to find it incredibly irritating when in certain circles school fees are talked about as if they are a necessity, not a choice?

[emkana]

Like Emma Thomson currently on the Women programme on BBC 4, or very often in the "Style" section of the Sunday Times.

Yes, BoF, its a wilful denial of their good fortune, and assuming a moral high ground based purely on the ability to pay. And it sucks.

Montblanc, I don't see what socialism has to do with it. Universal free education is the norm in all developed societies.

The attitude of some of the parents at ds's old school was appauling. The children behaved better. They would push in, interrupt if other parents were talking to the head teacher, some would ignore me (I hope they get fleas in their armpits). The head suggested that ds tries for Eton (lol!), I mentioned it to another parent and was told it was a little out of my league!!
The crappy state school ds was at also had parents like this though, they were in the PTA, one obnoxious twonk arranged a cinema night with some shite movie because he wanted to 'educate the parents and show a movie they would not normally consider watching'. It's all bollocks, life isn't greener on the other side, it's the same colour with the same people. You still get little sod's disrupting the class in a private school, you still get alcoholic parents (I've known a few).

No, forget the socialism bit. I mean, in my case my parents had somehow budgeted to send us to private schools, they didn't, we all did v. well, and they gave us the money in our twenties to buy a house. I have had less financial pressure in my adult life if I hadn't had without that leg up.

was the film all foreign, and arty and, um, challenging? (thinks most sane folk would rather nibble their own livers than endure a "Carefully chosen to expand your limited horizons"film...even if they directed the bloody thing! what a twat!

Sorry about that mangling last bit.

My parents gave me a financial leg up in the form of money for property, instead of giving me a private education.

Was "The age of stupid" IIRC. I just smiled and said I was busy. The stupid twonk was at the gate every bloody morning and after school trying to sell tickets. Fark that!! The school was a real mix though, mostly middle class with a few from the council estate, they never mixed. They even sat in different areas at the school play, the yummy mums at the front, the council mum's at the back. Couldn't wait for him to leave!!

But isn't that still one or 'other? A choice made with available money...most don't have that choice at all.

I sometimes (in my more uncharitable moments) get irked at even my siblings (well half, if you want to split hairs, but it makes sense to say it here) who had massive leg ups on the housing ladder due to their dad pitching in with xxx thousands, while I did the whole shebang by myself...And who, as a result have big lovely houses to call their own...

But thems the breaks.

Society's never been fair though, think back to the back to back housing of the victorians (hovis music plays quietly in the background), children from these houses were sent to school up to an age, all crammed in together, then left young to work down to' mine or in to' fields. The whealthier familes could hire governesses to educate their children or send them off to institutions public school where they would return to take over fathers mill, all polished and educated. Think back further to Ancient Rome (we are now on the Gladiator soundtrack). Slavery was rife, boys went to school to learn how to read (if they were rich enough that is), girls stayed at home. Things don't change, they evolve but the differences between people are still there.

Excuse my spelling, it's been a long day.

I've spent half my life night reading this thread, so I'm going to comment, whether it's redundant, or not.

I'm with the OP. I have nothing against private schools, so power to anyone who wants to send their kids to one, but please don't act like is at least as important as eating.

Since they've been mentioned, I am somewhat uneasy about state funded grammar schools. I believe they do far more to create inequality in some areas. Inequality at taxpayers' expense, at that.

I have my kids at the smallish local primary school, rather than sending them further afield to a special school. DS1 is twice exceptional, working a good 3 years ahead in Maths and some aspects of English/Literacy (despite a language delay). DS1 is that kid who is always disrupting the class, I'm afraid and is currently partially home educated just to keep him at school at all.

We have a few terrifying and a few, rather more promising secondary schools to consider, when the time comes. The one that most local kids go to is a definite no, though, since I've known of 2 other kids with autism who have gone there, been thoroughly miserable and moved elsewhere.

I have a feeling that if ever we did consider private schooling for our kids and if the options were available locally, the sort of schools we'd be looking at wouldn't be the sort most parents would be even considering looking at. Fees probably wouldn't matter (not that we could afford typical private school fees, despite DH being hard working) since they're the sort of schools we'd be pushing the LA to pay for, via a statement, anyhow.

Right. I can crawl into bed, now, happy that I've typed sufficient drivel to get this long ass thread out of my system.

I agree, society has never been fair, but it has always taken steps to protect itself from implosion. In this day and age, with the dearth of "blue collar" jobs, massive population and proximity to a wide range of socio-economic groups, the segregation that used to hold sway has disappeared to a great extent, and consequently a culture of disaffected underclass is inavoidable. It is in society as whole's interest to educate and channel all sectors of society into a fruitful manner of education and employment...

As discussed earlier...we are surrounded by the effects of good/bad/indifferent education...it impacts on our lives daily. Simply educating our own children separately will not make it safer for them to walk down the road..or to avoid ingrained disaffection...or to avoid engaging with those educated by the state...who will of necessity contribute the vast majority of work positions available in our society.

"Let them eat cake!"

Sorry, this is for BOF so don't construe it as an insult.

Quite right Madame!!

I do see the middle classes becoming larger though and the working classes becoming smaller and the underclass making themselves known. As standards of education improve (slowly!) and more and more people go to university then there's going to be a real skill shortage. The blue collar club will get bigger and along with it the people who want a private school for their child because they can and they are unwilling to have their child educated with the underclass. It's just a natural progression, it's not right but this is where we are heading.

I am all for cake

I like the point you make, MmeDeFarge, about education affecting the whole of society. It's pointless when you look at it that way to think "I'm going private and sod the rest of you". We should all care.

Message withdrawn

I hear what you are saying bloss but education (although it's fab and high up on my list of priorities for my son) is not food. If I had to choose between adequate nutrition and education I would choose adequate nutrition. He wouldn't become ill or die because he didn't go to a private school.

Has anyone actually seen The Age of Stupid? Is it as crap as I think it is?

But you are making the assumption that state education on the whole is akin to not feeding your children adequately.

which is nonsense. The vast majority of state schools educate children perfectly well.

Maybe not the the standard that you aspire to for your children (though as a state educated person with a good degree would take issue with that)

But nonetheless. the state DOES provide, on the whole, a decent education for our children.

It is not necessary to go private to provide your children with a good education. It is a choice you make, given your financial circumstances, to give your children an education which is paid for, something most people cannot do. Whether that education is better or not is a different issue. Some people choose to educate privately because they want their children to only mix with their own socio-economic class, some, choose it because they beleive that is the route to academic success. Others,like me and others, because their personal circumstances have meant that they can choose to remove their child from a situation that was bad for their dcs.

And quite a few who could afford it choose not to, because they don't actually buy into the "most state schools are crap" mindset.

Your children needed it desperately. What part of you could then afford the change it because of your financial position does not resonate with you?

It is wholly logical. what is illogical is to insist that your ability to pay for an alternative is the result of the necessity for change. If you had not had that money, then all the "necessity" in the world would not have enabled you to make that decision.

Nah, Belle, living in the age of stupid as I do, what need have I watch a film that mediates it for me?

I should go to bed, they are letting me loose with an ultrasound machine tomorrow and some pregnant women so I need to look as if I know what I'm doing

I shall rejoin your debate tomorrow.