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?

Teens are teens! It’s really not school specific - you could face issues at Eton or Bash Street comp!

I do find it rather annoying when parents feel they can buy their way out of potential teen issues with a “not my school” being equivalent of “not my Nigel”.

IT’s delusional

I don't find it annoying. I just feel a bit sorry for them. Imagine spending all that money and feeling really smug about the environment/peer group that you have bought for your child and then discovering that it was all a wasted effort. It's easy to see why some would prefer to bury their heads in the sand.

You get naughty girls and boys at all schools, they are the ones trying to get their hands on as many drugs as they can and going clubbing at a young age etc.

Interesting study

They don’t break down by dc education but by parents

Young people whose parents were highly educated – holding at least a degree – were more likely to report having tried alcohol than those whose parents had lower level qualifications (89% vs 82%). They were also more likely to have engaged in binge drinking (59% vs 50%).

Rates of drug use remained similar among young people, regardless of parents’ educational qualifications.

I find this post so interesting.

You say that the text mentions schools but that it mentions disadvantaged children a lot more. I presume that by "disadvantaged" you are referring to economic disadvantage, rather than other types of disadvantage, as that's the only thing that would make any sense in the context of this thread.

I really don't see that there is more reference to economic disadvantage in the section that you quoted. There is one mention of homelessness at the bottom, which is clearly associated with economic disadvantage. Where are all of the others?

Did you quote the wrong bit of text, or are you assuming that "vulnerable" means "poor" and that only deprived family backgrounds result in homes that are unstable or unsafe?

It is fascinating that you see this text as supporting your idea that affluent children at private schools are less at risk.

I'm sure some do regret it. Among my peers I've never regretted it. Smug? If you mean happy and relieved then yes. But I have girls and I think single sex schools can be more beneficial than mixed schools for girls, less pressure. Certainly mine have all loved their school and done well there and certainly didn't take drugs at school- can't possibly know what they have done at festivals but all seem unscathed as young adults. Who knows if their school helped make them lovely sensible kind girls or whether that's just innate.

Sorry should say among my peers I don't know anyone who has regretted it.

I belong to the local state Facebook group as dd1 went to sixth form there and the amount of ranting and moaning that goes on makes me very relieved I no longer have nothing to do with it.

By "smug", I am talking about parents who congratulate themselves on having bought their kids an education that they believe will insulate them from exposure to drugs and other teenage issues.

Their complacency is naive and misguided.

Of course, that's not to say that their kids will get involved in drugs. Lots of kids at state schools don't get involved in drugs either. But to think that you can somehow buy your way out of this risk is clearly foolish.

I'm not sure many parents choose private school specifically so that their children don't get involved in drugs.

I don’t recognise the views in some of the posts but do agree with yours (state and private dc).

@Changeau I'm my area a lot of parents choose private specifically to avoid the horror stories they hear about state highs. Which are largely vastly inflated. Paying to avoid kids mixing with the wrong sorts.
They just buy a better class of issues

I didn't say that they did. But some of them certainly appear to believe that they have bought their kids out of that risk.

Of course, there will be plenty more private school parents who have a much more realistic understanding. I am obviously not talking about them.

I very much doubt they pay 20k a year to avoid what you say are imaginary issues. They've almost certainly looked very hard at all their options. Some parents who don't have to worry about money never consider state school at all and that's fine.

@Changeau trust me they do.
They hear about 'disruption' and 'fights' and 'low expectations' and panic. Seen it over and over again. Had several conversations on that theme recently. Mine are state and whilst they are aware of stuff going on, they just avoid.
How many threads on here constantly refer to needing to find the cash to go private .. and in areas of london according to Mumsnet, state non selective would be a dire option

Well fair enough. If there is no disruption, fighting or low expectations at the private school they choose (there are none of these issues at our school) then they've done the right thing for their particular family haven't they?

There are drugs in every school

@Changeau yours obv go to a Mallory Towers type school where there are zero issues and drugs don't exist. Or bullying or eating disorders either I assume. But that's not the experience of 99.9% of people on here

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves
Dc in foster homes are vulnerable and disadvantaged. They get pp money and are high up in school admissions criteria. In care children are vulnerable. SEN Dc are often vulnerable too. Dc in out of school provision are clearly vulnerable. I’m assuming you don’t understand the list I posted. It’s obvious who is more vulnerable.

No one chooses a private school as a haven from drugs! Or quite often from local schools either. It’s far more than that snd mostly breadth of education.

Mine are at a state single sex. It’s not perfect but has good results is strict and not aware of a drugs problem but appreciate I am unlikely to know if there was or wasn’t! Dd1 a studious sensible type with similar friends so unlikely to be involved. Dd2 hangs out with the super cool private school party set so much more at risk tbh so we are vigilant with her.

@Changeau you seem to be under the illusion that just because young people haven’t been caught in school with drugs, that must mean that they aren’t using them. Your daughter may not be in the group of people who use drugs, but there’s no chance that there aren’t drugs in the school. As others have said, that’s very naive.

Don’t be naive there are Drugs in all types of schools…..also some parents are themselves doing drugs or drinking heavily.

Yes, of course kids in foster care are vulnerable, and of course kids with SEN may also be vulnerable. I just don't understand why you seem to think that these issues are limited to children from socioeconomically deprived backgrounds.

Are you saying that there are no kids with SEN in private schools? I'm sure that you know this isn't true.

Have it your own way 🤷‍♀️

Not many people on here actually have dcs at a private boarding school (even as day pupils as I do) currently. So no real contemporary experience.

There's no bullying currently AFAIK although I'm sure that's happened sporadically in the past. Dds friend had an eating disorder and went away for treatment and is now back at school and happy at least for now. Girls with severe eating disorders are asked to leave while it is being treated as modern schools are aware it can be socially contagious. I can think of two girls in the 10 years we've been there. I'm not sure why you are so triggered at the idea that some schools can be happy, successful and have excellent policies in place to head off and deal with problems as they arise. They have the time, expertise and the money to do so, plus a cohort of affluent, hard working girls. It's hardly rocket science.