Drugs at Private Schools

[abignael]

I have a DD in Sixth Form at a Surrey private school (day school) and I was recently looking at schools for my DS for the 11+ next year. I asked for her opinion on schools in the local area and was shocked that most her responses included references to the pupils there being “druggies.” I was particularly appalled when she told me that pupils at a school where I know a housemistress frequently smuggle in Ketamine and take it in their dorms. Apparently this is not uncommon at private schools - particularly boarding ones according to her. I won’t name the schools as I feel dragging their names through the mud at the behest of a teenage girl is inappropriate but could anyone enlighten me on this?

Don’t know how to edit previous comment to add … it’s a lot more common in se our school and uni students… it’s long been abused to enhance performance and increase their partying longevity. For some reason they don’t seem to understand that these drugs are as harmful to them as street drugs or see how unsafe it it to purchase things like this online.

DC in first year of prestigious uni. The pattern of "druggies" is definitely privately educated kids taking a lot of ketamine.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6286141/

It wasn't much of an effort to go back two pages and find where I quoted the studies. Therefore, I have doubts if you will read it. But anyway, I am quoting it again

The internet has fundamentally changed drug dealing. It is now very easy to obtain drugs this way and any teenager with a smartphone could do it. It really isn't about guys in puffer jackets hanging about on street corners anymore.

The abuse of prescription drugs for academic advantage is also evident at universities- again, out of sight of parents.

@DedicatedFollowerOfFashion84 At unis yh, not in schools.

Yes, in schools as well as unis… as pp has mentioned, any teenager with a smartphone is capable of getting drugs online. It’s far more common than you imagine, even amongst younger teens.

@DedicatedFollowerOfFashion84 Im under no illusion re drugs. I work with kids that age, but Adderall is just not what I've come across in secondary age kids in London.

@ReneeX That study is American as far as I can tell.

As far as students saying it’s just privately educated Dc taking drugs! How on earth do they know? There’s no research in the uk that I can find that backs this up. Money does help but working people have money too.

Yes of course they do, Renee, indeed some have more money.

Drugs are used across all social and economic strata, it has always been so. Young people either do or they don't dabble - a lot don't but many do, usually weed. The type of school they go to is not relevant. I'm in my seventies and it happened when I was a teenager in the 1960s.

Quite honestly the media (as usual) make more out of it than it is.

@ReneeX as I suspected you even didn't look into the study. It has nothing to do with drugs but the impact of the single sex schools 🤦‍♀️

Honestly I am not sure anymore whether you @ReneeX are so convinced by a single study that you feel pushing it 2x will help (which btw mentions that "Skeptics of single-sex schooling have suggested that such schooling may increase students’ gender salience (awareness of gender in categorizations), reduce opportunities for mixed-gender interactions, and increase mixed-gender anxiety, but little evidence has been found"), or whether you are just driving a political ideological agenda.

This is in the area of humanities (not maths), where there are an infinite good explanation to any given problem. Studies of this kind can be ordered from any professor to drive any sort of ideology, and if you are any good with the interpretation of data, then even in sciences you can come to variety of conclusions depending on your assumptions, see the tobacco studies ordered by the majority of world governments in the 1950s-90s.

A quick google search will throw out an equal number of studies suggesting the opposite:

By the American Foreign Service "The common social pressures existing in coed environments are absent, enabling student development without potential distractions from the opposite sex."
https://afsa.org/all-girls-all-boys-all-good-benefits-single-sex-education

By the Stanford Review "some studies find results that favor single-sex schools. No studies have found any negative effects of single-sex education on students."
https://stanfordeconreview.com/2017/06/28/mccarey/

The great thing about MN is that we have people with empirical / anecdotal / intuitive evidence from personal experience, with whom we might either agree or disagree with. Taking a humanities 'science' paper at face value and repeatedly presenting it as gospel because it is a government ordered study makes me suspect - excuse my words here - either naiveté or propaganda.

Ockham razor is the reason why it convinces me mote than anecdotal " I think that"..Also, I have an understanding of stats and can differentiate where is the credible sample pool of the respondents, as well as more legitimate body condicting it.

Sure, yet there is obviously also a bias here, which is not recognised in the paper at all. If you went to a co-ed secondary (like I did) and you're shy/awkward/anxious around (esp pretty) girls as a young adult (like most young bachelors are), then you obviously cannot blame your schooling. IT'S ON YOU. Now if you went to a single sex school, then your subconscious will dictate that it's not your fault anymore: IT'S THE SCHOOL! Pretty obvious if you think about it, yet this paper makes no recognition of this subconscious bias, which makes it a flawed piece of research in my eyes.

Humanities are awash with research papers like this, which are there to prove a subjective perception of the author and/or their sponsor. We have all listened to lessons titled "how to lie with statistics" and "leading questions in surveys" during our years at university, thereby armed with a healthy dose of scepticism.

Personally for me, I think that the diamond structure makes the most sense: co-ed until <13 and then again after 16+ but single sex in between during the years of teenage confusion, identify seeking, and experimenting without thinking about consequences😉 But hey, different courses for different horses. While I am fairly convinced, this should remain an individual family decision, and in my view we should all be grateful that we at least have a choice.

It is too risky to manipulate government sponsored survey because it is obvious that the private school businesses will backlash. Private schools are money makers. All bullying and drug issues are swept under the carpet. Maybe a local newspaper may lie ans manipulate in surveys but not such organisation that would be challenge by private Ka- ching.
I have met too many Boys only graduates not to hear from them how it took them years to gain confidence around women because they were in boys only school.

Whatever difference does single sex make to trying drugs? The best data is from
the uk government. Anything else isn’t applicable here and the study quotes is ludicrously off topic.

Anecdotally here, people think boys coming from single sex schools are over confident! It literally means all DC are different!

Absolute paranoid rubbish. Sorry. All dh's mates from (well known) private school are happily married or happily gay and doing well for themselves with kids and careers. Are you even from the UK?

@Changeau
If you even bothered to read the quoted study you will gather that it is not about impact on the marriages but about feeling shy around opposite sex during and just after attending single sex schools.

I have been living in Uk for the last 28 years and I'm 51. However, judging by tone of discussion you definitely yet to aquire British manners at least in discussion and learning to discuss the topic without ad personam trips. Everybody has a right to opinion. Please read the study attached before questioning it. No copy

@ReneeX no idea why you are so agitated about this. If you believe private schools/public schools are full of drugs don’t send your children there. If you believe single sex boarding schools are producing young men who struggle to have healthy relationships then don’t send your sons. I also don’t think you can criticise other posters manners as yours are not exactly polished. This may be due to your odd vocabulary and weak grammar, you do come across as slightly crazed on the subject of private schools.

100%

@JohnWick4 alterego of Changeau suddenly drops in conversation. Also, just like him using infantile ad personam comments instead of sticking to the discussion and rushes to write opinions without knowing who is saying what. Where did I write about Drugs? What on Earth are you on about?!Where am I stopping anybody to do what they want? Nonsense.
I am sorry that you speak only English. I happen to speak several languages and English is not my native language. Try to master one to the level of fluency and then we talk. Until then you are just a person who doesn't know who said what.
No copy

Dear crazy @ReneeX, I am no one’s alter ego (that’s two words not one). I am female. I haven’t suddenly dropped into the conversation (see entry 07/04/23 14.46). I thought I would contribute as I actually have children currently at boarding school in the UK. I don’t only speak English. Cheerio.

I have met too many Boys only graduates not to hear from them how it took them years to gain confidence around women because they were in boys only school

ReneeX did none of these boys have sisters who had female friends around during the holidays?

ookay...

Private schools... comprehensives. I'd say there's always a group that does this at most schools with teens aged 15-18 tbh.

Ok sure. No comment re claims that it is too risky to manipulate a gov't sponsored survey😂 This is probably as naive as it gets.

About this:
Private schools are money makers. All bullying and drug issues are swept under the carpet.

Let us try an alternative theory for a moment. Councils that run state secondary schools have a vested interest in keeping the reported crime rates low in their districts, right? The emphasis is on reported, not actual. So they will be heavily incentivised to sweep all issues under the carpet, as these decisions are made by mid level civil servants who are not elected and thereby rarely held accountable. The problem is, that the parents who are worried about drug use are unable to hold them accountable; it is just easier for everyone to play along and turn a blind eye. This is fairly similar to disruptive behaviour in class, a rotten apple syndrome where there is just no incentive for the teacher in a state school to remove the rotten apple from the barrel, as they have nothing to win (but everything to loose) if they open that can of worms.

Independent schools, on the other hand, have a vested interest to maintain their image. There is some PR in the mix for the blue chips (which will then have long waiting lists, so expulsion is really not a worry unless the kid is a straight A-star) but no-one in their right mind would choose a school based on newspaper articles. Decisions like these are overwhelmingly word-of-mouth driven, which means that the vested interest of an independent is to keep the barrel unspoilt and remove rotten apples - quickly and quietly if possible, as rotten apples are not good news for the business, but the overwhelming drive will be to sell as many healthy apples as possible so that you can have repeat business.

Welcome to the beautiful world of humanities 😀