The Hidden Burden on Middle-Class Families in Public Schools

[Anonymous]

This has always been the case. 40 years ago when our peers had kids it was a big deal.

[Anonymous]

Oh ffs OP. STFU and just take your kid to a museum. It’s fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

We did the same. Besides replying to this thread, I hardly give it a second thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

Is it a liberal mindset though? Wouldn't a true liberal want mixed-income schools (as opposed to very wealthy/very poor schools), more resources for everyone, and the like? I consider myself somewhat progressive and the segregated schools in our district don't align with my values.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

Is it a liberal mindset though? Wouldn't a true liberal want mixed-income schools (as opposed to very wealthy/very poor schools), more resources for everyone, and the like? I consider myself somewhat progressive and the segregated schools in our district don't align with my values.

I was referring to the notion that parents have an obligation to send their kids to public schools, regardless of the current state of those schools, and should feel shame if they don’t.

[Anonymous]

I'm super bummed when people peel off for privates, when I thought their values aligned more with ours in being part of public school and the wider community. Whether they're super wealthy or not. We could afford private (it would be a stretch, but...) trying hard to put my money where my mouth is and keep my kids in public - and invest in public.

[Anonymous]

Single income umc family here. I have been a sahm for many years. I supplemented at home extensively for my kids. We made sure that they went to public magnet schools so that they had a similar cohort and the classroom discipline was maintained. I was not willing to pay the private school costs. I have no qualms about not staying in public schools if I could afford it. I don't really care for equity over the welfare of my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm super bummed when people peel off for privates, when I thought their values aligned more with ours in being part of public school and the wider community. Whether they're super wealthy or not. We could afford private (it would be a stretch, but...) trying hard to put my money where my mouth is and keep my kids in public - and invest in public.

Oh please. I know your type. As soon as the balances tip you will pull your kid for private or an affluent public and then be crowing all about how the private is just a “better fit for our family.”

education is about education. Pretending it is some venue to prove your virtue and values does nothing to help anyone, least of all the kids without the privilege to up and move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm super bummed when people peel off for privates, when I thought their values aligned more with ours in being part of public school and the wider community. Whether they're super wealthy or not. We could afford private (it would be a stretch, but...) trying hard to put my money where my mouth is and keep my kids in public - and invest in public.

I guess I don't really understand that point of view, at least not in all contexts. IMO, there are huge institutional issues with public education that can only be solved with policy changes, not by individual citizens. My kid attending or not attending the neighborhood school doesn't make a difference. In any event, the major pull away from our neighborhood school are the public option schools. So whether it's the public option school or a private school, people are leaving. My one kid staying doesn't help anyone, and probably isn't what's best for my kid. I don't think it's a values question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

Is it a liberal mindset though? Wouldn't a true liberal want mixed-income schools (as opposed to very wealthy/very poor schools), more resources for everyone, and the like? I consider myself somewhat progressive and the segregated schools in our district don't align with my values.

I was referring to the notion that parents have an obligation to send their kids to public schools, regardless of the current state of those schools, and should feel shame if they don’t.

I don’t believe anyone other than a very very small group of true believers actually thinks that let alone actually makes decisions based on it. I happen to believe public is better for my particular kid but that’s not because my “values” demand it. I do get annoyed when parents peel off for charters and privates but not so much due to values but because it seemed like they were just chasing the latest trend, especially with charters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

Is it a liberal mindset though? Wouldn't a true liberal want mixed-income schools (as opposed to very wealthy/very poor schools), more resources for everyone, and the like? I consider myself somewhat progressive and the segregated schools in our district don't align with my values.

I was referring to the notion that parents have an obligation to send their kids to public schools, regardless of the current state of those schools, and should feel shame if they don’t.

I don’t believe anyone other than a very very small group of true believers actually thinks that let alone actually makes decisions based on it. I happen to believe public is better for my particular kid but that’s not because my “values” demand it. I do get annoyed when parents peel off for charters and privates but not so much due to values but because it seemed like they were just chasing the latest trend, especially with charters.

I agree with you that most people don't have that mindset. It certainly isn't a mainstream liberal value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s a liberal mindset that you have to sacrifice yourself and your children for the benefit of others. Sorry, but I “noped” out of that way of thinking years ago.

I went to public schools all my life and they were wonderful, but I had to send my kids to Catholic school to get a similar education for them.

We still pay taxes so the system gets money for schools we don’t use. That’s enough sacrifice from me.

Is it a liberal mindset though? Wouldn't a true liberal want mixed-income schools (as opposed to very wealthy/very poor schools), more resources for everyone, and the like? I consider myself somewhat progressive and the segregated schools in our district don't align with my values.

I was referring to the notion that parents have an obligation to send their kids to public schools, regardless of the current state of those schools, and should feel shame if they don’t.

I see this as a very common mindset where I am. A lot of people don't think private schools should even exist. And definitely not charters or homeschooling.

[Anonymous]

I saw my kids parochial school teacher in a tipsy social situation and she was gushing about how much she loves her job now and how awful public school teaching was. I asked "then why do you keep your kids at the public school?" And the answer was basically this, that her mom friends would guilt and shun her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm super bummed when people peel off for privates, when I thought their values aligned more with ours in being part of public school and the wider community. Whether they're super wealthy or not. We could afford private (it would be a stretch, but...) trying hard to put my money where my mouth is and keep my kids in public - and invest in public.

Oh please. I know your type. As soon as the balances tip you will pull your kid for private or an affluent public and then be crowing all about how the private is just a “better fit for our family.”

education is about education. Pretending it is some venue to prove your virtue and values does nothing to help anyone, least of all the kids without the privilege to up and move.

Lol, yep!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you are missing a piece.

Often the pressure for UMC families to stay in public education comes from middle class families or even UMC families who for whatever reason cannot afford or don't want to go private.

And the reason is not because they want the UMC kids to "share space" with poor kids. It's because middle class families who can't afford private want to have well-resourced peers with educated parents. They don't want to be left alone to struggle through a public education system where they are the minority and where the entire system pretty much has to focus on the neediest students at the expense of middle class kids who, in that environment, are considered privileged.

Thus educated middle class families where the parents are teachers, government workers, nurses, administrators, etc., don't want the kids of doctors and lawyers to abandon public school for private. They know their kids will greatly benefit from a system where they are still "in the middle" in terms of SES.

I also think that among low income families and the people who are focused on helping low income kids, there's little pressure on UMC families to stay in the system. Instead, I think there is resentment towards these families and a sense of relief when they leave, because if you are focused on the needs of low income families in public education, the interests and demands of UMC families can be seen as a distraction and detraction.

I have seen this dynamic first hand at a Title 1 school that was openly hostile to UMC parents who wanted things common in UMC suburban schools.

By grouping middle and UMC families together (where UMC families *can* afford private, sometimes with some sacrifice, and middle class families cannot) you are missing the truth of the dynamic.

Agree with this entirely. Have experience in the same environment.

Really? This has not been my experience. Most people have varying personal reasons, from faith, to location, to schedules, to sports, to culture and many other reasons that tip their scale. Guilting others is not done here so it isn't driving people to stay. I could also pay for private but have enjoyed the larger circles of public school, that wasn't my reason to stay though.
My reason maybe unique to our family or common, was that private tuition would have been a bigger stretch in early grades. Once it was on our radar, because we could easily afford it, we already had a million reasons to love our public and the families that make it. Shrinking their social world is a very hard sell and they haven't seen a happier result in their peers who switched.