So called left wingers who pay school fees

Leicestershire Director of Education in the 70s was just slightly prejudiced jeni and very left wing.

I sent my children to private schools because my son was being bullied at his junior school and couldn't have coped with a large comp, which at that time had a bad reputation. Having done it,for one, we felt we had to GDP the same for dd!
In fact, she is an 'elbows out type and would have been fine)
I was a governer of our local church school. Also on the PTA of their stare junior school!

Granjura - we did try to become school governors but were discounted because we had opted out!

That was for your previous post in particular.

Good on ya, jura!

Yes, I would have had much more respect for those neighbours and friends who opted to send their children to private schools, due to large classes at our local primary- had they then decided to become School Governors or get involved at local level to improve things. But they didn't - once people opt out, be it from education or health services- they rarely take time and effort, and use their own influence (because of their high ranking or professional jobs) to improve things for the majority. Would getting stuck in, although their children didn't go to the local school, be 'doing down' their own?

I have not posted so far as everything I think has been said - I sent my two to the local comprehensive school even though we could have afforded (just) to send them to a very 'good' school - Upton Convent. I was a head in the same authority and apart from my own scruples I thought it would send out a very bad signal if I did not use the system for my own children.
I agree absolutely with granjura that the wider community has to be considered and the vaccination question is a very good parallel.
My daughter became a parent governor of her children's C of E primary school (the only school in the village) and she was able to get many improvements implemented.

Of course choosing to spend limited resources on school fees rather than other things is a sacrifice let alone working two jobs, longer hours etc to earn it in the first place. But, it should in a perfect world not be necessary, it should be that all children get the education best for them, but the world is far from perfect and doing your child down won't improve it. And then of course there is the argument that all children should be able to reach the peaks of whatever they choose - reality is that some children just are less able, less committed, less focussed and pushing them into a top-level education would be as bad for them as not.

This is hard - I don't know what we would have done if our local schools had been 'bad' (whatever that means, my 'bad' could be your 'good'). And yet, what I have been trying to say is that it is a vicious circle. Same for the health service. Schools which have some problems, become worse and worse as those who can afford it, who are also often those who have more influence and clout, jump ship. If all the parents who could make a difference and influence things leave- then schools become more and more polarised.

It is very difficult in the UK, as things have gone so far for far too long- with a long traditions of (so-called) public schools and fee paying schools, CofE and other denominational schools, etc. In most other European countries, this has not been the case, and children have always grown up and been educated in mixed social groups- and the parents who can support the whole school for all the children. The concept of 'doing one's best for one's children' - even if to the detriment of others, and society at large, is an anathema- as it is detrimental to all in the long term.

I'd perhaps make a comparison with the immunisation of children - what is more important, the right of an individual to say 'no' - with the current huge increase in diseases like measles, etc- with the enormous risks involved. Or the rights of children as a whole being protected by a 90%+ immunisation. In many countries, children are not accepted into school until their immunisations are up-to-date- and this is accepted as best for all. My parents always taught me that my 'rights' had to be curtailed if it affected the rights of others.

I am fully aware this might be controversial, but the bigger picture is sometimes more important than the individual. Do we want a society which is so polarised that the 'lucky and better off' cannot play in the park or walk to school safely? Think of the situation in South Africa for instance- where anyone with a higher standard of living has to drive the children to school armed with a tazer and a gun - and live behind electrified fences. We do get the society we deserve sometimes.

Here all the kids go to the local school, and walk there happily together, rich or poor, irrespective of class, colour and religion. We always felt that it was our duty to help the school system for all, not just our own- and that in the end, it would also benefit our children in a different way.

My kids started their primary education in Leicestershire,kitty and were subjected to that county's avant-garde notions. What a good thing that the trend for open plan schools has died the death. I was Chair of Governors at such a school and every OFSTED inspection made the point that it was detrimental to teaching and learning, which it certainly was. We managed to use these reports to bulldoze persuade the local authority to apply for a grant to build a new school in which all classes were taught in separate rooms out of earshot of the other classes. Kids loved it, teachers loved it and parents thoroughly approved. As did OFSTED.

My grandson starts at an independent school this September after attending the local primary school for two years. My DD has given the school every chance to improve. Something as simple as being heard read at least once a week couldn't be guaranteed even with a TA in the class. This was simply not acceptable.

Neither my DD or SiL earn huge wages and it will mean every pound will have to be accounted for. I do take your point Bags, but this is not something they would have chosen had the quality of primary education in their area been adequate.

We sent our children to independent schools after we had a run in with the local Director of Education when we tried to exercise our right to choose a school. We asked to send our children to a school just outside our catchment area as it was not operating on Open Plan lines. His reply was that 'all schools will be open plan in a couple of years - it's the way forward!'

I don't think being educated privately made them unable to get on with other people. They played football, cricket, swam, danced and acted with the rest their peers in our town. They were taught, by us, that they were in a privileged position, that there were people not so fortunate and that we should strive for a better, fairer world.

Academic education might be given at school but it only a part of education for life most of which happens in the family and the outside world.

An acquaintance of mine - an active member of the Labour Party - justified sending his son to a fee-paying school by saying that although he didn't want to, his wife did, and that theirs was an equal opportunity household - therefore he gave in to his wife's persuasion. More likely for the sake of domestic peace, I would say.

I think the point was that some people, however hard they try, never have the opportunity to "make the sacrifice" of whether to spend a lot of money on schooling. In other words, some people, by the nature of human society, have more choices than others. Once someone has acquired money, of course they can spend it how they like, so long as it doesn't damage anyone else. Some people cannot acquire money whether by working hard or by borrowing. And no, that is not necessarily their fault. If they are not intelligent enough, say, to do more than a menial, low paid job, or are restricted from earning a lot by other means, they are stuck and their choices are limited.

i don't think I'd ever call spending money a "sacrifice". It's a choice, if you have it, that's all.

How can any of you say that parents who send their children to independent schools have not made sacrifices? Of course they have! If, as you say, it cost £28k a year to pay school fees that is a sacrifice in anyone's life! The fact that they find a way to, usually, borrow the money does not mean it is not a sacrifice. Of course a lot of people cannot find the money to do so but then everyone makes choices about what they can and can't afford, e.g shall we have chops or mince for dinner.

Nobody bashes people for spending their money on cars or holiday, why bash those who spend their money on their children?

The truth of it all is that in an ideal world there should be no difference between state and independent schools, and in the same way that there should be no difference between NHS and private hospitals - but there is. And, because there is, and because parents want to do the best for their children, if they can, they buy the best rather than impose their chosen lives on their children. That doesn't stop them from working for the best for others.

Good point, vegas. During the Thatcher years my up until then NHS dentist when private. I stayed with him because he was a good dentist and there weren't any NHS dentists around anyway. Then he retired and sold his business to two young men who went back to being NHS dentists. I stayed with the same practice until I moved to Scotland. Living in Scotland, naturally I have an NHS dentist once again, because Scotland is civilised about things like that.

So, much as I believe in state 'sponsored' health services, I was availing myself of the best of what was available at the time when I needed it. Nothing hypocritical about that.

I consider myself a staunch socialist, and have spent my professional life in the state sector. However, both my children were educated at independent schools, as their father is a dyed in the wool conservative. I didn't marry him for his political views! Despite our divorce in the years to come, he was a good father who was determined that his children should have the best start in life, according to his lights and I respected this view. I think there has been something of an assumption in this thread that parents always share the same political views, when I'm sure that often they don't and have to find a compromise that works for them.

I wonder if some contributors also think that socialists shouldn't avail themselves of private health and dental care?

it's easy to be full of principles when the local state schools are safe. When they are unsafe, children's needs come first. Mind you, our catholic school weekly fees were the equivalent of 2 hours pay for a cleaner (the lowest pay around), and free for the unemployed, so they were hardly elitist.

I am not of any political persuasion but I do believe in equality and fairness. We could have afforded to send our children to private schools but, living in an affluent middle class area, we reasoned that if a child couldn't go to a comprehensive school there, where could they. So, off they went when most of their primary school friends went to direct grant grammar schools. Lo and behold, son went to Cambridge and daughter became an architect. Would they have done any better or been any happier at a selective school? Who knows. Our children only have one chance of experiencing school and as parents we do our best. We saved a lot of money by sticking with the state school, so went on good holidays and were able to be more generous when they were at university and subsequently.
But staunch socialists who send their children to private schools are just hypocrites of the highest order.

Happy families live in happy societies- sometimes we also have to look at the wider picture.

Nelliemoser I've always felt irritated when people make that statement as well.

They sound so virtuous, as though they think the rest of us with children at state schools are just too selfish/hedonistic to make sacrifices.

I went to the usual local schools in West Yorkshire - including a grammar school after passing my 11+. Private schools were not even considered.

Here in Australia catholic schools are open to all, and some have very affordable fees. I am left wing, and have no religious beliefs now, though I was a catholic back then.

Anyway, my children's safety and well being was more important to me than any political principles, so i sent them to local co-ed catholic junior and senior schools. The state equivalents were rough as guts, and a friend's daughter ended up with a permanent injury at the local state school. We lived in a very working class area. However, I have always fought for better funding for state schools, and nowadays they have improved.

My son now teaches at the same high school he attended, but he did his prakticum at the local state schools. One day after he'd been teaching a while, he came up to us and hugged us, saying "Thanks for going to the trouble and expense of sending me and my brother to St Francis Xavier and Peter Clavier schools, and not sending us to state schools. it made all the difference to my happiness at school"

Family before politics.

Re school fees etc. I live in an area of cheshire with good local comprehensives. If I lived in a difficult inner city area I might think differently.

One thing that really makes me angry is hearing people say "we make sacrifices to send our childern to private schools."
We managed reasonably well without debt but we could never have afforded school fees!
The current average south of England rate is now about £14,000 a year. that would now be £28k for 2 children. We never had that amount of surplus money even by the equivalents in the 1980s.

No! those lucky enough to have that sort of money dont make "sacrifices" they just have enough money to have choices as to what to spend it on. They clearly have no concept of how the other half live.

Just what I was about to say Bags - you can spend a lifetime trying to do what your mum wants, when you are yourself a grown adult and her opinion on what you should or shouldn't be doing for your own children (or with your career) is a total irrelevance. Stick to your guns - you know your own children best and only you can know what your aspirations are for them. Don't let yourself be browbeaten by her or anyone else!!