Cruel School?

Rainey_LB

I work in a school office and I do think if this is the case it was a little harsh, but it is very difficult we are not allowed to make any profit for trips etc and there is no money given to the schools in the budget to pay for such things.

For all important letters such as trips, dinner money bills, permission to sporting events etc we send out the letters on paper with the children and on email, we try and give as much notice as possible, the children are reminded they must take these letters home, a list is put up in the class and the children are checked off it and reminded each day to check with mum if the form has not been returned.........yet although we are not supposed to we continually find ourselves having to chase all these things so the children don't miss out, with parents denying having received it or not having time to check their email!! Parents do need to take responsibility and if they are having financial difficulties speak to the school so help can arranged.

.........one other thought is that my children's school goes to a pantomime each year, the whole school goes but often some of the parents of the nursery children opt to withdraw them as at that age they are still sometimes afraid of the costumes and the 'baddies' etc.....could it have been this?

Fang_3

kittiej wrote: »

Now that is interesting thebaileys

Fang how do you know the parents smoke and drink cider?

I wish I could afford to smoke and drink at least I'd have something to give up then lol.

I think your point about the poorest children benefitting the most is true - but this wasn't a trip it was something which came into school and the children were physically removed whereas a trip the children just wouldn't turn up for school.

I don't. I was replying to the hypothetical parents being discussed.

It doesn't matter whether the children went to the experience or the experience came to the children, it still needs to be paid for. At least this way a message was sent.

cheepskate_2

Why should I as a parent support and subsidice other parents that are not willing to make the financial sacrificies that i do.
Just because I pay for my childs clubs/school activities doesnt mean that I can afford it it just means i take responsibility for my childs outgoings.

kittiej

I see I thought you'd read something I'd missed.

Maybe parents should be asked if they want to be having to pay for trips and entertainments instead of it being thrust upon us. Perhaps these things should be optional and the majority rule.

I don't know, it sounds wrong to me and Im sure my 2 wouldn't be that bothered if there weren't any trips to amusement parks etc. What happened to going for walks and exploring the surroundings?

Why does everything have to cost money these days?

Fang_3

kittiej wrote: »

I see I thought you'd read something I'd missed.

Maybe parents should be asked if they want to be having to pay for trips and entertainments instead of it being thrust upon us. Perhaps these things should be optional and the majority rule.

I don't know, it sounds wrong to me and Im sure my 2 wouldn't be that bothered if there weren't any trips to amusement parks etc. What happened to going for walks and exploring the surroundings?

Why does everything have to cost money these days?

They are optional. You can choose that your child does not go. If everyone did so then the trips wouldn't go ahead. Obviously the majority of parents care enough about their children and so ensure that they get a well-rounded education.

bestpud

thebaileys wrote: »

I totally agree pirate fairy no one would have been any the wiser, and in years to come if this happens again the children will be singled out by others.

Apart from the parent who overheard the another parent going off on one and refusing to pay any more money to the nursery...? :cool:

nottslass wrote: »

What I think is the worst thing about this particular instance is that there must have been sufficient money collected to pay for the entertainment yet the school still chose to exclude nursery aged children !!

I could almost understand the reasoning of excluding non payers if the activity or trip was being charged on a "per person" basis,but in this instance the show would have cost the same however many children attended.

I would be seriously questioning the ethos of any nursery that treated a 3 year old like this and would be putting in a strongly worded complaint.

I think this may have been about principle tbh.

If a parent is outright refusing to fund any extra activities for their child, and within earshot of other parents, what is the nursery supposed to do?

Should they let it go, knowing other parents will be aware this one family get away without paying because they refuse to?

I'm guessing this isn't the first time and tbh the other children may have been caught in the cross fire, but then again, maybe they are all serial non-payers?

I am sure they'd have been accommodating if a parent had told them they simply could not afford the fee, and so they should, but I fail to see why parents should be allowed to send the nursery and other parents on a guilt trip.

WhiteHorse

It might be a subscription only event, but it's very bad taste to openly single children out in this way. It should have been more discreet.

vaio

vaio wrote: »

As it was a theatre group I suspect the cost to the school was fixed and not dependant on whether these 4 tiny ones watched or not.

To me it just seems mean & petty (welcome to 2010!!) but I can see the other sides point of view too.

My view is if it’s a school/learning event then it should be free to all, if it’s not a school/learning event then it shouldn’t be happening.

Charging for things like this is just another form of hidden tax, much better to make it transparent and fund schools appropriately.

Fang wrote: »

So everyone should suffer a basic education regardless or whether or not some parents would like their children to have sponsored extras?

You have to remember that it's often the poorer children that benefit the most from school trips and activities because their parents couldn't afford to fund the entire family to do the trip, but one child is affordable. It's those that choose not to forgo their daily fags or cider and expect the decent parents to pay for their brats, that are responsible for this.

To be frank you lost my attention with your “scum” comment in post #32 and “brat” in the one above but you’ve missed the point I was making.

It’s not a matter of “suffering a basic education” it's schools providing a full & rounded education independent of the parents ability (or willingness) to put their hands in their pockets to fund extras. Schools are there to educate and help all children develop their full educational potential.

If the event is part of this process then it should be free (as in transparently funded from general taxation).


If the event is not part of this but is a nice jolly (like the skiing trip to Canada someone mentioned) then the school should be having nothing to do with it.

.

*Louise*

pjcox2005 wrote: »

Effectivelty should the school request the wage slips of all parents and then get them to pay the proportion of child costs dependent on how much money they have compared with others?

HAHAHAHA - no way!!:rotfl::rotfl:

I do feel sorry for the kids the OP mentioned. The costs were already paid, but it does sound like the nursery school was trying to make a point, especially if one of the parents had complained and refused to pay.

It does make you wonder why some of the parents didn't keep their child off that day. I couldn't bear the thought of my little ones sitting seperate from everyone else and missing out because I couldn't/wouldn't pay.

Our nursery school asks for £60 funds a year. I pay £15 a term but they let people pay £1.50 a week if that's what suits them best. That covers everything - snacks, daily milk (which would be £23 a year alone), trips and entertainment. Bargain imo.

meg72

thebaileys wrote: »

Hi,

Last week my son's nursery arranged for an outside theatre type group to come in to the school, and put on a show for the children, songs, dancing etc...

Parents were asked to pay £5.00, and were also allowed to watch the show with the children in the school hall.

I noticed that four of the children from the nursery class, were escorted off to another classroom just before the show started.

One of the Grandmothers asked why they weren't watching the show, as one of the children was her friends little one.

We were told they hadn't paid there £5.00 so could not watch the show.

The grandmother paid the £5.00 for her friends child, as she was certain it was a mix up,the little girl is collected by mother/father-the letter asking for the money may have got lost.

I have being thinking about this all weekend. These children are only 3-4 years old, and if there parents do not pay, why should they be punished.

I find it very cruel that they were not allowed to watch.

Does anyone else think this is unfair?

I think it more than unfair, I think its absolutely bang out of order
these were 3-4 year olds for christs sake. I would be very interested in how the situation was explained to them and why were they escorted out in such a public manner to invite comment.
why were other people told that the parents had not paid, surely such matters are deemed to be confidential..

I further find some of the posts unbelievable. Teach them a a lesson indeed, they are little more than babies and should have been treated with care, respect and the dignity they deserve, Not
singled out and left wide open to comment, it seems by all and sundry, it will surely invite comments from the other little ones.

Cruel, unkind and absolutely uncalled treatment of a vunerable child.