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.

Think Rabbit has nailed it with 'then we wouldn't have to see Dave'. Why is it we don't want to see Dave? Because seeing Dave makes us feel uncomfortable. Why do we feel uncomfortable?
Could it be because he is part of our community, and as such we are connected and maybe, just possibly, feel a certain sense of responsibility towards him?
'All our children' springs to mind...

What about if Dave's parents are in no position to help with his education? Is it still their fault if he fails?

What if they are illiterate? What if they are disabled? Mentally or physically ill? Substance abusers (to some degree this is a choice, I realise - but mum hooked on heroin by pusher boyfriend when a teenager, say, or addicted to prescription painkillers originally prescribed to address a genuine injury)? Or simply ill-prepared for parenthood through having been abused or neglected themselves as children?

If we as a society choose not to 'see' or help these Daves 'because his parents should have helped him with his education', what are we saying about our society?

I have parents in most of the above categories in my class. I also have a fair number of 'Mumsnet' type parents. We have the same expectations of progress from all the children in school, we set the same expectations of behaviour for them all. We try our best, through targeted intervention, individual reading, aid with homework, to address the 'home' gap that exists in our 'Daves' lives.

Hear hear.

Which is why ('what does that say about our society') it was very important to me that my dds attend a school where their immediate society - ie school community - says something healthy and inclusive. Though I admit we are lucky in having the choice to do that, around here.

To Original Poster
I am sad that you have friends(s) who feel they need stop being your friend because they do not believe in your choice. I think it is fine to have a difference in opinion but to not be friends with someone because you are politically not aligned is sad (and VERY NARROW MINDED!).

The same thing is happening to a very good very close friend of mine. All of us in the "mommy group" send our children to state schools (some faith some community). Our friend has decided that althought she is "satisfied" her the community school - she wants to attempt to send her DC to a private school. She is not particulary wealthy but is willing to sacrifice more of their income for this (ie no expensive hols, etc). One of our girlfiends in the group is freezing her out now and her husband is evening ignoring her. I understand one friend doesn't believe people should have the right to chose how to school their children privately but to suddenly drop a mate because of this? It is upsetting. And to top that, the friend who is anti private schooling lives in what I would call a privileged way: £75 haircuts, organic food delivery, holidays, cleaner for her home etc. - I guess in her books she deserves that because she works for it and of course it NOT smug middle class way of living.

Legallychallenged your arguement by the way is flawed. Everything we do that is over and above what Dave gets should be considered selfish, then, as you state. For example, Dave doesn't get a nutritionally balanced meal (many reasons from financial to parent(s) not caring). His health will never be a 100% and already he is not on par with "middle class children". Will you be buying ready made crappy food for your child because it is not fair your child has a better chance at good health than Dave? Should we not give Dave's family our surplus income so we could equally buy the same food? Clothes?

Another example, should people forgo taking their children on holiday because Dave will be spending that time off school hanging about in the streets/estates seeing deviant behaviour that may lead him astray.

Should parents not pay for anything for their child (swimming lessons, expensive treats etc) that is giving them more experiences, knowledge, health etc over Dave?

I believe we can only help Dave by changing policy not by sacrificing what we can give our children. Because as you can see -where do we draw the line on what is selfish/not selfish. Everything we do over what Dave gets is "not fair".

Again I see both sides but I would never oust a friend over something like this. I love that I have friends of different creeds, cultures, political opinions, and so on. It keeps me exposed to different views which makes me less narrow minded.

Original poster best of luck.

well written misspaella

LegallyChallenged
Dyslexia and dyspraxia "these are mild SEN and hardly require going to a specialist school"

I think what you've failed to appreciate is that SEN is talking about educational needs, not needs generally. Sure a child with cerebal palsy has huge needs, across the whole of their lives, across the spectrum and will have special educational needs as well as all of that.

But SEN is about educational needs.I think a really clever child, for example one in the top one percent for intelligence, but in the bottom one percent for reading and writing has huge educational needs, huge educational potential. And likely they're severely f*ed up because they are frustrated and angry because of the educational problems they have.

Obviously every child is different but you can't say the educational needs of these children are mild.

Mispaeela
Your arguments are fairly typical of selfish parents that don't care about others, and will come up with any sort of nonsense to try to justify their selfish behaviour. To say someone who is against private education because of the undoubted harm it causes others is someone being hypocritical if they go on holiday is stupid beyond belief.

*KATTT" dyslexia and dyspraxia are still mild SEN. Someone with severe celebral palsy has several SEN, as well as serious needs generally.

Personally, I think it is good that people who selfishly send their children to private schools are cold shouldered by those that make the right moral choices. That should help to discourage something which is so clearly wrong.

Well personally, when I feel (privately) that I've made the right moral choice about something I don't go around cold shouldering other people that haven't made those same choices because frankly that would be smug and er...oh yeah, it would be the wrong moral choice.

Seriously, some of the more militant arguments against parents going private on this thread seem a bit nuts to me. Not to mention a whiff of "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

wildstrawberryplace I think you're right, it's a bit nuts to get soooo het up about where other people send their kids to school.

LegallyChallenged If you think not being able to read and write is a mild problem in education you've got a different definition of 'mild' and 'severe' to most people.

my ds has cerebral palsy actually, his indep school is marvellous.

Life is too short to worry about what others think. They have done you a favour, real friends would not treat you like this, so now you know and don't have to waste any time on them. We learnt this the hard way too, being 'dropped' from the nursery group of mums and toddlers that used to hang out together. It was hard for our son who could not understand why his little friends were always 'busy' and could never meet to play. Strangely, we did get the last laugh as one of the most violently opposed to my decision to go private actually ended up at the same private school as us, 3 years later. Like all parents, you must do what you feel is best for your child. Good luck and don't let the buggers get you down.

I am so infuriated by LegallyChallenged's attitude to dyslexia - it is that very attitude that meant I had to move DS to the private sector - when a child has severe dyslexia and can't read or write they are totally locked out of the education system - and we are talking about education here! The system only deals with those children who can function at a high level and so it really doesn't matter that DS can wash and dress himself, feed himself, understand those around him and be understood, because when it comes to school if you can't read and write you have nothing the school wants. And in the state system they simply do not have the resources to plough into a child who needs massive amounts of 1 on 1 time.

And severe dyslexia doesn't just have an impact on the child's ability to learn to read and write - have you thought about the psychological and emotional impact? which should not be dismissed. My DS comes out as top 2% in terms of intellect and bottom 2% in terms of reading ability - the amount of awareness he has to his "deficiencies" are huge! I actually had a six year old child who would try and tear at his skin with his teeth, and talked about wanting to cut himself - all brought about by the negative attitude towards him at school. He was moved to a small school with small classes, intensive 1 on 1 teaching and lots of focus on drama and the arts (ie areas in which reading and writing aren't necessary) and all the negativity floated away within weeks.

I HATE the smugness of parents who can use the state system without a backward glance. You are in truth no more inclusive than anyone else. DS should have been able to receive the education he (and every other child) deserves, provided by the state.

sugartongue

You could be talking about my child there, similar profile, she bites herself, she hates herself. I'm glad yours is getting help.

Hopefully it will get better, but there's NOTHING MILD about it!

Is there anyone else like me who would state absolutely that they hate the very idea of the private sector with the inequalities in enshrines, but would absolutely not be willing to say they wouldn't consider it if they had the wealth, given that we already do all sorts of things for our children we don't do for other peoples, which selfish screws other children over?

It's the moral superiority and the way it effaces those who are poor as if they were pawns in judging Henrietta's parents I dislike most. I grew up with children like 'Dave'. I still live alongside them and their parents. Give them 100k a year or even just a free place and they'd all be off to private school too, and fair play to them as long as this shitty system exists.

Nothing mild at all! And it never goes away. I really hope you're finding a way to help your DD too.

black/white thinking is always exclusive - no better or worse in one direction (private/state) than the other

I'm all for the State system generally, but there are very good reasons for choosing specific schools for specific children - regardless of whether they are state or private.

Elibean

I think that's the point - children are different and have different needs and personalities and talents and problems. They need different provision. The problem with the comprehensive system is it's a 'one size fits all' factory system.