response to private school

[plumling]

DS did not get a place at either of our good local schools (live within .5 mile to both) and so after much thought rather than walk 1.5 miles each way to nearest school which I didn't really like(for lots of dull valid reasons) we have decided to go private (5 min walk each way) after much navel gazing and general pissed offness with the state system of catchments etc.

Have been really saddened about friends' reaction in that people at a recent Ds friend's birthday party - got lots of quite intrusive questions challenging this decision (don't know how you can afford it...how will you? etc etc).

Just really curious around the thinking - why is it ok to challenge people going to private school but not when they overtly move into catchment areas? Very difficult to move, my mother lives with us etc so moving wasn't an option but even so going private is a lot cheaper for us than hunting down a house within 0.2 mile etc.

ooops! their i meant there

I didn't assume that for a second, I said the rudest people are those with the most money.

well I dunno, there's a woman at dd's school who whooped her kids out at year 4 even though it's an excellent school, and she parades them about in our playground in their blazers when their school kicks out early, and it annoys me, to be honest.... but I'm not rude to her. Probably because I'm not rich. She is much, much, richer than me.

Well of course there are twats who send their kids to private school! it's human nature

back to the hat choice imho

Thanks all for your thoughts. Sorry have only just got back to this. What surprised me, was my surprise - I mean that I have lots of different attitudes to lots of friends' views on religion, clothes, politics, child rearing stuff but we don't feel it needed to interrogate each other (and I guess perhaps I just don't feel defensive) Yet my choice to send DS private than move house means I am fair game. Not sure why really but what it does highlight how difficult everyone finds these decisions and thus they react so strongly as Elibean commented.

Really grateful to everyone who said not to worry. I think the problem is that I have been too open over the decision (perhaps unthinkingly). Lesson leaned I guess.

And yes I do accept Rabbit Stews comments that these lucky choices reflect that I am very blessed.
If I lose friends, I lose friends. I do feel lucky to have this choice, and more comfortable with my decision. Thanks for your insight and kindness.

ronshar - I don't think a genuine, deep seated friendship would ever be ruined by something like this, because you would be confident enough in the important things you had in common and liked about each other not to have a problem with it (and frankly probably wouldn't be very surprised by it, as you would have a better understanding of the person, anyway).

But I can see it ruining a superficial group friendship, where people are tied together by nothing more than a set of assumptions, common backgrounds and common behaviours, because you have revealed your assumptions and behaviours to be different from the rest of the group's - or possibly, your friendship-radar to be so utterly dire that you really have shacked up with a group of nasty, prejudiced, competitive, jealous people, in which case you get what you deserve for not having noticed before.

People do lots of things which are wrong: eating meat, terrible for environment and animal welfare, flying and driving, terrible for environment, shopping at supermarket, terrible for environment and local business etc etc.
I am happy to admit that almost everything I do is a compromise, as is sending kids to private school.
We all know it's not the moral high ground, but so is most of life.
People who can't admit this, or who go to extreme lengths to do everything right tend to be deluded and often annoying.

Of course, I (and most people I know) do try to do the best I can, but that is certainly very far from perfect.

I do feel a bit judgy when someone in our area says they're going private because we have an outstanding state school that they could use on doorstep. I know it's not the same in your case Plumling, but when my neighbour says she didn't bother looking at local school because it's 'an inner city primary' I judge her because by choosing to send her kids to a school that's a long drive away, she's implicitly judging the school I send my kids to as so crap that it's worth doing anything to avoid. I know people who go private say they're not judging the choices of people who don't, but it can feel like they're implicitly accusing you of not caring about education in the same way they are.
I feel that the local school should be your default choice unless there's a good reason not to eg inadequate sn provision, you can't get in etc. But to reject it merely because it's a state school makes someone fair game.

a lot of people seem to get very het up and protective about the school they send their kids to, which i find very hard to understand.

i took ds1 out of our local "outstanding" infants which loads of local people love, because i thought it was bloody useless, and he hated it. moved him to a local private non selective prep which isn't brilliant but is still considerably better than the state school in my opinion.

yes a couple of local friends have mentioned they found it strange, because they think the state school is great, to which i tend to reply something along the lines of "horses for courses". it's about finding the right school for your kid, nothing more than that.

In my area the local juniors is "satisfactory" slipped from "good" and the 2 nearest seniors have just been turned into academies because they are so awful.
So when we moved DD private a lot of parents said "I don't blame you!" and "I'd do the same if I could" which was very generous of them.

The other option was to move house to get in the catchment of state schools with better results and reputations (some of our firends are doing this). One way the houses go up massively in price so we'd end up with a house smaller than the one we have now without a garage. Other way and DH and I have massively increased commuting costs so we did the sums and decided to stay put and go private. Believe me, if I could have found a state school nearby that I liked, I'd have taken it. I just didn't want to leave my house which I've lived in 20 years and have really worked on the garden, a bit of a sentimentalist, that's me.

The posts above miss the point completely. Private education is an extremely selfish act, which is incredibly harmful to others. I think it is great that people who behave in such an inconsiderate way, causing untold harm to poorer children and wider society, are subject to criticism. Hopefully this will reduce the numbers of people who behave in such a selfish way.

Couldn't give a toss who criticises my decision in RL or on some forum, an not that insecure.Imho best thing I ever did for my kids.

Legally challenged ,it's great that you think my children are so valuable to the state school system ,shame the state system didn't agree with you with regard to ds2 (Spld).

I don't think our local school is disadvantaged by not having my children.I live in an area with quite a high proportion of independently educated children and there would not be enough state school places to accommodate everyone

LegallyChallenged its a shame that the state school admissions are so heavily weighted in favour of Christian children (of the 4 state primaries nearest to us 3 are Christian with half the places automatically going to baptised Christians). How selfish of me to have non-Christian children.

I agree with Hester that a wider debate on education in this country is needed but that doesn't mean that anyone has the right to criticise you for making the best choice you can for your child within the system as it currently stands.

I'm with MABS on this one. How we educate our DCs is our decision alone and fook all to do with anyone else. If anyone has a problem with it they'll get short shrift from us.

legallychallenged- please could you tell me how fee-paying education causes 'untold harm to poorer children'? (A genuine question, as I still do not know where I stand on the whole independent/state issue).

Of course it doesn't. Parents do what they think works for their children or their situation. Legallychallenged you should redirect your anger to those who have made this two tear system and created demand for it. Not to those who use it as they have no other option.

Do you feel the same about people using private healthcare? Do you know this is now offered by most companies as part of an employee's benefit package? What would you do in those circumstances? Not use it if you can get a referral 3 months quicker hence improving your children's or your own chance of survival?

everlong - depresses me too.
OP - just have a pat answer to anyone who asks a question. It's your business, no one elses. People have all sorts of views of state/private but none of them are relevant to you and your situation.

I teach in the state sector - Y1 Primary. Also I'm pregnant with my first child and have found myself questioning whether to send my child to the local outstanding school or the private school that sits less than a mile away from my husband's workplace in five years. (Obviously an outstanding school may not be so in five years). I've been teaching 11 years and I have seen A LOT that has occurred in education. I think it may be a lot to do with my own dissatisfaction at the way education has been meddled with so much and disrupted and goal posts changed by OFSTED that makes it so difficult for us as teachers to continuously teach to a good standard. I'm not saying that teachers are not good, but that what constitutes as 'satisfactory' nowadays used to be bloody outstanding only a few years ago. We don't know whether we're coming or going! In 11 years OFSTED have changed their inspection criteria THREE TIMES, the Literacy and Numeracy framework has changed TWICE, they've introduced MFL, SEALS, PSHCE, Brain Gym, Activate etc, etc and NEW assessment criteria SEVERAL times - and that's just the tip of the iceberg!!! is it any wonder that education is so messed up?

I think for my own child I don't want his/her education fiddled with by those who sit in white collars behind a desk, pushing pens AND have absolutely NO experience of education or how children learn. They even listen to old fuddy duddies who claim to be experts but actually have never been in the classroom in over a decade! At least at a private school it's more likely to be structured in a way that teaching methods and curriculum have been tried and tested and set out in stone and not changed every five minutes.

It is up to you to find the school that is right for your child especially with stupid cathment issues that we went through. In the end we moved house as had two children and could not afford it but I did consider private at the time as I was so annoyed. It is the same for parents who choose faith schools and not your local school. People don't like it when you do not do the same as them. It makes them wonder if they made the right decision.

Okay, in answer to your questions:

Private education is selfish and wrong because you are buying Henrietta an education that Dave's parents cannot afford. You are buying Henrietta grades she does not deserve (smaller classes, better facilities, only children of other parents who are paying). This is unfair on Dave. His grades will be lower than they deserve to be, they are lower than they would be if middle class parents used their local facilities and improved them, whether through becoming school governors, but more importantly just by being there: complaining when lessons/teachers are rubbish, and ensuring a more balanced social and intellectual intake. Dave's education would benefit from this immensely, and obviously having a social underclass is not good for anyone of us (eg increase in crime). Also, bare in mind ethnic minorities are far more likely to be unable to afford private education too.
Anyone who justifies private education by saying you are leaving more places for Dave at good state schools or saying that they are paying twice throug paying taxes for state schools and then not using them is deluding themselves about their behaviour, and its devastating affects on Dave and wider society.
Private education is in essence when the advantaged stick two fingers up at the disadvantaged and say "we are better than you, and we don't care about you". It is the social equivalent of allowing posh middle class people to only pay taxes for benefits they use, and not to support those more disadvantaged than they are.

No other option? Yes, you do have the option of making your local school a really good one, and you should take it.

Re private health care. Actually the issues are quite different. Private education is what economists term a positional good - what grade/ability you have is not as important as where you are in the scheme of things. After all the person with the best grades will get the job/uni place etc, whatever those grades may be. The same cannot be said of private healthcare.
However, actually I do think private healthcare is wrong. Healthcare is for the sick not the rich, and so yes if I were in a situation where an employer offered this as part of their contract then I would refuse. My reasons include the fact it is important to have the vocal middle classes using services and therefore demanding better services for all, but it is important to note the issues are quite different.

I couldn't afford to move to get into the catchment area of our two good state schools. I am in catchment for the mediocre one but wouldnt be able to work, pay my bills and do the school run. It's a common theme on MN that only the wealthy choose private schools. Ime the reality is very different indeed.