My four year old has just been discriminated based on her religion!

Dan_Solo

James Loud Rob wrote: »

So Jesus(allegedly) saying that whoever harms a child should have a millstone put around his neck and he should be thrown into the sea actually means Jesus didn't care much for children.

Back on track....

“Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death."

Fathers should kill their children for Jesus... well thanks for that Mr Peace N Love.

positron

LeeMajors wrote: »

So, the school is oversubscribed but you decided to claim you were being discriminated against?

She would have gotten a place if she was baptised. You could argue I have it all wrong, and I can't prove you wrong unless school gives me a list of kids applied, accepted and their religion etc, but it's very clear based on the applications that went in that we know off and the responses they have gotten so far.

SpaceTime

LeeMajors wrote: »

The only schools being built now are educate together schools.
Still claim 'no political party has the balls to do anything about it'?

Not true. Two shiny new catholic schools where I am.

This should have been dealt with 50 years+ ago. We allowed a situation to develop where a private organisations has basically got complete control over public schools due to a combination of absolutely deference to church power in the recent past and complete inertia and sleepwalking.

The record of these organisations in education and social services here is pretty bleak too - zero accountability, abuse of power, abuse of vulnerable people etc etc yet, the state did absolutely nothing to reform the situation other than a bit of lip service.

Educate together isn't an adequate response to a completely privatised management of a public service.

Dan_Solo

James Loud Rob wrote: »

They may well have been full based on siblings in the school but without knowing the truth its easier to blame religion.
Let's not let lack of facts get in the way of a good story.

But since they apparently do this in secret and it is one of the criteria they deserve all the abuse they get really. The mere fact that it could possibly be due to not being baptised should be enough,

LeeMajors

positron wrote: »

She would have gotten a place if she was baptised. You could argue I have it all wrong, and I can't prove you wrong unless school gives me a list of kids applied, accepted and their religion etc, but it's very clear based on the applications that went in that we know off and the responses they have gotten so far.

How do you know that?
Did many Catholic kids miss out on a place because the school was oversubscribed?

bjork

positron wrote: »

She would have gotten a place if she was baptised. You could argue I have it all wrong, and I can't prove you wrong unless school gives me a list of kids applied, accepted and their religion etc, but it's very clear based on the applications that went in that we know off and the responses they have gotten so far.

Your neighbor got a place and she is not baptized catholic, so they are not discriminating against non-baptized children.

positron

James Loud Rob wrote: »

They may well have been full based on siblings in the school but without knowing the truth its easier to blame religion.
Let's not let lack of facts get in the way of a good story.

Not true. School has grown considerably in size since we applied. So unless there was a fertility explosion among the parents of the previous pupils 5-6-7 years ago, producing twins and tripplets, it sounds meh, kinda difficult to explain that.

RustyNut

Dan_Solo wrote: »

if "nobody takes baptism seriously" then why do religious schools take it so seriously they'll refuse entry without it?

If it was just the baptism maybe it wouldn't be so bad, but then they teach kids to just accept that supernatural creatures are real and you must consider them in your every action on pain of eternal damnation. And they are always watching.

If you teach this bull to kids with absolutely no evidence then you are leaving them open to being brain washed into accepting anything if someone can just concoct a good enough story to back it up.

LeeMajors

SpaceTime wrote: »

Not true. Two shiny new catholic schools where I am.

Ok.
Tha majority of new schools are educate together schools.

Dan_Solo

BQQ wrote: »

I know for a fact that you don't.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/is-it-right-for-schools-to-ask-for-baptism-certificates-30962063.html
"But when places are in heavy demand, schools can ask for baptism certs or other proof of a child's religious affiliation."

Over to you and your "facts".

padohaodha

Dan_Solo wrote: »

But since they apparently do this in secret and it is one of the criteria they deserve all the abuse they get really. The mere fact that it could possibly be due to not being baptised should be enough,

ridiculous ....they might be guilty so convict them...birmingham six anybody?

Dan_Solo

LeeMajors wrote: »

Ok.
Tha majority of new schools are educate together schools.

Go on then, enlighten us with some reference other than "I said so".

Gatling

LeeMajors wrote: »

Ok.
Tha majority of new schools are educate together schools.

We've a new school catholic ethos going up in the new few weeks

Tasden

James Loud Rob wrote: »

They may well have been full based on siblings in the school but without knowing the truth its easier to blame religion.
Let's not let lack of facts get in the way of a good story.

The op already said they prioritise baptised kids, siblings, then locality. So if op's child was baptised they'd have a place regardless of the amount of kids with siblings in the school.

Eta: actually if all the siblings were baptised and op's child was baptised... would op's child have gotten a place if most children applying were a sibling?

Dan_Solo

padohaodha wrote: »

ridiculous ....they might be guilty so convict them...birmingham six anybody?

As long as the school decides in secret and baptism is a selection criteria they're guilty of having discriminatory procedures whether it happened here or not.

hoodwinked

positron wrote: »

They said school is oversubscribed, and based on the enrollment policy explained on their website (if oversubscribed, kids will be prioritised as catholic, siblings, locals etc etc). They didn't say exactly why she didn't get it, other than saying by the above order or priority she doesn't have a place.

We know someone who applied two years later than us (also not catholic, incidentally) got a place offered because of an older sibling already in school. We are local, we are in the catchment area, and we applied as early as you possibly can (within weeks of being born). The school takes some 200+ kids every year. So I am deducing that if she were baptised she would have gotten a place. That's all.

so they do accept pupils who aren't catholic? sounds like yet another oversubscribed school and your child just simply didn't make the cut,

i know of a parent with two catholic children, who have to attend different schools because on the year of entry with the youngest they were so oversubscribed they couldn't offer the second child a place. the school that child did get into couldn't offer a place to the older child either, it happens.

Dan_Solo

hoodwinked wrote: »

so they do accept pupils who aren't catholic? sounds like yet another oversubscribed school and your child just simply didn't make the cut,

But all those with baptismal certs did, meaning the non-baptised were inevitably discriminate against.
Not that complicated TBH.

dogcat

I feel very sorry for both you and your daughter. I presume some, if not all of her friends are going to this school, which I will presume to be RC? If I'm wrong please do say. Does the school have a policy on discrimination? Some schools have this thing where if they get too many applicants they will decide them on certain criteria, with the first one being on the top of the list.

For example

1. Lives in area
2. Is a [religion insert here]
3. Parents went here
4. Child of staff

etc. Maybe this was used in deciding? However, if they had enough spots for all applicants but didn't allow her because she is not a RC or whatever, that isn't on.

Dan_Solo

hoodwinked wrote: »

so they do accept pupils who aren't catholic? sounds like yet another oversubscribed school and your child just simply didn't make the cut,

i know of a parent with two catholic children, who have to attend different schools because on the year of entry with the youngest they were so oversubscribed they couldn't offer the second child a place. the school that child did get into couldn't offer a place to the older child either, it happens.

Which is utterly irrelevant to this situation, but ya know, cool story bro.

positron

hoodwinked - the rest of the statement you highlighted states that's because of the sibling policy. They fell into the second priority. First one was catholic or not. Which then tells me that ALL catholic kids were offered places, and then siblings, and then at some stage they ran out of spaces.

Anyway, how can you justify prioritising four year old based on religion anyway? Isn't it stupid and cruel?

SpaceTime

What annoys me most is this notion that a school needs a "patron" at all.

The Dept of Education should be able to build and manage its own schools. There shouldn't be any need for patrons at all

jester77

I wouldn't get too worked up OP, sounds like your daughter will be better off. If they are that fixated on someone's religion, so as to deny them an education at their school, then would you want to imagine what they would be "teaching" your daughter when it comes to faith and beliefs.

padohaodha

Dan_Solo wrote: »

But all those with baptismal certs did, meaning the non-baptised were inevitably discriminate against.
Not that complicated TBH.

again can we have proof please or does that not matter when it doesnt suit....i actually do not believe the order of admission policy op claims.if im proven wrong ill accept it gracefully.

positron

Since everyone is asking, here is their enrollment policy:

http://smpps.ie/files/Enrolment-Policy.pdf

In the event of the number of children seeking enrolment in any given class / standard exceeding the number
of places available preceding or during the school year the following criteria will be used to prioritise children
for enrolment, and in the following order:
a. Catholic children living within the catchment area**, and sisters and brothers of pupils
attending St. Mary’s BNS and Scoil Mhuire Fatima.
b. Children of current staff, including ancillary staff;
c. Catholic children living outside the catchment area who do not have a Catholic school within
their own parish boundary;
d. Other children living within the catchment area;
e. Other children living outside the catchment area;
f. In the event that priority will be required to be given to children within any one of the above
categories, older children will be given priority.
g. It is proposed to enrol a maximum of 150 pupils for the school year 2012/2013.

So the fact that a friend's non-catholic child was offered a place (despite a very late application) tells me that all catholic kids were catered for already. I hope this addresses some of the questions here.

BQQ

Dan_Solo wrote: »

I know for a fact you need to produce baptismal certs to get into schools?

!=

Dan_Solo wrote: »

"But when places are in heavy demand, schools can ask for baptism certs or other proof of a child's religious affiliation."

My daughter did not "need to produce a baptismal cert to get into school".
That is a fact.

SpaceTime

Ah sure being treated as a second class citizen in your own county is perfectly acceptable it would seem.

You're just being a trouble maker for refusing to be catholic from what I can see.

Until we fix this nonsense we live in a theocratic state.

Dan_Solo

padohaodha wrote: »

again can we have proof please or does that not matter when it doesnt suit....i actually do not believe the order of admission policy op claims.if im proven wrong ill accept it gracefully.

How can we have proof when the decision was made IN SECRET. What we do know for a fact is that religion is one of the criteria considered, which makes the process by default discriminatory.

January

So the school was oversubscribed in that case.

Dan_Solo

BQQ wrote: »

!=




My daughter did not "need to produce a baptismal cert to get into school".
That is a fact.

"get into schools" can mean "get into a specific school".
Apologies if my use of English is beyond your ability to comprehend.

Dan_Solo

January wrote: »

So the school was oversubscribed in that case.

But the OP had NO CHANCE AT ALL due to discriminatory selection procedures.