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, looby.

Its such an easy concept to grasp, and yet ...

... so many of our fellow postees do not seem to have the capcity.

I send my DS to a state school, but I don't see why some people saying that school fees are a necessity is unreasonable.

When we make choices in life, they lead to consequences and these consequences necessitate certain actions. If I decide to send my DS to Eton then it will be necessary for me to find the school fees. Just because the whole world cannot afford to go to Eton, doesn't change the fact that Eton still insists on charging fees and it is necessary for me to stump up if I want my DS to go there. If I choose to go on holiday to Australia, then it will be necessary for me to pay the fare. If I want to exist on anything but a sustenance diet, then it will be necessary for me to increase my food budget. If I don't want to live in a shack in the Orkneys, it will be necessary for me to pay a larger mortgage.

The choices that you make will determine how much spare cash you have got left at the end of the month, after all the necessary expenditure to cover those choices has been met.

Everyone is entitled to make their own choices and will then have to find the necessary funds. It's not up to certain people to tell others whether their choices were necessary or not.

claig, I see what you're saying, but part of my irritation stems from the fact that you see articles in some newspapers where financial planning help is given to people who have children too young to go to school, and school fees are factored into the calculations as a matter of course. And what started all this was the "Women" programme in which the Felicity Wishes author Emma Thomson also had very young children and spoke about "having to" work all the hours God sends because of school fees.

I see where you're coming from but I think I possibly detect an eensy weensy bit of envy there. These magazines are written by and aimed at people like Emma Thomson, so that is what they want to hear about.

There are some state schools in this country that knock the spots off all of these public schools. Not all of us can go there, but Emma Thomson is probably green with envy over the ones that do. Also paying £20,000 a year is no guarantee that their kids will do better than ours. You can't pay for brains, our kids may be smarter.

The mansion owner down the road has to factor in maintenance costs for the outdoor swimming pool. There is no point worrying about what they are up to, just keep on track yourself and make sure you teach your kids well at home and you may find they outshine the mansion owner's kids.

Those moats are awfully expensive to maintain, aren't they?

Oh, it was that Emma Thomson. Not Emma Luvvie Thompson the actress.

Not that it makes a difference at all. I was just picturing the wrong one!!

Amazed any writer can afford private school, frankly.

our local private school seems to have produced successful drug dealers and topless models!(no. 6 in one of the lads mags!)

Have to say I was also confused about which Emma we were discussing UQD. Until someone mentioned Felicity Wishes.

OMG - I've been having bad thoughts about Emma Thompson, top actress I admire greatly and all the time it was the annoying one with the cashmere jumpers on that annoying programme......thought it didn't make sense.

MadameD - where have you gone? I'm loving your posts - you express what I've wanted to much better than I've been able to on this thread.