What is it like to be a family at an elite NWDC Private who can just barely afford it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it?

I guess FA is the only way the children of privileged, well-educated parents can learn. If only this country had free education for children. Oh wait, it does! And the public schools in and around this area are consistently ranked high and sending thousands of kids to top ranking colleges every year! Next time you brag about the work you do, you should also praise the big law parents who are subsidizing your kid's education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it?

OK. So I have to work in a stressful job while a nanny "raises" my kids, so that I can earn enough to pay tuition that allows your kids to attend a private school? Let's reserve FA for people who don't have the education to earn enough to pay tuition.

[Anonymous]

NP here, but PP who pays full tuition, you are insane. Tuition is out of reach for all but the very wealthiest people. Do you really think teachers, prosecutors, scientists, researchers, musicians and anyone else who is well-educated doesn't deserve to attend private school because their parents didn't choose to be investment bankers or law partners?

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.


[/quote][/quote]

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)[/quote]

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it? [/quote]

I guess FA is the only way the children of privileged, well-educated parents can learn. If only this country had free education for children. Oh wait, it does! And the public schools in and around this area are consistently ranked high and sending thousands of kids to top ranking colleges every year! Next time you brag about the work you do, you should also praise the big law parents who are subsidizing your kid's education. [/quote]

I guess you haven't heard that not all of the public schools in this area are all that good...certainly not in the county where I live. And if me being committed to public service and prosecuting criminals is bragging then you don't know what bragging sounds like. I'm happy for all of the big law attorneys I know.
Many of them are my very good friends and classmates. And I'm happy to acknowledge that it's their tuition subsidizing the tuition of kids whose parents can't afford it to! Here is the thing...they don't have have to send their kids to private school either and subject themselves to subsidizing others. Public school is available to them too! And the last time I check most schools also receive funds from private donors -- so just maybe my share of the pie won't come from your pocket. Oh wait...I doubt you are one of those big law people...you just sound like a hater. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids are in public now but ods is applying to private schools. The wealth at some of them is unbelievable - private jets, the whole nine yards. I don't even feel bad because the wealth is so extreme. But because this is a wealthy area, my child was feeling bad recently saying that he feels like everyone has been to Hawaii but us. That is absolutely not true - I think we know three families who have been in the last three months so that is why it was on his mind.


These things will happen wherever your kid goes to school to a degree.

Yes, one school family seems to go every year to Hawaii for two weeks at Christmas and gets to fly on their own special 747. I worry that it will really make my kid feel bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it?

I guess FA is the only way the children of privileged, well-educated parents can learn. If only this country had free education for children. Oh wait, it does! And the public schools in and around this area are consistently ranked high and sending thousands of kids to top ranking colleges every year! Next time you brag about the work you do, you should also praise the big law parents who are subsidizing your kid's education.

All I can say after reading the posts from the full freight parents is that I am glad my kids are not in school with your kids because I don't want to be associated with people as rude as you! This is what I believe many of the wealthy parents sending their kids to these Big 3 schools are thinking, but not sharing (except, obviously, on DCUM). Thanks, but we will stay at our more affordable Catholic school where people actually have hearts.

[Anonymous]

Wow...I can't believe the less demanding work week justification for taking a handout. Neither my spouse or I earn what a public prosecutor does and somehow we come up with the full freight for tuition.
So you think that it's perfectly okay for other people to work long hours to pay for people who chose not to work long hours. And although you are a public servant you would rather not have other public servants teach your kids.To me you don't make a convincing argument for FA. I hope admissions people agree. FA should be for families doing everything they personally can do to help their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not worth the stress. It will ruin u financially and u quality of life would suffer. ROI is not all that, but u do get the bumper sticker.? Did it for one kid, but will not be doing it for the other.

This depends on what you value. If you value your child receiving a certain type of education then maybe it is worth it. If you value having the latest car and eating out every not then maybe not.

Private is overrated, especially in this economy.? Look at recent job placements?

Disagree with this point of view. Economy is changing rapidly and the job market will not even be recognizable to us when those in lower grades enter college. They may not even need to go to college, which makes early education that must more critical. If you measure sucess by the child going to HYP, then not a good ROI for you. Many of us want our kid to be articulate, well mannered, cultured, and enjoy learning. If you can manage private without lavish vacations each year, then I would recommend it. Public as currently structured will not meet the needs of future generations unless parents substantially invest in after school enrichment activities, which also cost money.

In that case private is not the way to go. At my office I have a mix of millenial employees who have been to private and public but the attitude and entitlement of the private school kids is simply outrageous!! The public school kids are intelligent, hardworking, willing to learn and oh - they write better as well.

[Anonymous]

WTF @ acting like being a "public servant" is somehow a favor to society when you're working a cushy schedule... okay lady.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the post interesting and puzzling all at the same time. I don't have a child in one of these schools yet, but we are applying. We will need substantial FA to send your DC to whichever school we are lucky to get into. This fact has not discouraged me from applying for a few reasons. One, we require FA simply because of the careers we have chosen to pursue. Both my husband and I graduated from a top 25 college and have advanced degrees. Nonetheless, we are both lifetime public servants by choice. Despite our annual income we have a deep commitment to making sure our children get the absolute best education possible. Part of that education is teaching them that life is about the choices you make including your income. Given my profession I certainly could be making 10 times more than I do had I chosen to not work in the public sector. I'm a lawyer, but a long time government lawyer by choice. I valued a commitment to public service and the flexibility of a less demanding work week so that I could be a present mother over earning a high salary. With that choice came certain consequences. We wont be buying a new car every year, we wont be taking lavish vacations every year, and they wont be wearing shoes and clothes that cost $500. However, we plan on working hard to instill in them IF they want those material things they are being provided an excellent education so that they can pursue whatever career choice they want and earn however much they want to provide those things FOR THEMSELVES! Does that mean they may not feel slighted as they grow and see other kids with all of the material things? No, it doesn't and of course they will. However, adversity builds character. Period. It isn't my job to protect them from all of the ills of the world, its to instill in them skills to handle any obstacle they face.

Heck I was on FA in college and never took a lavish Spring Break vacation and had to hear all about my roommates and dorm mates fancy vacations. Guess what? That's life. Unless you are in the 1% there will always be someone who can afford more than you. More importantly, while money can certainly make you more comfortable it doesn't define happiness. I don't want to suggest the OP concerns are valid, but I think the response should be -- yeah there may be challenges, but you have to decide why you want this education for your child...and THAT has to be your focus.

...you do realize that you aren't avoiding materialistic things (aka. An expensive education), you are just having someone else pay for it. FA doesn't mean it's free, it just means that people who pay full freight are paying for you.

+1. That was the reaction I had when I read this post. So this person is a lawyer and could make a better income. But she chooses to do a lower-paying job, and have others pay for her children's tuition. I might like to have a lower-paying job that was less stressful or more fun, but I figure that, if I want my kids in private school, I need to pay the tuition. I can completely understand FA for people who genuinely don't have the ability to pay the tuition because of lack of education etc. But I think it's a bit much for a lawyer to be applying for FA. (Granted, there are lots of unemployed and underemployed lawyers out there, so perhaps that profession is not the best example.)

Yes I am committed to public service and I make no apologies for it, and I certainly won't risk my children's ability to get a good education because I didn't want to slave at a private firm while a nanny raised my kids so I can afford to send them
to a private school. Somebody has to be willing to prosecute criminals...dare I children be subjected to a crappy education because of it?

I guess FA is the only way the children of privileged, well-educated parents can learn. If only this country had free education for children. Oh wait, it does! And the public schools in and around this area are consistently ranked high and sending thousands of kids to top ranking colleges every year! Next time you brag about the work you do, you should also praise the big law parents who are subsidizing your kid's education.

All I can say after reading the posts from the full freight parents is that I am glad my kids are not in school with your kids because I don't want to be associated with people as rude as you! This is what I believe many of the wealthy parents sending their kids to these Big 3 schools are thinking, but not sharing (except, obviously, on DCUM). Thanks, but we will stay at our more affordable Catholic school where people actually have hearts.

Nope, wrong. I send my kids to public because we can't afford private school. I also don't have a lot of patience for hypocrical, entitled people who think they are better than because they chose less lucrative professions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow...I can't believe the less demanding work week justification for taking a handout. Neither my spouse or I earn what a public prosecutor does and somehow we come up with the full freight for tuition.
So you think that it's perfectly okay for other people to work long hours to pay for people who chose not to work long hours. And although you are a public servant you would rather not have other public servants teach your kids.To me you don't make a convincing argument for FA. I hope admissions people agree. FA should be for families doing everything they personally can do to help their children.

Listen, regardless of education level, not everyone can land a job that provides a household income sufficient to fund private school. The schools, thankfully, believe it serves them well to have a diverse student body. Maybe you should read up on the benefits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow...I can't believe the less demanding work week justification for taking a handout. Neither my spouse or I earn what a public prosecutor does and somehow we come up with the full freight for tuition.
So you think that it's perfectly okay for other people to work long hours to pay for people who chose not to work long hours. And although you are a public servant you would rather not have other public servants teach your kids.To me you don't make a convincing argument for FA. I hope admissions people agree. FA should be for families doing everything they personally can do to help their children.

Listen, regardless of education level, not everyone can land a job that provides a household income sufficient to fund private school. The schools, thankfully, believe it serves them well to have a diverse student body. Maybe you should read up on the benefits?

What's diverse about another lawyer family (lazy version)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be helpful if people specified elementary, middle or high school. My experience is that the kids don't really notice or care about the differences in incomes/ experiences until middle school.

I disagree. Even little kids want to go to the same summer camp as their friend and have the same video games as their friends or go to the same private swim team or soccer club or have their birthday party at the same place. It starts early -- it isn't about noticing the differences, so much as expecting and asking for the same. So you start saying no earlier and more frequently and teaching those life lessons PPs talk about pretty much right away. Nothing wrong with that, but it does start right away.

BTW, it also happens to a degree in the public schools, particularly if the school has economic diversity. Some do, some don't. It's all relative.

For us it started in preschool. All those huge immaculate showy homes, 2nd and 3rd homes, new cars, trips to Disney, trips to Florida, summers at the beach house. The number of times we had to say no to the summer camps was uncountable. Why should my DC have to be the one with the least when in reality, we have plenty? But a child does not see it that way -- they are simple -- what their friends have. And the comparison started in 1st grade. The most popular girl was the richest, then the next richest and so on. That is our culture here in the US, and to some extent everywhere. Its fine if you don mind climbing this hill fairly often. But it is real.