to say that in some cases, they would have received more care and attention at boarding school than they did from their parents, and would have had the advantage of getting away from the horrendous domestic situations in which they found themselves.

But occasional abusive families are not an argument for children needing boarding school. You might as well say that all children should go into care because some familes are abusive.

I do know families who weekend for many years, live in a services town. They put the needs of their children first.

But in the context of the care system - isn't it the case that the care system itself is so horrendous that life in a family, however neglectful, is generally likely to lead to a better outcome?

I don't think this is comparable with a good boarding school, is it?

No that isn't the case SixSpot. It's because children have a developmental need for a nurturing family unit. They haven't just decided to say that kids need to be with their family because the alternative is bad.

"I went to boarding school and not for ONE minute did my parents make me think this was because they didn't love me or want me"

I never thought that my parents didn't love me or want me (not consciously anyway).

My parents are very loving and affectionate people and I got lots of love and cuddles during the holidays. My mum wrote to me every week.

That doesn't change the fact that from the age of 11 I was spending 9 months of the year basically without any regular day to day contact with an adult who loved me and knew me well.

If someone had asked me at the time I wouldn't have said 'I hate it - take me home', although I was horribly homesick to the point of having panic attacks at night for the first few weeks of every term. I thought that was normal and that's what everyone experienced. I don't think I understood my own feelings or how the experience might affect me in the long term. Children don't.

Later on I would have said 'I had a great time'.... becuase I basically could do what the bloody hell I liked without interference from my parents: having sex, smoking, getting pissed. And by that time I think I was quite resentful of any inference of my parents that they had a right to tell me how to behave, given that they'd more or less turned my care over into the care of other (not particularly nice) people at the age of 11.

I have a great relationship with my parents now - I talk to my mum every day and I see them twice a week. But I've got to this point by recognising and coming to terms with how boarding school affected my emotional development. I feel my sister has never acknowledged the damage it's done to her - she's 45 and a very screwed up person. She was badly bullied at school when she first started and was emotionally neglected by the people who were supposed to be taking responsibility for her (she started off at a very frosty traditional girls boarding school before moving to a smaller boarding school with me).

My dad was a diplomat by the way, which is why I went. There were British and international schools in ALL the places they were posted to. In addition there were good local schools in these places that we could have gone to and got a reasonable education. The reason we were sent back to England to school was not because we couldn't have got a reasonable education locally, but because going to boarding school has more academic and social status than being educated in a foreign school.

I think very few parents really understand the way boarding schools work. The school says it is in 'loco parentis' but what that really means is this: your children will be cared for in groups by an adult who has no particular love or even liking for them. I personally think children do best when they are cared for and supervised by an adult who knows them intimately and who loves them. Children at boarding school and children in care don't have this.

I come from a country where the nearest high school can be over 100 miles away. Boarding school is the norm for all the children in these cases. My mother's family and cousins were all educated this way (they attended local primary schools - in my mother's case there were a total of 11 pupils in the school - she was the only one in her class).

For children to remain at home and be home educated in this situtaion, would mean they would rarely, if ever, see other children their own age.

The suggestion that parents are 'choosing' this career is a little absurd. Short of all families (mostly farmers but also families in small towns) packing up and moving to the cities, there is no other option.

I don't think that putting the children into boarding necessarily means you are not putting their needs first.

some children will have a strong educational need that can be best met by a boarding school. As long as the parent ensures that they do their best to meet emotional needs as well where is the harm?

My DS1 is a bright boy and we hope to get him into a good grammer school from his current prep school. However to go to the one we want to we would have to move, uproot his brother and sister whereas the answer "may" be to weekly board him. I don't know yet he's only 9 so we have 4+ years to think about it.

At the end of the day surely as parents we are all trying to bring up the best well rounded children we can.

I accept that some people will chose boarding as an "easy" way out but that is not always the case.

potoroo, I am talking about this country as it's where I live. No child here is in that situation of having a school 100 miles away.

I'll leave this thread now as I accept I am very fixed in my opinions; they're based on my experience and understanding both of child development and my professional experience and my visceral feeling that parents MUST parent when they choose to have children. I will never see it any other way and I don't accept the justifications of one or two fairly unique situations, so I think it's pointless me going on. I will just be saying the same thing. Nothing on here has given any justification for boarding, to me.

scaryteacher - would agree with you that some families are so dysfunctional that children might well be better off out of it if the family can't be 'fixed'.

There were a number of children like this at the two schools I went to. Children who were sent to board even though (like the man in the programme) their parents lived just down the road from the school.

StephanieByng - thankyou for your comments.

I feel the same: where parents are able to parent, then they should parent as this is what children need for optimal emotional development!

"some children will have a strong educational need that can be best met by a boarding school"

Exactly what need can be met at boarding school that can't be met at a good day school?

All the research shows that well motivated, bright children whose parents are supportive, achieve academically even in 'average' schools.

Well I was going to reply to StephanieByng post but she has left the thread.

However I do think that some adults looking for something to blame for their problems blame boarding school and have this mythical view that everything would have been roses and light if they had stayed at home, I don't necessarily agree not all parents CAN parent even if they look like they can, just in the same way not all people can teach. (btw if they suffered from abuse of COURSE they should blame the boarding school but abuse can happen at home)
Also I'm not sure why the paid employee the nanny should be anymore loving than the paid employee at a boarding school.

It's not something I could do, I don't think. My DH is in the forces, and has been away for long stretches- 9 mths at a time, but I have to say it hasn't really put a great strain on our marriage, I don't think (more strain now he is home !)

I do understand that it might be a necessity (eg, if I dropped dead and DH stayed in the forces), but I would probably prefer my dad to look after them when DH was away- any other option really. I remember going to a chiropracter who talked about her dd being at boarding school- the mum seemed very detached when speaking about her 8yo dd, and basically said she and her DH were so busy working/ commuting they didn't have much time to spend with their dd, which I find really sad. I've no personal experience of boarding schools, but can't help feeling like the OP- that children (especially very young ones) are better parented at home.

Then let me ask you this: if you accept that these unique situtaions exist (and have to exist), then what difference does it make to the child's development if it is a necessity rather than an option? Is there a difference and do children understand the difference? Perhaps if children are boarding in the situation where all their peers are doing the same thing, they accept it more easily?

I don't think that the boarding experience in my original country compared to my home country (UK) would be that different.

Although, I suspect the experience of boarding 20 years ago when I was at school would be different to now - more regular contact with family - mobile phones, IM, email, webcam etc?

I think it's a fair point that families are the best place to bring up children, except when the family is neglectful or abusive. Institutions are generally NOT ideal. OK, some families may have particular reasons such as frequent moves that make it a reasonable choice for them. But in general, it's a pretty weird idea. If you care about your children, why would you want to get shot of them for nine months of the year?

Friends of mine who went to boarding school got up to all sorts without their parents (or teachers, apparently) knowing. And no-one I know who has been themselves would send their own children away.

potoroo- I think the difference between necessity and an option is the way might be seen by the child in question- ie they will know their parents had no choice but to send them away to boarding school, even though they would have preferred to have had them around had circumstances been different, rather than thinking their parents were quite happy to send them away.

"However I do think that some adults looking for something to blame for their problems blame boarding school and have this mythical view that everything would have been roses and light if they had stayed at home"

You have no justfication for saying this. Actually it is quite disrespectful of my feelings and experience and of the feelings of other people who believe their lives have been affected by a major dislocation during their childhood.

"I'm not sure why the paid employee the nanny should be anymore loving than the paid employee at a boarding school"

Well - because a nanny takes on the role of a mother who generally has responsibility for only a very small number of children with whom she develops a close relationship. This is simply not true of housemasters and housemistresses. In the schools I went to one housemaster/housemistress was responsible for the supervision of dozens of children. Sometimes these people have families of their own and sometimes they are younger childless people. I'd ask you what sort of emotional resources people in either of these situations would have to offer the dozens of children in their care?

The other issue of course is that a nanny hands over care of the child to the parent at the end of every day. When I was at boarding school I'd go weeks - literally weeks, without being cuddled. Not that I would have wanted a cuddle off most of our housemistresses or masters..... basically because they were a bunch of weirdies..... (well - it's hardly a job which is going to attract nice, normal people: poorly paid, long hours, no escape because you live on site, caring for a whole load of overprivileged children. Not something I'd want to do personally - not as a mature adult)

That wasn't my question SB - have you personally weekended for any length of time with your partner? Until you have done it for a good while, or unless you are married to someone or have grown up with a parent who is a member of the Armed Services, you have not experienced the strains of service life, or experienced what it is like to face years and years of weekending. The most I have done it for at one time was for four years.

As to service towns - 250,000 people live in Plymouth (service town); it doesn't mean that they will know what service life is like, or have experienced it themselves. I'd be interested to know which service town you live in, as if you have a married quarter, it is most unusual for the serving partner not to be living in it, unless they are on deployment either on land or sea; in which case there is no way that their families could go with them.

I've weekended for 16 years out of the 22 I've been married, and it hasn't always been fun, either before or after ds was born. It's not about always putting the needs of your dcs first either; I married a serviceman, and I hope to still be married to him when my ds leaves home. I have needs, as does my dh. I wasn't aware that becoming parents meant that we had to totally sublimate ourselves to the needs of our ds until he is 21 and left uni.

In an ideal world the Armed Forces would let us have 5 year postings; they don't, and so we have to do what we can to ensure our kids get a good education. For many of us, boarding school is the solution whether you like it or not. It avoids disruption, and provides male role models for ds's where Dads in particular are away.