| As some posters above noted, the real issues come out when everyone is an adult and one sibling is more successful than another. I've certainly seen it play out this way with my own sibling who went to public; we have a toxic relationship in part because my sibling (rightly or not) believes that my private school education got me to where I am. To be fair, the public options where we were back then was not nearly as good as they are here, but please know that this kind of decision by parents can have real repercussions vis a vis family dynamics down the line. |
| I have one kid in private and one in public--it's what's best for my kids, and they know that. There's the benefit that they each get their own lives. It's harder on us as the parents to get everywhere, but it's worth it to know they each have the opportunities we want for them. |
And that's the problem: "opportunities you want for them" What about opportunities kids want for themselves. They're too young to know that you are cheaping out. If you can afford private, both kids should go period. Just because there is no rivalry now doesn't mean there won't be in the future. I just don't understand parents who kill themselves by putting kids in 2 different schools with 2 different spring breaks, but then again if you're too cheap to send both to private you're probably not taking kids anywhere on spring break. |
My child in public school is far more likely to be "successful" than my kid in private school. I don't know why you would assume otherwise. Give each kid what each needs. That might not be the same thing. |
| We put youngest in private because public wasn't a good fit and took oldest on tours of privates so oldest could see whether private looked better. Oldest went to many schools and concluded that they weren't doing the same level of work as FCPS AAP and so oldest would rather stay in public (and try for TJ where oldest is now). This occurred at 4th grade. |