Private school pupils banned from work experience in hospitals

[beelegal]

“Pupils who want to be doctors 'barred' from vital work experience at NHS hospitals - because they go to private school”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15007121/amp/doctors-work-experience-NHS-hospitals-private-school.html

This will be extended to all civil service jobs.
Bridgitte Philipson is a nasty bully. What next, private school pupils to sit on certain sections on buses? I cannot wait until the next general election, this shower need a wipeout.

Average doctor salaries is not going to pay for private school these days.

It does when many of them are married to other medical staff and most importantly they tend to come from families with money. So help with house deposits, fees etc

And this is what this policy is supposed to be doing isn’t it? Widening access to all? Hence we have more doctors?

Quite. Which is why medical schools will continue to admit the best and most able applicants. Who will be the most academically successful and the best interviewees.

Whether young people will continue to aspire to being doctors is another matter. But that’s in the hands of the medics.

How do you feel about the kids who go to this state school then? Which box would you put them in?

I feel a bit sorry for those dc who have to board at RA&A.

Nothing to do with Labour. It is an article about a trust's partnership with The Social Mobility Foundation and local schools to offer work experince to pupils from low income families. As always people just read the headline and jump to the conclusions the Daily Mail want them to.

But who will look out for the rich and privately educated??? They already suffer so much.

How about those at London Oratory?
The London Oratory
💰Fees: FREE.
Entrance: Musical (2 instruments)/Catholic (not a grammar).
🏫Facilities: Indoor heated swimming pool, 4G pitch & fitness centre. Special Oxbridge lessons. Choral scholars do lots of singing.

School of choice for "not posh" like of Tony Blair etc 🙄

My point isn’t against widening, they should have more access for both types of education and not limit those from private education.

The next prodigy of a neurosurgeon could be from a state school, however they could be from a private school.
Surely if you needed a neurosurgeon in the future you’d want to know that that prodigy was getting the opportunity throughout their education.

How do you respond to Sutton Trust who state that top 200 state schools are as "privileged" as the top independent schools?

@twistyizzy that's interesting, can you link to that? Certainly there are very privileged dc i state schools but I can't see any state school with a cohort as privileged as say Eton?

I actually do know you 😉

We all know the children at private schools will do well in life and won’t be held back. They will have lots of work experience from family/friends. And that’s good. Just get on with it and don’t wait around for a “scheme” to organise it.

And ever it shall be.

Some very bitter people on this thread lol.

OP did you seriously just compare racial
discrimination and segregation to private school kids not being able to do work experience?

Not cool.

@twistyizzy I know plenty of dc who went to The Oratory, what's your point?

My dc's state has a swimming pool and 4G pitch.

But with this policy the next prodigy of a brain surgeon is less likely to come from a private school.

Less numbers from private school doesn’t necessarily mean less ability. It means a wider pool from other areas.

Plenty of ordinary dc go to catholic schools...

You’re still not grasping my point, I don’t want the prodigy to be more or less likely from either. I just want the prodigy to get there.

No one knows where they will be. So should be equal opportunity from both types of education.

Year 5 of medical school finances ( when it swops from Government funding to NHS) causes an absolute financial mess for any students without extra support. It can cause poor medical students to drop out. Maybe the government should look at this?

Also what about the horrendous debt to be paid back (at the same high interest/inflation rate which the government denies applies to wages) and wages which may remain low for years? This is not an incentive for able disadvantaged students.

Also, what about the bottle neck whereby qualified doctors after F1 and F2 cannot get on to a training place (foreign more experienced doctors replace them) and then they are stuck in limbo with no job?
Also, the working conditions are bad.
Should students from disadvantaged families think this is worth it?

There are middle class, not poor children of doctors attending state schools. Will they get access to placements but not their private school counterparts?

As for blocking those students in private schools who are thinking of medicine as a career, does Phillipson really want to prevent very well educated, highly able students with top grades, who were selected for academic private schools because of their ability in the first place to be excluded from medicine?

Why not win win? Many doctors’ children are at private selective, academic day schools. Those doctor parents often help set up work experience for pupils in the school. Why not ask those schools to share their resources re-medical entrance exam information, and share access to work experience contacts, with local state schools - especially those in the most disadvantaged areas?

But I’m guessing most of those children wanting to be doctors etc haven’t asked to go to private school, their parents have chosen. So they’re missing out at 15/16 because of a choice their parents made years ago?

Year 5 of medical school finances ( when it swops from Government funding to NHS) causes an absolute financial mess for any students without extra support. It can cause poor medical students to drop out. Maybe the government should look at this?

Agree the biggest barrier is often the expense of learning & training to be a doctor.

Surely one of the barriers to being a doctor is the five years of university that we couldn't have afforded to subsidise DS for. It was difficult enough helping with the finances for 3 years of University. DS went to a state school.

I don’t think it’s as simple as all that.

It doesn’t matter as the OP was misleading anyway. What OP said and what the article says are not the same.

I think the title is a bit ‘click-baity’?

Nobody is being ‘banned’ it’s just about schemes that are trying to broaden opportunities for less privileged students.

For years and years private school pupils have been way over represented in certain unis, courses, professions. What’s the issue with trying to level the playing field and make things a bit fairer?

If we had no private schools it wouldn’t be an issue though would it?

I remember reading an article in The Telegrqph a few years ago. These private school parents were moaning that universities were taking less students from private school due to the increase in improving access and diversity. And they were furious and saying what was the point in paying for private school if it couldn’t guarantee a place on a medicine course. The entitlement was unbelievable.

So if we had no private schools we wouldn’t have this issue.

Your response arose from my flippant comment that posh isn't a protected characteristic.

I did not say that all state school kids aren't posh. I disagreed with you re "all state school kids are chavs", which wasn't what I said. Yes I think that for arguments sake private school kids can reliably be described as posh. There are posh kids at SS too obviously. But as I said the precise word you use is irrelevant, the point I was making is that posh (privileged, privately educated, whatever you want to call it) isn't a protected characteristic.

Sorry that the term upsets you so much.

Bullshit thread. They're not banned at all, just not allowed to take advantage of schemes aimed at state school students.