Private schooling

Person_one

emsywoo123 wrote: »

Why do you think this?

Because its true?

Why do you think it isn't?

emsywoo123

Person_one wrote: »

Because its true?

Why do you think it isn't?

It's not true at DDs school.

You cannot just say something is true because you think it is? Where are the facts?

Itismehonest

Person_one wrote: »

I'm not talking about money, really.

A lot of people who put their children in private schools absolutely scrimp and live like paupers in order to do so. That kind of parent can't send their kids off to Switzerland!

True, as a single parent I did it myself. However, you'd still have those with more money who were unable to send abroad but able to buy into certain UK catchment areas etc. which would only knock those in the middle back. Look at the arguments about Grammar schools.
Most people will always try to do what they see as the best for their child's future given their own circumstances. You'd just end up with elite areas & educational ghettos, unfortunately.

There's only one way to put Public Schools out of business for most UK parents & that is to raise the level of State system so parents don't feel the need to go private. If the need for private education has gone for most UK parents then they will send their children to state schools. Why pay if you don't have to?

Person_one

emsywoo123 wrote: »

It's not true at DDs school.

You cannot just say something is true because you think it is? Where are the facts?

So there are no parents at that school who are making huge financial sacrifices to send their children there? I suppose if she goes to Harrow or Eton that's probably true.

Most private schools however will have a lot of people who are not particularly well off but decide to prioritise private schooling and go without for many years to pay for it.

I know they exist, because I've met several of them, and I've also seen them share their experiences on here.

Person_one

Itismehonest wrote: »

There's only one way to put Public Schools out of business for most UK parents & that is to raise the level of State system so parents don't feel the need to go private. If the need for private education has gone for most UK parents then they will send their children to state schools. Why pay if you don't have to?

Or you could just outlaw them...

balletshoes

emsywoo123 wrote: »

It's not true at DDs school.

You cannot just say something is true because you think it is? Where are the facts?

to be fair though, unless you know the financial incomings and outgoings of every parent at your daughter's school, you can't say that there aren't parents at your school who don't scrimp and save to send their children to that school.

I believe there probably are lots of parents who sacrifice a lot financially (and that could include scrimping on other aspects of their household/family life) to send their children to private school - and they may be perfectly happy to do so. Its a choice they make.

Itismehonest

Person_one wrote: »

Or you could just outlaw them...

Taking that line on a different slant.
You could also outlaw private health. However, people would still raise the money to go abroad for treatment. Others would be forced to go NHS & lead to longer waiting times etc.

If people can afford to pay for themselves (as well as paying through their tax for the others) then there is very little sense in depriving them of the opportunity. It never benefits the many in the end.

The tax paid into the pot remains the same be it for health or education. All that would happen is that you would be forcing thousands of people to use the system who now pay extra to use an alternative. There would actually be less money available per capita under your system.

miss_independent

I'd say at my school around 5% of children at the private schools I attended had parents who "scrimped and saved" and no one appeared to struggle that much. In these cases often grandparents helped to pay the fees. The majority of children had parents who were both doctors, in the law profession, business owners, bankers, teachers at private schools themselves, professional sportsmen and women, well paid civil servants etc.

GobbledyGook

I think the thinking behind not particularly liking the divisiveness of state vs private is mostly over-ruled by the fact that we won't sacrifice our children's education for our own values, if we have the luxury of being able to afford the choice.

I don't like private education. I don't like the divisions it causes, I don't like the whole "old boys network" when it comes to jobs and the likes and I don't like the fact that the chances a child has in life could come down to their parents ability to afford an education. I think all children should get an equal education as a fundamental.

However, despite that I know that my decision one way or the other isn't going to change the entire system. So had one of those private schools been the best option for my child/ren I would have sent them.

I have my principals and opinions and views, but I wouldn't have my child be my guinea pig for them when it came to something so important as their education.

I don't agree with private education as such, but if my younger daughter continues in her current form then her father and I will look at private secondary schools because it seems she'd benefit from a very academic set up.

I know that makes me somewhat of a hypocrite. However my opinions are mine, they are not my child's and my job as her Mum is to do the best for her. I'd rather all 3 of my children stayed in the state system for their entire education, but if any of them would be better suited elsewhere I won't allow my principals to block that.

emsywoo123

miss_independent wrote: »

I'd say at my school around 5% of children at the private schools I attended had parents who "scrimped and saved" and no one appeared to struggle that much. In these cases often grandparents helped to pay the fees. The majority of children had parents who were both doctors, in the law profession, business owners, bankers, teachers at private schools themselves, professional sportsmen and women, well paid civil servants etc.

Exactly.

Why are people just hazarding guesses at things? I never said NO ONE was, but this "majority scrimping" etc just isn't true at DDs school.