Help end medical misogyny. Sign our petition.

Help end medical misogyny.
Sign our petition.

Sign the petition

Please or to access all these features

30 days only

What do parents hope to gain from the private school arms race?

175 replies

Abladeofgrass · 03/07/2026 23:28

Genuine question about the private school “arms race” - what’s actually the end goal?

This is a bit alien to me as I live outside the capital and my kid is just a baby, so genuinely asking rather than being obnoxious. But I read so many threads on here about the trajectory towards a “top” education, especially in and around London - feeder nursery for the 4+, then prep school, tutoring for 7+ or 11+, then one of the big-name secondaries, all aimed at Oxbridge or a “good” university. Sometimes this planning seems to start before the child is even born.

I get that everyone wants the best for their DC, but I’m curious what people feel the actual payoff is? There’s only one PM, only so many top media/barrister/City jobs, and surely plenty of those are filled by people from state schools or less famous privates. So what is it people are hoping this level of selection and competition actually gives their child - is it the school name, the network, the confidence, something else?

OP posts:
Phineyj · 05/07/2026 07:39

WonderingWanda · 04/07/2026 09:49

Read this op

Source: The Sutton Trust https://share.google/MOlHE5hkL7UMDccUd

That is such an interesting report! But what a shame they have misspelled "volatility" on the key findings page. Very easy to correct on a pdf too.

If you wanted your child to be an excellent cricketer and they had aptitude (or a pop star), it's evident they'd have more chance in the independent sector or the state sector respectively.

Regarding the OP's actual question, I worked for a school like that for a while and the parents either a) all know each other and/or b) come from other countries where using your money on something as important as education isn't frowned on. So it's a social group thing and a London specific thing. What a pp said about demand exceeding supply in many areas, not just education, is also true.

In my area of outer London, the council failed fir many years to create enough state school places/wraparound/holiday clubs and many parents work long hours in high paid jobs in finance and law and medicine. So the private sector has filled a gap. Parents are also interested in their kids being prepared for the plentiful grammars. That's a big saving compared to private: around £300k for two kids years 7-13. That's worth investment in primary.

Phineyj · 05/07/2026 07:42

P.S I've left my own typo in to show how easy it is 😂 (it is NOT easy to edit Mumsnet posts on a Samsung).

Phineyj · 05/07/2026 07:46

anon666 · 05/07/2026 00:49

Sadly it really works, that's why.

The public school system creates an elite. Once you're in, you're in. Once youre out, you're locked out for your entire life.

It's not academic, it's social status and network. And by that, I don't mean just the kids they go to school with. Once they leave, they quiz each other about schools amd who they "know".

If I'd understood it, I might have tried harder to get my kids in. I'm probably "middle" middle class, and my kids went to brilliant, high performing state schools. However, both of my girls have left there ill-prepared for mixing with private school kids, and they form most of the worlds they want to access for work.

The British class system is decided by age 18, sadly.

I think that sectors such as law and technology have addressed this though, so it could be done (in terms of access to the jobs, anyway). It would be interesting to know how it pans out socially and in terms of progression for those kids once they are in.

NOTANUM · 05/07/2026 08:02

I guess I am insider on this topic.

It’s not private v non-private that is the distinction in London/SE as many, many state schools outperform on academics.

It’s the parental attitude - these parents have “succeeded” in their own lives and want their children to be the “best” in the eyes of their community, colleagues and families. They won’t say that out loud but it’s true.

Best can mean academically (esp, for ethnic minorities) but it can also mean at music, swimming, hockey, fencing..! It seems you can’t be average these days but need a talent, and private schools are good at finding that. Those who can’t access private schools may be tutoring at 4 and getting their kids to practise the violin for 2 hours every day. Different school systems, same approach.

I’ve seen the fallout from this non-stop pushing but generally speaking it works to some level. The only issue is that some children never feel quite good enough.

hellohellochef · 05/07/2026 08:47

OP, just my view but:

There are some parents are competitive and want their kid(s) to end up at the best unis then the best jobs as they think this means their kids will have an easier life. Some may also want to brag about it later.

There are some parents that may want their kid to follow in their footsteps to become a dr or lawyer or to go to the same uni they went to etc

There are also some people who just want the best that money can buy / the best they can afford.

HOWEVER, many parents (myself included) want none of that (i.e. not focused on uni / job / prestige).

Many parents like me choose a school based on which can provide their kids with the optimum environment to thrive and reach their potential - whatever that may be. It doesn’t always have to be academic. It could be more attention / smaller class sizes, fewer distractions, more variety / extra curricular, more focus on music, arts, sports, better facilities etc. Their kid may be SEN and may benefit from specialised learning, more one-on-one time, smaller class sizes and less distraction too.

This is not available in the state sector hence go private.

People will select nurseries up to 2 years before their child is born and that’s not because they want their kids to do better in the future but based on many of the things above - good standard of childcare and safety but also learning and development opportunities.

So it’s not that different. People should always be given a choice to go private if they wish, and not made to feel bad about it. If anything, Governments should lower the barriers to entry and not increase them by increasing the price.

FatterthanBarbie · 05/07/2026 09:00

I know one parent saying that she will be sending her kids to private school because she didn't want them talking like the local Asian kids.

hellohellochef · 05/07/2026 09:05

@FatterthanBarbieThats hilarious. Loads of Asian kids in private schools. We picked our private school based on their being lots of diversity.

strawberrybubblegum · 05/07/2026 09:06

StrictlyCoffee · 04/07/2026 20:56

How many children are demonstrably highly academic or capable from birth or even before, which is what the OP was
talking about?

This is rather inflexible thinking.

Parents generally assume that their children are likely to have a similar ability to themselves, because intelligence is highly heritable and the traits that allow a child to make use of it - like conscientiousness, openness to experience and creative thinking - are partly heritable and partly learned from their environment, so are unlikely to be wildly different from their parents.

But the parents don't rigidly assume something fixed, ignore what their child is like every day... every month... every year, and follow a rigid path without change for 18 years Confused

What exactly do you think they're doing in the preschool years? Engaging with their child and giving them interesting experiences is what parents do for the child's healthy development, not for school entrance. And that healthy development - which they support for its own sake - is all that's needed for the child to get into their first school. Even a highly selective one - providing the child is bright enough for it. And yes, you can tell that early, just from how they engage.

Then the parents continue to support their child in learning and growing and becoming themselves - providing every opportunity they can because the opportunity is worthwhile in itself, for enjoyment and development. The school supports the child's academics: not much is really needed from the parents apart from facilitating unless the child is going from state primary to selective private secondary (and even then, the kind of kids we're talking about are often self-sufficient enough to drive their own preparation by late primary).

At each stage, the parents adjust what they're doing, to reflect their child's current needs and interests. Always trying to facilitate and support what will help their child in whatever way they can - admittedly with a fairly high expectation of what's possible.

Isn't that what you do for your child? I can't really imagine a different way to parent.

JuliettaCaeser · 05/07/2026 09:18

Anecdotally both mine have friends from both various state and private schools. It doesn’t seem to matter to the teens where you go to school - maybe I am missing something.

Dd1s new crowd at uni are a mix of top name public schools and ordinary comps.

MeridaBrave · 05/07/2026 09:22

My older 2 kids went to state schools until year 11 and private school year 12-13. Both at RG unis. Most of their friends were at state schools. I’m not sure what the extra opportunities are - maybe it’s stuff like good sports whilst at school? My younger DC is staying at his state school for year 12-13.

strawberrybubblegum · 05/07/2026 09:27

And just to clarify: opportunities for enjoyment, successful learning and growth - and the development of those crucial traits such as conscientiousness, openness to experience, creative thinking, critical thinking, resilience etc - are why the parents choose those top private schools.

The parents are aiming to support their children's development every step of the way, in everything they do. A great school with the same aims is an important part of that, given how much time children spend at school and the influence it has on them.

JuliettaCaeser · 05/07/2026 09:28

Most of dd2s state 6th form are from the local private schools. Makes sense most sport drops off at
this age (part time jobs /driving lessons/ social lives and a levels take up their time) and the disruptive kids have left so the upside of going private reduces.

Phineyj · 05/07/2026 09:31

For my niece (state up to 16) private gave her access to the classes she needed to study Classics (without having to do most of it outside school) and small classes, plus although she didn't spell it out, she wasn't keen to go from girls only to mixed A level classes.

sychoologikal · 05/07/2026 09:35

Through my work in mental health, I’ve seen how this kind of parental mindset can have lasting consequences for some children.

Many grow into adults with a chronic sense that they’re never doing well enough, despite being objectively successful by most measures. It can manifest as poor self-esteem, depression, anxiety, eating disorders and relentless perfectionism. They can spend their lives feeling as though they’re constantly performing, always chasing the next achievement without ever feeling like they’ve arrived.

I recognise that my perspective is shaped by the fact that I work with people where this approach hasn’t gone well. Even so, I’m often struck by how many people I meet who have objectively successful lives on paper still carry a deep sense that they are never quite enough.

The issue isn’t excellence or ambition. I think children benefit from high expectations when paired with unconditional acceptance and the knowledge that their worth isn’t dependent on their achievements. Problems arise when achievement becomes the primary measure of their self worth. Over time their identity can become tied to their output, status, or who they know, rather than to who they are inside.

To be clear, I don’t think this is about private schools being inherently good or bad. In general, I think many private schools provide an excellent education. I had both state and private education myself and my experience of private education was very positive. The smaller class sizes, fewer classroom disruptions, and greater resources created a better learning environment for me. They can also broaden a child’s sense of what’s possible, and parents often have more influence in advocating for the support their child needs.

My point isn’t about private education itself. It’s about a particular parental mindset, where the focus from the age of four or five is on securing a place at the most selective, prestigious schools, rather than simply choosing the school that is the best fit for the individual child. Those are different motivations that can create very different pressures for children.

It’s worth considering what it means to grow up in an environment where the level of competition is so intense from such a young age. Even if a child is simply told to ‘do your best’ they’re still comparing themselves with a peer group where expectations and standards are exceptionally high. Whether intentionally or not, that environment sets the bar remarkably high and can shape how children come to measure their own worth.

I’d also add that sending your children to elite private schools doesn’t guarantee the networks that many parents hope for. Those networks exist, but they’re often longstanding, intergenerational, and less accessible than people assume. Simply attending the school doesn’t automatically make someone part of them. A child may leave with confidence, polish, good manners and the cultural capital that comes from those environments, but not necessarily with the influential network parents imagined they were buying into.

sychoologikal · 05/07/2026 09:40

I also want to be clear that I’m answering the OP’s specific question. This thread seems to have become a broader state versus private school debate, but I don’t think that’s what the OP was asking. They were not asking why people opt for private education in general. There are plenty of valid reasons to pay for a good education. They were asking about the mindset of parents who prioritise getting their children into the most selective, prestigious schools from a very young age and that’s the point I’m responding to.

Squirrelsnut · 05/07/2026 10:06

I've just retired from teaching in an expensive private school for decades. I'll miss the kids but not the parents...

JuliettaCaeser · 05/07/2026 10:15

Such an interesting post syschool.

The very pushy alpha parents forcing their own version of “success” onto
their children. There was an upsetting post recently about a father insisting a son stays at his old school where he is unhappy and is not allowed to pursue drama which is what he wants to do. Son predictably acting out.

Wonder if AI will upend the traditional perception of “success” anyway. Graduate job market is terrifying.

MxCactus · 05/07/2026 10:53

Abladeofgrass · 04/07/2026 21:36

Thanks for this. I think this is what I was trying to explore, and perhaps I poorly worded my OP or at least the thread title.

I do understand that there are many reasons why people choose to privately educate. I’m sure that the experience at a lot of private schools is wonderful, and that the education offered at some of the top schools is incredible.

But, I suppose what I’m trying to work out is what the super competitive, “tutor your kid from the age of two or three, and then essentially keep them competing at every step of their education” type of journey adds, in comparison to just a really good school. It must add something, otherwise why are all these children doing the 4+ and 7+?

To my mind, the benefit has got to max out somewhere. Like, how much extra value can be added beyond a certain point? And is there not a tipping point for some (not saying all) kids where the extra pressure to get into the Top School, kind of offsets any problem that might have come from only going to the Top Ten (but not Top) School?

Also, whilst I accept that wealth may correlate with success and academic prowess in some cases, I do think it’s funny how all the kids whose parents have signed them up for the 4+ just happen to be really bright and studious (according to the MN threads). And it’s nothing to the parents having one eye on the assessments from the embryonic stage? As if the 93% of kids going to state schools and ~6% of kids going to other private schools just so happen to be the clever ones?

Edited

I completely agree with you OP. I don't get it. I live in London, me and DH in competitive careers, and a lot of my peers are pushing 4+ etc and I just don't understand it. Surely it's not going to have that much impact on overall outcomes?

My 3 year old is going to the local comp (which is good!) and she's already taught herself to read without me pushing anything. I don't think she needs any more pressure at this age and I actually think it's probably counterintuitive for a lot of kids as it'll put them off the fun of learning.

Personally I think it's about the parents. Their status with other parents and their competitiveness

MxCactus · 05/07/2026 11:09

MxCactus · 05/07/2026 10:53

I completely agree with you OP. I don't get it. I live in London, me and DH in competitive careers, and a lot of my peers are pushing 4+ etc and I just don't understand it. Surely it's not going to have that much impact on overall outcomes?

My 3 year old is going to the local comp (which is good!) and she's already taught herself to read without me pushing anything. I don't think she needs any more pressure at this age and I actually think it's probably counterintuitive for a lot of kids as it'll put them off the fun of learning.

Personally I think it's about the parents. Their status with other parents and their competitiveness

To add: my kids are ahead but I'd feel the same if I had a non academic child. In fact I think I'd be pushing them into vocational/entrepreneurial careers rather than giving them extra tutoring because they were behind in school

C152 · 05/07/2026 11:16

Missjonesandrigby · 04/07/2026 21:43

If a child is as thick as mince sending him/her to a private school won't fix that.

No, but being at that sort of school will introduce them to the people who will help them later in life - the mate you played hockey with will ask his dad to offer you an internship, they or someone else will offer you your first job, further along the line, the people you know will push you up that ladder etc. I can't afford private school, but if I could, it would certainly be the route I'd choose for any child.

EweCee · 05/07/2026 11:18

We chose private when state primary failed our child - a 7 year old bullied so badly they didn't think they were worth being alive. Luckily we had the chance to act when the school was ignoring and pulled them out and the only option with immediate start in London was a private. Private gave them a nurturing environment to rebuild and thrive. When it came to secondary, we chose happiness and wider education and co-curricular opportunities to let them continue to thrive and enjoy teenage years, not just survive. It was never about future connections, jobs, 'keeping up with the Jones' for us.

Abra1t · 05/07/2026 11:42

C152 · 05/07/2026 11:16

No, but being at that sort of school will introduce them to the people who will help them later in life - the mate you played hockey with will ask his dad to offer you an internship, they or someone else will offer you your first job, further along the line, the people you know will push you up that ladder etc. I can't afford private school, but if I could, it would certainly be the route I'd choose for any child.

It really doesn’t work like that any more. Even if you get an internship via a friend, you will not be advantaged at any big firm interview for a permanent job because their diversity requirements will probably work against you.

JuliettaCaeser · 05/07/2026 11:46

Exactly. Dh firm is super strict and right on. Annoying as he can’t help dd! But fairer I guess.

The only people that may get an in are the kids of high paying long term clients. Which only a tiny minority are. And even then.

Miranda65 · 05/07/2026 11:50

I have no skin in this game, but surely it's obvious? Smaller classes, academic rigour, good pastoral care, opportunities for sports, music, drama etc. And most of all, proper discipline and lack of disruption. It's not about every child becoming PM, but having a happy school life, making good friends and fulfilling their potential.

DadBodAlready · 05/07/2026 12:54

The whole intent for us was for DS to have a good education with minimal disruptions, plus his primary education was overseas in the local systems where we lived and we wanted him to get a British education, and to be fair he thrived. It was never about Oxbridge, although he was offered a place at Cambridge to study medicine, but he turned that down much to the chagrin of his teachers and his headmaster

Swipe left for the next trending thread