Anonymous wrote:Jealousy? Those full pay parents chose to "scrap by" to increase admission chances for the educational opportunities they value for their kids. I don't think you're very realistic. Anyone can apply but it's not a lottery. You should have bothered to read the thread. May be the fancy degrees and the critical thinking they should have instilled would have clicked in.

Unrealistic about what exactly? Of course I know FA is not a lottery system, it is based on need. The school or degree someone has does not determine need. Need is based on actual income and expenses. For anyone to assume that the type of degree or school one went to determines your need only suggests they have not been paying attention to the financial market. There are many people with fancy degrees from fancy schools that are struggling to get by. I do not begrudge anyone who is scrapping by to pay for their child's tuition, but perhaps they too should be applying for FA instead of viewing it as a government handout they are ashamed to accept. Seems to me that is what is driving most of these comments. Those scrapping by don't want the wealthy full pays to look down on them, yet they freight at night over whether they really fit in or their kid is going to feel their middle class lifestyle is actually akin to poverty.

What's most disturbing about this thread is most of what I have read seems to go completely against the ideal of most IS we have toured. The have tons of donors who are don't have children currently enrolled in the school who donate millions of dollars so the school can offer FA to attract people from all walks of life (what do you think would be a better use of the donors money since THAT IS THE EXACT REASON THEY DONATE IT...I mean where should the million plus dollars slated for FA be redirected?) They all speak of equality for all, social justice for all, equal access to education for ALL regardless of income level (not degree or school attended), yet they seem to admit a significant amount of people who don't hold those core values. Or maybe you all are the exception to the rule and just have the loudest voice because those who are committed to the values don't spend their time looking for posts to unleash their misplaced anger on. Maybe you should move your kids to schools that do not offer FA (some exist) and then you won't have to worry about it.

Here I thought IS where mostly progressive liberal minded people...clearly not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Halfway through our second year, and so far, we've been completely comfortable with it -- but then our kid is in lower school, and I imagine it might get worse later.

For now, we're perfectly happy being the Toyota in a sea of BMWs.

But if I ever get the sense that he's starting to think we're "poor" then I will beat him like a French omelet.

Just kidding. But I will have a long, vigorous talk to him about how lucky we are and what actual poverty is.

Ayah, I tried that. DC still does not "get it" Thinks that $300 is pocket change and a Range Rover is an average car. Its what you see around you. I do get very tired of saying "we cant afford that!" when of course we could if we went to public. It is a sacrifice, but my DC needs it. No reason to explain why.

Isn't it perverse that you are (or anyone is) so well off in the grand scheme of things that you can afford 30K private tuition a year, but your kid feels poor(er) ,and you feel like a "have not" sometimes? It is a bizarre world we live in, I feel, especially in this city, where you have constant soliciting for foods and coats at one (public) school and having to explain that no, we will not buy a new 100K car this year at the other (private) school.

By the way, I totally understand what you are saying, I'm just contemplating how different life is here and now, from when I grew up.

Yes! It's completely perverse. Which is why I know I'll have a strong reaction if my well-fed, well-clothed, safe, iPad-owning son ever thinks we're "poor". I'm going to have to explicitly teach him lessons that he'd learn implicitly if he attended our local high-poverty public school.

Jealousy? Those full pay parents chose to "scrap by" to increase admission chances for the educational opportunities they value for their kids. I don't think you're very realistic. Anyone can apply but it's not a lottery. You should have bothered to read the thread. May be the fancy degrees and the critical thinking they should have instilled would have clicked in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those parents who are full pay, what type of family are you OK subsidizing? I've been following the comments and I'm trying to understand what you all believe is deserving? Is it a family on government assistance who want better for their children? Or do you think how dare someone on public assistance feel their children should be able to go to a wealthy school? Is it someone who works for McDonads or Walmart? Is it someone who is a single parent and is an Administrative Assistance?

I too find it odd that a lawyer would qualify for any financial aid, I thought all of them
even government ones made a nice big salary. But if you don't think someone deserves financial aid just because of the title of their job, then who are you OK subsidizing? I've been researching schools for middle school and now I feel awkward even thinking this is a possibility because maybe my kids won't be judged but a rich parent or one who finds a way to pay the full price and struggle resents that I didn't find a way to make enough money to send my kid to the same school as theirs.

Also, isn't most of the school's focused on diversity in social class, race, religion, etc. If so, how do they accomplish that if you only think kids who parents can scrap up the money to afford it or the very wealthy should be able to go.

We can barely afford to pay full freight for our two kids, but we do. I am fine with part of my tuition dollars going toward FA for families with lower incomes (especially those without the education to have high-paying jobs.) I just object to people with degrees from fancier colleges and grad schools than I attended getting FA. It also really burns me that some families with a SAHM get FA. I would love to be a SAHM!

At my school, families with a SAH parent only get FA if there is a child who is preschool-aged or younger and/or there is a child with severe special needs that requires a parent at home.

I don't understand why you'd object to people with fancier degrees and grad school who qualify for FA. I'm the PP who posted about the research scientist example who works at NIH ($100K) with a spouse who works for legal aid and makes $50K. Are you really going to begrudge them for their career choices? I don't understand the mindset of people who think that people should only get graduate degrees to earn a lot of money. If anything, you should direct your anger at school administrators who keep raising tuition and cave into uninformed parents who demand the latest technology for their 4 year olds.

It's called jealousy. I didn't read all the comments and posts but I work for the government and make 6 figures and my wife works in social work and makes $60K. We both have "fancy degrees" from "fancy colleges" and we are applying for FA for our DS. If you choose to scrap by so you can pay $37K a year than I applaud you. However, since FA is available and we where told anyone can apply that is what we are going to do. If we get in and are awarded FA we will be grateful and we will accept it. If other parents choose to "not like" us for it it will be unfortunate but not my family's focus.

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting thread. We have our kids in public school so that we can travel to Europe, St. John, Western US, etc. often. We value travel above the particular educational environment of an elite private school. We would covert make the trade-off and give up the travel.

Every family has their particular value system - find yours - own it - and move ahead accordingly. Your children will find their own value systems too when they have families.

I agree that travel is a great learning experience and courtesy of grand parents we have been able to do some as a family. But, the travel my DC has done with Sidwell US is far more valuable than our family trips because of the opportunities for home stays, cultural events we would not have access to, meetings with political leaders, visiting with students who are the same age in their schools... I could go on and on. There is just no way we could have organized these trips on our own even if we had a lot more money. So I think traveling with your teachers and a few fellow students is really irreplaceable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Halfway through our second year, and so far, we've been completely comfortable with it -- but then our kid is in lower school, and I imagine it might get worse later.

For now, we're perfectly happy being the Toyota in a sea of BMWs.

But if I ever get the sense that he's starting to think we're "poor" then I will beat him like a French omelet.

Just kidding. But I will have a long, vigorous talk to him about how lucky we are and what actual poverty is.

Ayah, I tried that. DC still does not "get it" Thinks that $300 is pocket change and a Range Rover is an average car. Its what you see around you. I do get very tired of saying "we cant afford that!" when of course we could if we went to public. It is a sacrifice, but my DC needs it. No reason to explain why.

Isn't it perverse that you are (or anyone is) so well off in the grand scheme of things that you can afford 30K private tuition a year, but your kid feels poor(er) ,and you feel like a "have not" sometimes? It is a bizarre world we live in, I feel, especially in this city, where you have constant soliciting for foods and coats at one (public) school and having to explain that no, we will not buy a new 100K car this year at the other (private) school.

By the way, I totally understand what you are saying, I'm just contemplating how different life is here and now, from when I grew up.

Anonymous wrote:I went to an elite private school in NJ. And one of things I struggled with as a student was knowing how many brilliant and amazing classmates I had, and how few career opportunities were presented to us outside of medicine, law, and especially high finance. Our society needs of course great doctors, lawyers, and economists, but we also need amazing teachers, non-profit leaders, coaches, small business leaders. And youth, even high school students, are pretty impressionable, and need the encouragement to be successful doesn't automatically mean to follow high income career.

While I understand the high earner's subsidy argument, I think the net result is a school that is very narrow in its vision for its community and the future of its kids.

It almost sounds like a club, and a not a school preparing kids, in the fullest way, for the future.

Are you me? Right down to the elite private in NJ. Spot-on.

Anonymous wrote:This is an interesting thread. We have our kids in public school so that we can travel to Europe, St. John, Western US, etc. often. We value travel above the particular educational environment of an elite private school. We would covert make the trade-off and give up the travel.

Every family has their particular value system - find yours - own it - and move ahead accordingly. Your children will find their own value systems too when they have families.

+1 from a private school family stretching to make it work but happy with decision, well said to each their own

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to a private school in the late 90s with a lot of wealth, though none of it particularly ostentatious, and I was certainly on the lowest end of the full pay students. My parents had good professional jobs - not doctors or lawyers, but they made good salaries. We definitely lived in a lesser house than we could have because of private school, and what some PPs are saying about resenting their parents for having little choice in the school choice matter resonates with me.

I had friends and did fine by myself socially, but I never really bought into the community and unlike many students, I wanted off campus as soon as the day was over. I am not sure if this is because I am more introverted and preferred relationships with my smaller circle of friends -- some of whom were very very rich and others who were on FA -- or because I didn't like the "scene." As an adult, I now know both of these things are true of me.

You will be keenly aware that others have much more and do much more. I saw this affect some friends not at all, and others a great deal (resulting in huge complexes and lifelong mistakes as a result of feeling less than). The thing is, you don't know how it'll affect a kid, and you don't know who their friends will be.

Yes, there were drugs. Some of my more social climbing friends tried them all. I never did.

As an adult, I admit to being jealous of my peers who have had homes bought for them, take their kids to Europe, and have very impressive pedigrees. Anyone who isn't a little jealous is lying. I also am aware and appreciate that a lot of my life experiences that are on the more fancy side are a direct results of where I went to private school, and that's neat I guess.

I wouldn't send my kid to a fancy private school, and I would perhaps consider private high school if the place we live at the time necessitates that option.

So many things about this post resonate with me. Our family did get FA, although my parents were both educated, working professionals. It was an amazing education, and I still credit it to this day, to the extent that I really want my DC to have the same private school academic advantages. However, I was one of those kids who really struggled with being a "have not". It didn't take wealthy families "flaunting" their money, they were just living their lives but on a totally different scale. They socialized at the same country clubs, not at the local pool, and we weren't in the same neighborhoods anyway so I wouldn't have run into them at the pool anyway. Many of my classmates went to the same expensive summer camp every year, coming back even more bonded or with shared stories and experiences that I didn't have. My senior year I finally got an old hand-me-down car from a family member so that I didn't have to ride the school bus my last year. It definitely looked out of place parked next to the late-model Saabs and BMWs that more than a few of my friends drove. Some of them were also their parents' used cars, but again they started from a different financial level.

Like PP, as an adult I still struggle with crushing feelings of envy when friends seem to have more. DH and I are both highly educated professionals, but in this town most people are and you never know the background of other people's financial situation.

This is what makes me think long and hard for DC. Will my child be more comfortable and fit in despite the income disparities, or will the left-outedness also have a long-term impact?

I really think that this is an important point. Thanks for posting.

I see this over and over and over in families who live in neighborhoods or go to schools that they can barely afford. A sense of inadequacy because the lifestyle of those around you is a different level than yours. We have chosen to live in one of the most inexpensive houses in our neighborhood and we drive very old cars. I guess we are typical American millionaires, but we are much wealthier than our lifestyle looks to the outside. That gives us a strong sense of security and we can use the money for things that are important to us, like college and travel. I guess each family is different but I think one of the unintended consequences of stretching to a neighborhood or private school is this feeling of "less than" than can be insidious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those parents who are full pay, what type of family are you OK subsidizing? I've been following the comments and I'm trying to understand what you all believe is deserving? Is it a family on government assistance who want better for their children? Or do you think how dare someone on public assistance feel their children should be able to go to a wealthy school? Is it someone who works for McDonads or Walmart? Is it someone who is a single parent and is an Administrative Assistance?

I too find it odd that a lawyer would qualify for any financial aid, I thought all of them
even government ones made a nice big salary. But if you don't think someone deserves financial aid just because of the title of their job, then who are you OK subsidizing? I've been researching schools for middle school and now I feel awkward even thinking this is a possibility because maybe my kids won't be judged but a rich parent or one who finds a way to pay the full price and struggle resents that I didn't find a way to make enough money to send my kid to the same school as theirs.

Also, isn't most of the school's focused on diversity in social class, race, religion, etc. If so, how do they accomplish that if you only think kids who parents can scrap up the money to afford it or the very wealthy should be able to go.

We can barely afford to pay full freight for our two kids, but we do. I am fine with part of my tuition dollars going toward FA for families with lower incomes (especially those without the education to have high-paying jobs.) I just object to people with degrees from fancier colleges and grad schools than I attended getting FA. It also really burns me that some families with a SAHM get FA. I would love to be a SAHM!

At my school, families with a SAH parent only get FA if there is a child who is preschool-aged or younger and/or there is a child with severe special needs that requires a parent at home.

I don't understand why you'd object to people with fancier degrees and grad school who qualify for FA. I'm the PP who posted about the research scientist example who works at NIH ($100K) with a spouse who works for legal aid and makes $50K. Are you really going to begrudge them for their career choices? I don't understand the mindset of people who think that people should only get graduate degrees to earn a lot of money. If anything, you should direct your anger at school administrators who keep raising tuition and cave into uninformed parents who demand the latest technology for their 4 year olds.

This is an interesting thread. We have our kids in public school so that we can travel to Europe, St. John, Western US, etc. often. We value travel above the particular educational environment of an elite private school. We would covert make the trade-off and give up the travel.

Every family has their particular value system - find yours - own it - and move ahead accordingly. Your children will find their own value systems too when they have families.

Anonymous wrote:Dh is in biglaw but is a senior associate, not a partner. We will most likely be full pay assuming ds gets in, but we will fill out the financial aid paperwork anyway.

My understanding is that full pay families are NOT subsidizing financial aid, but that the actual cost to the school per student is higher than the published tuition cost. It is the donors who donate beyond tuition who are subsidizing everyone else.


I don't get the hate for pp - we are comfortable with our choices so anyone else making different choices just doesn't even hit my radar. Schools give FA and that's what it is there for. An attorney choosing to work for DOJ or whatever is a world away from some deadbeat parent working under the table so they don't have to pay child support.

It shocks me that a senior associate in BigLaw would apply for FA. I hope any school would deny it. You should be ashamed to apply for FA with that income. DH and I combined make the same as one senior associate (with both of us working full-time) and we stretch to pay full tuition. (I used to work in BigLaw and so I know the salaries.)

Anonymous wrote:We were one of those families. When my kid was younger, it wasn't a big deal but as they got older and all the kids would be talking about the trips they went on, summer programs, cars etc, it did become more difficult.

Sort felt like we were on the outside of the glass always looking in.

I agree with this. The lifestyle differences seem to get bigger as kids get older.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am perfectly happy to "subsidize" parents who are working for the federal government, for not-for-profits, etc. A lot of these jobs are very important and need to be filled by well-educated, highly qualified people. They are gainfully, and respectfully employed, IMHO. Think of people like scientists who work for NIH, for example, helping to cure disease but who are paid far less than those who go into the private sector.

Glad someone gets it. They idea that working for the government is perceived as not being willing to work hard to provide for my children is PATHETIC! I also said I work better hours, but I certainly work a hell of a lot more than 40
Hours a week, and the stress level of my job for the pay is a HUGE SACRIFICE! At the end of the day, I don't really care what others think about me needing FA to provide my children a good education. Despite being the parent who works and raises my kid, I will also be the parent who is active, volunteers time in the evenings and weekends, etc. I know the value my family will add to any IS, as well as the value of my child being a part of that school and that's really all that matters. All these uptight selfish people can be pissed all they want.

NP here -- I don't think you get it. If you and your husband have progressional degrees and work for the government, it is highly unlikely that you will qualify for financial aid for one child (if you are very junior and have multiple kids, you might get a small award). There is a huge difference between wanting financial aid and needing financial aid. Financial aid is not available as some kind of "reward" because you chose to work at a public service job that pays less than others you could have taken. Nor is it available because paying tuition would change your lifestyle. Check out the financial aid threads on this board, where folks are shocked by how much of their relatively small income they are expected to contribute. The kids of government lawyers are a dime a dozen at these schools. All of those "uptight selfish people" are pissed because they are scraping together tuition from their own public service jobs, or working at a lucrative job they don't really find rewarding, to earn enough money to pay full freight.

Signed, longtime government lawyer who pays full freight at a private school

PS -- I also hate to break it to you -- the bulk of the volunteer hours are during the school day. If you're a prosecutor working "a hell of a lot more than 40 hours a week," you are not going to be close to one of the more active volunteers. Those are the stay at home Moms/Dads. Just the way it is.

Just curious. What is your HHI? I'm always wondering the big question -- what HHI qualifies you for FA? (I'm guessing it differs at each school, depending on the endowment?)

Anonymous wrote:For those parents who are full pay, what type of family are you OK subsidizing? I've been following the comments and I'm trying to understand what you all believe is deserving? Is it a family on government assistance who want better for their children? Or do you think how dare someone on public assistance feel their children should be able to go to a wealthy school? Is it someone who works for McDonads or Walmart? Is it someone who is a single parent and is an Administrative Assistance?

I too find it odd that a lawyer would qualify for any financial aid, I thought all of them
even government ones made a nice big salary. But if you don't think someone deserves financial aid just because of the title of their job, then who are you OK subsidizing? I've been researching schools for middle school and now I feel awkward even thinking this is a possibility because maybe my kids won't be judged but a rich parent or one who finds a way to pay the full price and struggle resents that I didn't find a way to make enough money to send my kid to the same school as theirs.

Also, isn't most of the school's focused on diversity in social class, race, religion, etc. If so, how do they accomplish that if you only think kids who parents can scrap up the money to afford it or the very wealthy should be able to go.

We can barely afford to pay full freight for our two kids, but we do. I am fine with part of my tuition dollars going toward FA for families with lower incomes (especially those without the education to have high-paying jobs.) I just object to people with degrees from fancier colleges and grad schools than I attended getting FA. It also really burns me that some families with a SAHM get FA. I would love to be a SAHM!