Why is private education so taboo now?

[DoMyBest]

When I was younger I was privately educated as were most of my friends. Now we all have children and almost all of them have decided to send their children to state schools. Whilst for most of them it was a question of money, for others it really wasn't: they believe that every child should have the same educational opportunities and if parents like them start giving their kids exclusive treatment then the system won't work. Some of these parents chose local 'outstanding' state schools, but one couple with enough money to buy every private school in town admirably chose their worst local state school and work hard to improve it.

I listen to these stories with interest, sometimes admiration but mostly respect for their choices & views.

So it's with some alarm, now we have chosen a private school for our son, do discover the hatred this decision engenders. Private education has, it would seem, become taboo.

So here's my question: is it morally right for people to get angry with parents who privately educate their children?

"How the parents howled. Not all- I thought it was fantastic- but oh, so many were not happy with the changes. Too much competition! To much required parental involvement! Too high expectations!"

I don't believe any parent has ever complained about too high expectations...! And in my experience, private schools do not go in for parents involvement. And the wrong sort of competition is very damaging.

A competition for what though?

Taz

The general argument seems to be, even though many would not like to attend the same school, that your ds shouldn't be allowed to go.
I don't understand this futile argument myself.

So many times on these threads we read that people are only too happy in their state school and how good it is, better in some cases than a local private school.
Then they argue it isn't fair some dc get to go private. Make your minds up.

Martorana I can quite assure you that many of the things that my DC's private schools hold dear are anathama to many an MNer.

They just don't want what it offers. Or at least they want to cherry pick the bits they think they might like.

So wehy not leave me to it?

I'm not for one second insisting that their DC have it. I'm not even suggesting that I ought to get it via the state. I'm happy to pay for my quirky nonsense .

"So many times on these threads we read that people are only too happy in their state school and how good it is, better in some cases than a local private school.
Then they argue it isn't fair some dc get to go private. Make your minds up."

God, I hate this faux puzzlement. So boring. Such a waste of time.

And if you don't think parental involvement is part and parcel of private education, you obviously haven't been anywhere near a modern prep school!

MininMum Yes, that's exactly the general argument! I find it quite surreal that the same people who think it unfair that I'm sending DS to a private school were actively moaning about the environment when the school was run along the lines of that exact private school. They don't want it for their children but they don't want my DC to have it either.

Martorana It is entirely possible that DS' school is unique in actively involving parents in their children's education but all of the private schools around here do seem to expect parental involvement.

It's not about education quality. It's about the contacts you make at private school, the doors it opens whether interning a friend's mother's law firm or arranging for a friend to get work experience in the media with daddy.

That's the difference.

The wordFactory

Well said. Although I have no idea what anathema means.
You are doing the best for your children with the resources you have.
We should all do this instead of bothering about what others are doing.

ubik all that stuff happens quite independently of school, I assure you.

I have been asked by the world and his wife if I can get my agent to read their (usually awful) book.

DH has been asked by most of his mates if they can help with work experience (none of them send their DC to our DC's schools).

"We should all do this instead of bothering about what others are doing."

The problem is that I care about the sort of society my children will live in when they grow up.

I don't agree that food for children and reading to them are any different from education. In fact the fuel that goes into them arguably determines their outcomes including mental and physical health even more than a private school will. It is just as much advantaging you as a good school as is a parent who reads to you every night as well of course as those who love and cuddle you. Other allegedly divisive things might be instilling a work ethic and stoicism in a child and / or giving it a particular accent. There is nothing wrong with advantaging your own child. It is called love. It has the moral high ground. It is nothing about which to be ashamed.

But martorana you seek plenty of advanatge for your own DC. You do your level best for them.

And I quite applaud you for it.

But you seem to be always very critical of others who do it.

As has been said, these things are a balance. And I think it behoves us not to pat ourselves too heartily on the back and not to point fingers too readily at others!

Martorana.

We all care about what sort of society our children will live in.
Private schools have always existed, I can't see your point.
It didn't do me any harm, nor the generation before, nor this generation coming up now.
If your child was suited to a particular school that happened to be private and you had the money, you would send them.

"But martorana you seek plenty of advanatge for your own DC. You do your level best for them."

I send my children to the nearest state schools that will take them.

I do also take them to music lessons and things if that's what you mean.

"If your child was suited to a particular school that happened to be private and you had the money, you would send them."

I wouldn't, actually. But that's beside the point.

I think that the way privilege attracts privilege is disgraceful. The very fact that here are more old Etonians in the Cabinet than people, from state schools says it all.

I didn't know that any people from state schools were in the Cabinet.
You go to Eton for that, surely.
My dc weren't interested in a career in politics or members of the Cabinet, so state school was fine for them. Horses for courses, and they didn't have the background for that type of school.
Wouldn't want to stop those who do though.

"There is nothing wrong with advantaging your own child. It is called love".

If it makes society a worse place for other children to grow up in and undermines our meritocracy (it does), then there IS something wrong with it.

I don't believe that society should accommodate the wishes of parents to shove their child as far as possible towards the favourable end of an uneven playing field - no matter how 'natural' this urge is. Not if it results in social unfairness.

So what other things do you think should be banned in order to attain 'fairness'?

Or is everything you do for your DC, okay? Just other folk thast need to be reigned in?

Plus ca change .
Private education is not always an advantage for future life but offers choice and reduces competition for good state schools. As wordfactory and others say, people who advocate banning private education should also desist from paid extracurricular activities, buying books and providing unfair advice and access to an expensive university education. It would make for a much fairer system but I'm not sure whether the next generation would thank us for it.

How does having everyone at the same type of school giving everyone the same standard of education make things any better. As your giving them the same starting point but after that taking into various factors such as extra circular activities, know / being friends with various important people ect ?

I'm just going to throw this out there along with education, food and extra curricular priviledges: should private healthcare be banned too? Do we have a right to get angry if a parent pays for a private health service for their child when they could have chosen public? Should private companies be abolished because they allow shareholders to choose unfairly high salaries (which might be used, for example, to pay for private schools)? Where should the free market end and equality be enforced?

Well, tbh, I've always thought some private healthcare to be worse, morally, than private education, as it's a way of queue jumping, although if the government continues to run down the national health service, I will begin to see avoiding some NHS hospitals as a sensible way of avoiding being killed off. You can argue that private education can be chosen for reasons other than wishing advantage on your offspring (eg I don't think it's really hugely advantageous to your life prospects to go to a scientology school or a Rudolf Steiner School, etc), but I don't think you can really argue that paying to get your hip replacement sooner than some other poor sod is because some people like waiting around longer than others. So I guess we all have a different idea of where it is most important for the level playing field to be well and truly level - and human nature means if it really is a choice between life and death, few of us would actually choose to die in the queue if we could find a way of avoiding it.

... in other words, in an imperfect world, we almost all behave imperfectly.

it would just be nice if everyone could see the value of educating all children the same.

private schooling buys jobs for kids, i don't really see how that would be a good acomplishment as an adult to look back upon if they had any conscience but people generally don't think of others these days do they