Didn’t get into any choices, placed into Catholic School - help

[morozova89]

Hi everyone, I’m really hoping someone might be able to offer some advice about secondary school appeals in London.

My son has been allocated a place at a Catholic secondary school, which we did not put on our application list. We are a different faith and not Catholic, so being placed in a faith school that isn’t ours feels very upsetting and uncomfortable for our family.

I’m also a single mum and have had to navigate this process on my own, and unfortunately my son’s dad hasn’t been helpful with any of it. I’m originally from Ukraine and not very familiar with the UK school system, so I did what I thought made sense at the time.

We listed four schools, three of which we genuinely believed were realistic choices based on distance and admissions. Sadly he wasn’t offered any of them. I realise now maybe I should have listed more, but I honestly didn’t know.

What has made it even more shocking is that all of my son’s close friends were offered places at our number one choice school, which is in our catchment area and part of the same federation as his current primary school. I know friendships aren’t a ground for appeal, but it has made the outcome quite difficult for him to understand.

My son was born in the UK, is in Year 6, and is doing well at his current primary school, so this has been a really confusing and upsetting situation for us.

I understand that appeals are usually made for a specific school rather than against the one offered, but being allocated a faith school that isn’t our faith and wasn’t on our list feels particularly difficult.

If anyone has experience with appeals, waiting lists, or what steps I should take next, I would be incredibly grateful for any advice. Thank you so much. 🙏

btw we are in London.

Yes and I have been in meetings where priests have argued exactly that case that children in families who struggle to attend Mass actually have a greater need to be admitted.

This is the admissions policy for a Catholic state school in Liverpool. Non-Catholic looked-after children are in category 5. So, yes, they do.
https://www.bellerivefcj.org/_site/data/files/admissions/521345E86C366F4C211C0778E458984F.pdf

@NimbleMauveRobin Furthermore Catholic schools have a clear admissions code which follow borough guidelines.

?? What are these borough guidelines you speak of? Schools are increasingly independent. Many are their own admission authorities. Tell me, why did the London Oratory carry on for so long with blatantly illegal admission policies despite these "borough guidelines" you mention?

They do not as your article suggests(without any evidence) exclude looked after children or children with special needs

it might be useful to click on the links shared, before jumping to the wrong conclusion that there is no evidence.
I will share them again:
https://humanists.uk/2023/04/28/vulnerable-children-denied-school-places-because-of-faith-admissions-regulator/
and
https://humanists.uk/2025/07/22/listed-all-the-faith-schools-in-wales-that-discriminate-against-children-in-care/

The OSA is the impartial body that regulates English schools’ compliance with the School Admissions Code. Its annual report, published last week, noted that in local authority areas where ‘schools with a religious character give the highest priority only to looked after children of their own faith’ – something which they are legally permitted to do – looked after children not of that faith may well not gain places’. The report goes on to say this can ‘limit the scope for looked after and previously looked after children to gain admission to a good or outstanding school.’ This is the third annual report in which this issue has been raised.

Leave unsubstantiated faith at your church.
Here we are talking about facts and evidence.

I have myself seen many cases where clergy have supported families in really heartbreaking scenarios where teachers in an ordinary school would probably not feel they could help and would have to refer families on.

Again, anecdotes vs evidence.
I have no doubt that many faith schools do an amazing job. You will remember I mentioned to OP that faith schools in England tend not to be as bad as she feared and that in many there is, in fact, no indoctrination. But that's not the point

You obviously dislike religious schools and religion in general but please allow others to seek support and solace there if they want and definately refrain from mocking them.

My opinion on religion is irrelevant.
I oppose any kind of discrimination in the provision of crucial services funded by everyone's taxes.
I would oppose with the same vehemence a hypothetical school giving priority to children of atheists.

I do not mock religion. I mock the unsubstantiated belief that believing in one makes pupils somehow "better" and that the better results of some faith schools are because of that rather than because of their socially selective nature.

@NimbleMauveRobin please allow others to seek support and solace there if they want

I am a staunch supporter of free speech and religious rights.
I would dare remind you that religious people tend to be attacked by believers of other religions, more than by atheists or agnostics.

Eg the thugs who attacked mosques in the summer of 2024 identified as Christians, not as atheists.

Attacking religions, one religion in particular, can be very dangerous for one's personal safety. No comparable risks arise from attacking, mocking or even insulting atheism or agnosticism. That's a FACT.

You have the right to believe in whatever you want.

What you shouldn't have a right to is use everyone's tax money to fund a crucial service, like education, which discriminates based on faith. Again, we wouldn't accept it with hospitals, why do we accept it with schools??

Surely you can appreciate the difference?

Surely you can appreciate that not discriminating based on faith doesn't preclude anyone's religious rights ? If anything, the opposite...

UPD: They clearly must’ve made an error because I just got confirmation from council that he did indeed get into our first choice :) always worth checking these things! Thanks all for your help! Happy ending after all.

Great news @morozova89
I hope he is very happy in his new school.

Brilliant news @morozova89 and thanks for the update. I must say the advice from those who know on MN is always excellent and helpful.

The rules are that faith schools can prioritise children of the faith over LAC who are not of the faith, but LAC of the faith must come first, and LAC not of the faith must come before any other children not of the faith. Some do prioritise LAC children of the faith in this way, many don't. Note that the admission policy of the school to which you link is counter to the policy of the Archdiocese of Liverpool (which is not binding on schools but most will follow it). This prioritises all LAC children regardless of faith.

Faith schools cannot exclude SEN children in admissions, nor can any other school. However, many state schools, both faith and non-faith, treat SEN children poorly and find ways to manage them out.

It is unlikely that any government will take away the ability of faith schools to prioritise on faith grounds any time soon because of cost. If the government did this, all Catholic schools would close along with some other schools of minor faiths. This would leave the government either having to buy the land and buildings from the Catholic church at full market value or having to build new schools for over 850,000 pupils. This would cost the taxpayer billions of pounds. As well as the initial capital cost in creating these places, there would be an ongoing cost. The Catholic church contributes at least 10% of the capital costs involved in maintaining and improving Catholic schools and for at least some schools also tops up the government grant, allowing them to spend more per pupil than community schools.

For a while, new academies could only give 50% of places based on faith. That seemed like a reasonable compromise. I believe the government rolled back on that on the grounds that it didn't make sense to have two separate rules for old and new schools.

Really great news OP!

Thanks, that’s very interesting. And makes sense given the common misconception that there is actually much choice when it comes to how education is apportioned

There was a consultation to remove it, mainly because some faith groups (particularly Catholics) objected to it and made it clear that they would not open new free schools or convert existing schools to academies unless the cap was removed. However, the general election was called before the consultation completed and the Labour government dropped the idea. The 50% rule therefore remains in place.

It would be useful to remember that the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended the UK scrap faith-based admission. it urged the UK to

"guarantee the right of all children to freedom of expression and to practise freely their religion or belief", including by "preventing the use of religion as a selection criterion for school admissions in England".
tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CRC%2FC%2FGBR%2FCO%2F6-7&Lang=en

The 50% cap for new schools was introduced in 2007 by Labour.
Humanists UK concluded that the cap improved inclusion and diversity https://humanists.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016-09-15-FINAL-Ethnic-diversity-in-religious-Free-Schools.pdf

some faith groups (particularly Catholics) objected to it and made it clear that they would not open new free schools or convert existing schools to academies unless the cap was removed

Not just that: some Catholic lobbies engaged in a shameful and dishonest misinformation campaign, blatantly lying that the cap was in some way against Church law, when it was not
https://humanists.uk/2017/11/20/mps-misled-on-catholic-school-admissions-claims/
These are the same people who enslaved Irish women in the Magdalene laundries till the 1990s, who lobbied to keep contraception illegal in Ireland (I think the pill was illegal there till the 1980ish), who covered up sexual abuses in the Church, etc etc etc

@morozova89 I'm really pleased for you and I hope it turns out to be the best school for your DS.

As for the wider argument, it might be worth remembering that all state funded schools (including academies) must take part in a single daily act of collective worship, whether as a whole body or as groups within the body of the school. Schools with a faith designation are required to follow that faith, and those without must provide an act of worship with a 'broadly Christian character.'

Now, we all know that most schools don't follow this to the letter, and would instead focus on some issue of ethics or social conduct that fits with a broadly Christian principle (such as sharing, kindness, tolerance, etc.), but nonetheless, the requirement is there. So that's one reason, a lot of faith based arguments of 'I'm not religious so my child shouldn't go here...' will fail.

Very glad to hear that the admission authority has acknowledged its mistake and given the place.

Visit the school before making assumptions. My child goes to a catholic school and is catholic but there are plenty of atheists, there's Muslims and Hindus too. They HAVE to do RE as GCSE unlike secular schools and learn about other faiths. They often have culture days and are way more multi cultural than the secular schools locally. Non Christians have to respect the ethos of Christianity but aren't indoctrinated into it. My friend went to a RC school as a child and she remains very much a hindu and it's not damaged her in any way!

They can be more diverse as a result, yes. I've worked at two separate schools with faith based criteria and both were significantly more diverse in ethnicity and economic status than the surrounding area - and more so than in the maintained/community/non faith schools.

I appreciate that this is purely anecdotal because, you know, if you start citing particular schools, you're about ten minutes away from somebody being able to work out who you are IRL. But considering I'm absolutely not religious in any shape, way or manner - my only concern is having employment that pays my bills - seeing the differences and reporting on the differences, the data doesn't lie; in a fairly homogenous area, a faith based criteria can and does have the effect of increasing diversity because it cuts across economic and social lines in a way that being able to afford a house round the corner doesn't.

You are 100% correct, you only need to attend church to know a lot of the congregation are not white. Black, Eastern European, Indian predominantly, fijian Christians from all over the place. All the secular schools locally are very much white, my child's Catholic School class it's about 50percent white, in her friend group of 7 only 2 are white British. Most white British are atheists. This goes against most people anti Christian propaganda so they like to spout out a load of rubbish about diversity and they completely wrong.

@NeverDropYourMooncup the data doesn't lie

What data? Where is this data? Show it!

I have presented research and data. You have presented mere anecdotes, for which you have no way of knowing how representative they are!!!

in a fairly homogenous area, a faith based criteria can and does have the effect of increasing diversity because it cuts across economic and social lines in a way that being able to afford a house round the corner doesn't

That's just an unsubstantiated assertion.

The London Oratory is a living proof of the exact opposite.
One single school does not prove anything, but the research I linked shows that the Oratory is not an isolated case.

Your approach is the same as someone saying: "oh but my grandpa died at 95 smoking 5 cigarettes every day" when someone points out the dangers of smoking. Single cases are irrelevant. A single case does not disprove well-researched and documented nationwide trends.

@Hereforthecommentz You are 100% correct, you only need to attend church to know a lot of the congregation are not white

Diverse churchgoers does not necessarily mean diverse intake at a faith school.
Again, look at the data. Look at the research

This goes against most people anti Christian propaganda so they like to spot off a load of rubbish about diversity and they completely wrong.

It took a legal fight to get the Oratory to change its discriminatory admission policies! Pointing it out is anti-Christian propaganda??

The Oratory is far more socially selective than other schools in the borough.
Plenty of research shows it's not an isolated case.

A much more diverse Catholic school (St John Bosco) just 2kms south of the Oratory is a constantly undersubscribed and underperforming school where no one wants to go. Coincidence?

How is pointing out these facts "propaganda"?
Facts don't become propaganda just because you don't like them.

You lot have no problem using everyone's tax money to fund crucial services which discriminate based on faith. Only morally bankrupt individuals without a moral compass would agree to this abomination.

If you ever need the police or the ambulance, and they put you in a longer queue because priority goes to people of a different protected characteristic, how would you rect?

That's not a school under the control of the Diocese. It's a very old fashioned admissions policy and they are likely approving them despite considerable pressure from the Diocese. The 2027/28 policy has to be determined and published on the website by the end of the week - and further searching shows that they consulted on that policy.

Most of the schools run by religious orders are being transferred to diocesan control as the orders themselves age out of dealing with education. When that happens, the likely outcome is that they join a catholic academy trust - I've just googled and the first admissions policy I accessed gave all looked after and previously looked after children of all faiths (and none) top priority, no particular priority for practising catholics/mass attendance, siblings of all kinds and then attending feeder schools with no faith requirement at all for either, then other children.

They still seem uncessarily complicated to me, but it is still a considerable way from a wording that was phased out in Diocesan schools some time ago.

My approach is I'm not doxxing myself to satisfy your rage. I've already explained that.

Churches don't own the police, police stations, police cars, pay 10% of the costs or have power of arrest. Well, except for Vatican City.

They're not paying 10% of my biologics, either.

I don't give a flying fuck for religion. But I do like social justice - and seeing children who actually represent the full spectrum of financial and ethnicity categories instead of the 'nice, middle-class, white' kids that enter schools because their parents have three quarters of a million or more to bang out on a house round the corner like the Oratory is something I approve of. And widening the net away from owning the big house is levelling the playing field more than sticking to letting parents buy their way into an ostensibly free education.

@ParentOfOne The London Oratory School has an English as an Additional Language rate of 43.1% compared to a national average of 19.2%. So in that regard, yes, it is diverse. But you would have known that from when you looked at the Ever 6 FSM data because it is right above it, you just chose to cherry pick the data that fit your rhetoric and ignore that which didn’t.

Some Catholic schools have a higher than average FSM rate. You are taking one school and extrapolating it to all.

The statistics quoted above are at odds with the Catholic Education Services own figures which show that Catholic schools have a more diverse work force and more diverse pupil population than other schools. For example 44% of pupils in Catholic state primaries compared with 36% in non religious schools. The Oratory case you quote is from 2017. A whole cohort of pupils have passed through schools since then. Again your anti Catholic vitriol is concerning. Would you write about another religion in the same way on this forum?

@NeverDropYourMooncup My approach is I'm not doxxing myself to satisfy your rage. I've already explained that.

Doxxing? The text comprehension skills are worse than I had thought. Doxxing would require you revealing the specific school of which you have experience, but my point all along is that single cases are irrelevant because you have no way of knowing how representative or not they are.

So let me get this straight: are you saying that you are basing your entire conclusions on one or two isolated cases known to you, and that it has not occurred to you they might not be representative?

Churches don't own the police, police stations, police cars, pay 10% of the costs or have power of arrest. Well, except for Vatican City.
They're not paying 10% of my biologics, either.

What a nonsensical argument. By that logic, would it be OK if a Church gave the land for a hospital, paid 10% of the costs, but required that people of its faith get priority treatment???

@KeepItSpinning The London Oratory School has an English as an Additional Language rate of 43.1% compared to a national average of 19.2%

You want to compare English as a second language in central London, one of the most international places on the planet, vs the whole of England?

Again, text comprehension skills are worse than I thought. What part of "socio-economically selective" was unclear?

Some Catholic schools have a higher than average FSM rate. You are taking one school and extrapolating it to all.

This is past poor text comprehension skills - we are getting into poor cognitive skills territory. I have been very clear that single cases are irrelevant. Which is why I have quoted research proving that the Oratory is not an isolated case. But you chose to ignore that.

@NimbleMauveRobin The Oratory case you quote is from 2017. A whole cohort of pupils have passed through schools since then.

That's only because they were defeated in court!! They didn't reform internally - they fought tooth and nail, and lost. You seem to be forgetting this tiny detail.
Also, it remains socially selective to this day

Again your anti Catholic vitriol is concerning. Would you write about another religion in the same way on this forum?

I don't write about one specific religion because that would be like signing a death sentence, as recent history shows.

I couldn't care less what Catholics do, as long as they don't enslave innocent women, abuse innocent children, or expect everyone's taxes to fund a discriminatory education system. Is quoting historical facts vitriol now? The Magdalene Laundries are a historical fact. It carried on till the 1990s FFS, we are not talking about 500 years ago.

Anyway, you lot have confirmed that you welcome discrimination.
I fight it.
We are not the same. Not even close.

The statistics quoted above are at odds with the Catholic Education Services own figures which show that Catholic schools have a more diverse work force and more diverse pupil population than other schools.

You mean that someone marking their own homework paints a rosier picture? How shocking!!!

Wat I find intellectually dishonest is that those who are pro-religious discrimination in education take the socially selective well-performing schools as an example of good performance, and the undersubscribed, poorly performing schools (like St John Bosco) as an example of diversity. You can't have it both ways.

Your quotes from the humanist society are prime examples of someone marking their own homework!!!