Can you be a leftie and use private schools? Are people prejudiced against the privately educated?

[SpoonsAndForks]

I've always been into equality of opportunity and on that basis, think that it's wrong that our country allows private schools.

But then my son's state primary went into special measures and I pulled him out and put him into private school. Now he's being offered a really great scholarship to stay on and I'm considering going private all the way. So I'd rather private schools didn't exist but now they do, yes I'd like my child to benefit from them.

I came across this book yesterday - www.amazon.co.uk/Posh-Boys-English-Schools-Britain/dp/1786073838/?tag=mumsnetforum-21 - the intro to the book sets out the 'public schoolboy' as the most horrible creature, misogynistic, egotistical, generally a posh hawhawhaw uncaring horror (usually a nasty MP). Yet the intro also sets out some interesting statistics about those in top jobs always being from private school (which makes me want to give my child that opportunity). But makes me sick at the thought of educating my child into a guffawing posh MP.

I'm keen to explore:

• whether you can sit politically to the left and square it with yourself if you use a private school
• whether children who go to private schools will experience judgement and prejudice against them
• whether children who go to private schools are all at risk of turning into posh uncaring brash misogynistic MP types.

You would need to bus kids around to improve standards in state schools across the board, to avoid big differences between schools in wealthy and deprived areas.

I don't think you can truly hold left or socialist principles no. We all want to do the best by our children or what we think is the best (we never really know at the time) so I am not criticising your decision. However, I have had to listen so many times to people saying they hate the conservatives (because its socially acceptable) and have left wing/ socialist principles and then say that the local school isn't good enough for their child or they bought the house on the development that was the furthest away from the social housing in almost the same breath and not realise the hypocrisy and ignorance of the statements!

There are many different ways to use our resources to benefit our specific DCs’ education. And not others.

Time with DC, including helping them learn. Many SAH and PT mothers, for example, devote considerable time to DCs’ education and development.

money, eg for books, materials, activities and trips.

Attending church regularly when you otherwise wouldn’t.

Parental tutoring.

Paid for tutoring.

Moving house into catchment for popular schools at a high price premium, eg 100k difference for a 3 or 4 bed home in the south east.

Home educating.

Private education is probably the most expensive, but some of the others are very costly too.

It’s fine to act in ways not in accordance with political views - most people have a range of views about different things, not all consistent.

I personally judge jeremy corbyn much more for putting his politics (anti state grammar) before his DC than Dianne Abbot’s - understandable IMO - decision to privately educate her son.

This argument is applied to private health care as well. The issue is that when the educated and the affluent buy their way out of state provision in these areas the state provision becomes neglected.

I think that was more valid in a different world of several decades past, because it implies the hope that if we use it more, the government will start providing the funding. Not a world with dwindling resources, ageing population and so on. And to be country-specific, especially not Brexit and all its associated costs.

I would see it as an idealistic choice in theory rather than one which would actually change anything. But most people I know well enough that I know what sort of school their kids go to can afford private anyway. Most of these people are downwardly mobile relative to their parents' generation. (The few that aren't are already in careers that could be read as massive sellouts of their principles if one is so inclined.)

*can't afford private anyway

Do socialist lefties usually make sure their kids inherit nothing? Maybe I missed that memo. Maybe socialist lefties avoid becoming wealthy so they never have this dilemma about unequal distribution of resources.

Lots of interesting responses here, as I expected, thank you.

I'm not yet sure which way I'll go - state or private. Really can't decide.

In an odd way I'm enjoying the fact that this fork in the road / difficult decision is causing me to evaluate my principles / politics.

Younger me was probably more principled, older me is more cynical - I see the whole of society as unfair and can't see that there's an effective way to make it fair. I very much WISH it was fair (that's what I meant when I said I believed in equality of opportunity) but it very much isn't. And I don't believe any politicians or movements can make it so, because I think humans and society are a giant mess.

Some people sending their child to state not private won't close down the private schools. It won't change the fact that some children are born into more difficult circumstances and families than others. It won't change the fact that some children benefit from inheritance and some don't. It won't change the fact that some parents are well educated and have time to spend with their children to pass that on, whereas some parents can't give this.

So I suppose perhaps my approach is now apolitical or something, not sure, I'm not well educated enough in terms of politics.

Just don't go telling off other parents who have done the same. There are few things more pathetic than preachy hypocrites who send their DC to private/grammar and then castigate others for doing the same.

Do better off parents actually provide donations to their child's state schools? I've not experienced this before.

I can't find the threads now but I've seen something on here about selective London state schools with mostly affluent families where parents were expected to donate about £1500 pa, on top of PTA stuff and activities. There are plenty more about lower levels of donations.

I don't have objections to private schools. Can't afford them myself, but I can see that all my dc would have benefitted from them.
I do find the "I don't agree with them, but will use them because they're there" argument rubbish. It reminds me of the song df used to sing (to the tune of Red Flag/Oh Christmas tree) which began:

The working class can kiss my arse
I've got the foreman's job at last.

My cousin is a militant leftie and both her kids go to prologue school as her husband is a teacher there!

Private*

I'm a leftie. My partner is a teacher in a private school. Our children won't be attending. I know enough about them to know that that kind of privileged, nepotistic, grasping environment is not where I want my children to be ...

In making that decision I do not think that I am disadvantaging my kids for my principles. I consider I'm doing the best I can for them.

I went to an inner city comprehensive in the eighties. It was not a school that had fabulous resources, selective intakes or tiger moms and dads. My parents were hands-off, but supportive of me and whatever I wanted to achieve. I think that's so much more important and that's the kind of "leg up" I want to give to mine.

I think that was more valid in a different world of several decades past, because it implies the hope that if we use it more, the government will start providing the funding

No my point was that in areas where the wealthy, more educated people use the same services as poorer people they are better because there is customer base who can and will complain and campaign for improvements. When those people opt out of state provision of services it becomes a bare bones safety net and quite often not that.

state schools with mostly affluent families where parents were expected to donate about £1500 pa, on top of PTA stuff and activities

Some years ago the neighbouring borough grammar schools made it clear to visiting parents that all parents donated to the school at around that level. This deterred a lot of poorer parents as it was made clear the schools were not for the likes of them.

Unsurprisingly the annual Yr 7 intake came from private primaries and heavily tutored children.

The counterpart "High Schools" (aka secondary moderns) had far less parents able to contribute and suffered consequently.

No you can't be left wing and send your kid to private school.
Private school is buying your child privilege and saying you think it's right children of poorer parents should be treated like dross.
The tax treatment of private schools as charities is ridiculous and should end. Then most grasping middle class parents would have to roll up their sleeves and start making their local schools better.

No my point was that in areas where the wealthy, more educated people use the same services as poorer people they are better because there is customer base who can and will complain and campaign for improvements. When those people opt out of state provision of services it becomes a bare bones safety net and quite often not that.

I understand that, it's a well -established argument for universal benefits. But you see services getting worse regardless now. (Those schools with large donations from affluent parents are a bit different.) People complaining in that way may obtain better treatment for themselves or their relatives on the NHS but it doesn't seem to be contributing to improved standards in those hospitals at large. People I know who've tried haven't even been able to get better results for themselves in recent years, including about common fairly serious things that weren't properly diagnosed/treated and which even junior doctors should recognise. They either went private or gave up depending on urgency/income/cost. One of them would probably have died of an infected fracture if they hadn't been stubborn in rejecting the answers of two a&e doctors and had the money to go private.

I reckoned I was a leftie until I sent my kid to school.
I went to a state comp and bloody resented it, despite doing fine there.
I will be using private for primary and then decide for secondary later.
I am sure there are plenty of excellent state schools, but my parents thought my comp was excellent and fairly middle class etc..... it wasn’t. And the lack of aspiration from the sizeable minority of kids and parents - just left me frustrated.

Private school is buying your child privilege and saying you think it's right children of poorer parents should be treated like dross.

How is that different from leaving a big dollop of cash to your kids after you die -- isn't that giving them a privilege with the money they inherit? The fact that society allows this, does that mean that society is treating people who get no inheritance "like dross"?

"I've always been into equality of opportunity and on that basis, think that it's wrong that our country allows private schools. But then my son's state primary went into special measures and I pulled him out and put him into private school . . ."

You are not a lefty, not even a hypocrite.

You are worse! And I've wasted a couple of minutes of my precious Saturday afternoon writing even this in response to people like you.

Can you be a leftie and use private schools?

Diane Abbott seems to think so.

But you see [health] services getting worse regardless now

And everyone says they want more spent on the NHS but vote for a partly promising tax cuts. I suspect that would happen less if those who have were more engaged in public sector health services rather than thinking they can opt out so the tax cuts get the vote.

Yes I know there are significant problems in the NHS, I'm not going to tell anyone they should turn down life saving/affecting treatment because its only available if they pay for it. However as long as the better off vote for tax cuts because they have a choice things will not improve. If we considered we were all part of one society parties campaigning for better funding in the NHS would get more votes.

Notwithstanding there are many aspects of the NHS that need better structural organisation and modernised processes but that probably belongs in a different thread.

Well that was a constructive comment petermas! Why bother commenting if to do so is wasting your own time?