Baptisms and primary school

lazygal

I run a pre-school service and every year I am amazed at the number of parents who shrug their shoulders and baptise their children for the sole purpose of getting them into the handy local Catholic school.
Having just done Count Me Out, I wonder if these parents realise by making their children Catholic, they are giving the institution more weight as it can claim it has parents who want a Catholic upbringing for their children.
I am wondering how many parents have done this? Baptised purely for school purposes that is, and if you considered the consequences?
This is for information for some of the parents who want to raise secular children but feel they will be considered a bit nutty if they go against the tide.
Any comments really welcome!

Nevyn

A lot have, this comes up here frequently.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055057491
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055000841
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055465146

Grawns

I'd rather home school than have her baptized and I don't approve of homeschooling :rolleyes:. Luckily I live in Dublin so I have plenty of choice. Maybe you can get fake baptismal certs on the net! Who checks these things anyway?

This really is one for the atheists forum though.

Nevyn

The school checks, and fake certs is commiting fraud.

Grawns

You mean the school contacts the church and asks them to confirm the records! That's a fraud I'd love to see committed. Can you imagine the field day when the media get hold of it! Not that I'm encouraging fraud, just the seperation of church and state

ps. Baptizing your child just to get into a school is the bigger fraud by far.

seamus

There are a large number of reasons why parents baptise their children, despite not really caring about religion themselves. Topping the list would be:

1. The grandparents' sensitivities/Don't rock the boat
2. A hangover of Catholic guilt - feeling guilty for *not* doing it
3. "Fitting in" and getting the child a local school

Most people in their 20's and 30's in Ireland will have grown up as Catholics in Catholic schools and will attest to it not being a very bad experience. Sure, there was mass and all that crap, but few people would say that they suffered for having attended a religious education.

This is why parents aren't concerned about any "consequences" of baptism. The child gets into school, says a few prayers and such crap and when they get home, the parents don't reinforce it. The parents are *always* the primary educators, so if religious education is not being supported by a religious adherence at home, then it won't carry on into adolescence and the child shouldn't suffer any ill-effects.

I imagine most such parents would prefer to just dispense of the whole thing, but see it as a necessary evil in order to get the school they want. You could say that it doesn't fix the situation, but you'll find few parents who will avoid doing what they think is best for their child in order to make a political statement.

Grawns

All true but still fraud!

Nevyn

Grawns wrote: »

You mean the school contacts the church and asks them to confirm the records! That's a fraud I'd love to see committed. Can you imagine the field day when the media get hold of it! Not that I'm encouraging fraud, just the seperation of church and state

ps. Baptizing your child just to get into a school is the bigger fraud by far.

Yes if the child is not christened in the local church, the school will contact the other parish office and about the records.

I am for the separation of church and state and for all children to be educated and cherished equally as set out in the Constitution, but I don't' condone lying to get your child into school, in a lot of cases it's not needed or warranted.

There is a lot of scaremongering around this issue, mine are not baptised and getting them into school wasn't an issue.

bigdogbarking

Unfortunately i had to baptise my daughter to ensure she got into a school of our choice. At the time i felt guilty and hypocritical as i do not hold any religious beliefs as such and am strongly opposed to organised religions as a whole but we had to do it as there are no other options for schools in our area. Plus with a high demand for a limited nimber of places we were afraid of our "heathen":rolleyes: children being overlooked in favour of a child that had been baptised. Had there been an educate together school then baptism would not have been an obstacle/issue. And i know all my friends who do not intend to raise their kids religiously have done the same and for the same reasons with the odd one or two exceptions who had to cave in to family and peer pressure.

Most parents, like me, didn't really have a choice so the shoulder shrugging couldn't be avoided, a few drops of water for a lifetime of education is a small price to pay as far as i'm concerned

BDB

Nevyn

It's not a few drops of water, it's standing up and lying to start with and it's propping up
a shítty system, and adding numbers for the catholic church to wave around when it's pushing different agendas.

But you said school of choice, does that mean there was a specific school or the local school, what were your options?

Having to baptise a child to get them educated is immoral and breaks the parents and child's rights both those granted by the consitution and the UN charter of human rigths.

Ickle Magoo

seamus wrote: »

...but you'll find few parents who will avoid doing what they think is best for their child in order to make a political statement.

What do you mean?

seamus

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

What do you mean?

What I mean is that people will forgoe their civil liberties or other comforts in order to try and make a political statement - hunger strikers, etc.

However, people are unlikely to inflict the same restrictions on their child and will prefer to toe the line if it means that their child receives a better education in the short-term.

E.g.:
A parent has two options for their child - the local catholic school which is a five minute walk away where all the child's friends are going, or a secular school a 20-minute drive away where neither the parent nor the child know anyone.

Assuming both schools provide an equal education, what's best for the child is the local school, whereas the secular school makes a political statement about religion.

Most parents will just go ahead with the silly baptism because it will result in a better outcome for the child.

I could be wrong, but that's why I think such parents will toe the line rather than fight it.

Ickle Magoo

seamus wrote: »

What I mean is that people will forgoe their civil liberties or other comforts in order to try and make a political statement - hunger strikers, etc.

However, people are unlikely to inflict the same restrictions on their child and will prefer to toe the line if it means that their child receives a better education in the short-term.

E.g.:
A parent has two options for their child - the local catholic school which is a five minute walk away where all the child's friends are going, or a secular school a 20-minute drive away where neither the parent nor the child know anyone.

Assuming both schools provide an equal education, what's best for the child is the local school, whereas the secular school makes a political statement about religion.

Most parents will just go ahead with the silly baptism because it will result in a better outcome for the child.

I could be wrong, but that's why I think such parents will toe the line rather than fight it.

That's what I thought you meant. I guess it comes down to what parents think is best for their kids, maintaining friendships at five years old or making new friends in an environment that echoes home-life and accepts them and us for what we originally were/are. Towing the party line or fighting for improvements. We'd rather - and do - travel further to get to the ET but my kids are surrounded by kids with parents like us & I think they get a better quality of education & socialisation for it.

bigdogbarking

Thaedydal wrote: »

It's not a few drops of water, it's standing up and lying to start with and it's propping up
a shítty system, and adding numbers for the catholic church to wave around when it's pushing different agendas.

Look, i had this discussion and arguments with my wife and like i said i felt hypocritical for having to resort to baptism but for some people there are no options and bottom line is that my daughter is getting into our school of choice in exchange ,as far an I'M concerned, for a meaningless ceremony and a "few drops of water".

[/QUOTE] But you said school of choice, does that mean there was a specific school or the local school, what were your options?

Having to baptise a child to get them educated is immoral and breaks the parents and child's rights both those granted by the consitution and the UN charter of human rigths.[/QUOTE]

I agree but whereas you have a right to education the school can argue that its not necessarily at their school.

I don't have any options, all schools in my area are either catholic or protestant.there is an Educate together school in the next town but its way too far to travel, and too far from friends and family for a young child to be travelling to school every day. We are campaigning for an ET school in Dundalk but thats unlikely to happen given the current economic climate and the rat bastards running the country.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

That's what I thought you meant. I guess it comes down to what parents think is best for their kids, maintaining friendships at five years old or making new friends in an environment that echoes home-life and accepts them and us for what we originally were/are. Towing the party line or fighting for improvements. We'd rather - and do - travel further to get to the ET but my kids are surrounded by kids with parents like us & I think they get a better quality of education & socialisation for it.

I think you summed it up right there and thats the dilemma, it comes down to what parents think is best for their kids. Unfortunately some of us have to toe the line until other options become available to us.

Nevyn

I know several parents who have managed to get ET schools set up, it's hard but they seem to think it's a worth while battle.

bigdogbarking

Thaedydal wrote: »

I know several parents who have managed to get ET schools set up, it's hard but they seem to think it's a worth while battle.

Definitely worthwhile, and definitely in high demand, but i've only just started campaigning recently, most of the others involved have been doing it for years and still no joy, for now at least

lazygal

Hi all, thanks for the responses.
I was interested to read the replies.
In my line of work I have come across dozens of parents who seem to do the baptism thing without any real understanding that by doing so they are giving the church a reason to retain control of schools-ie they can say there are so many baptisms this year so we have a mandate to maintain the status quo. What about if every parent who really did not believe in it simply stopped the charade-the children would still have to be educated wouldn't they? And maybe it might force a change?
Also, I spoke to a parent who has not baptised but due to lack of choice had to enrol her daughter in a Catholic school. She is now in 2nd class and the academic curriculum has been mainly pushed aside in order to prepare for communion for those who partake. Is that right? How would parents handle that? The mother is very worried she is losing time in "proper" subjects to faciltitate religious artwork, preparation for confession and discussion about how special communion is.

Nevyn

Yes the religious part can over take normal classes at times but if your child is not taking part they can be set work or let do arts and crafts.

Today my daughters day was her class preforming a religious play for the other classes and the parish priest and then the priest letting them off homework. I am not impressed tbh but that is what we have to try and live with.

pickarooney

There were many non-catholics at both my primary and secondary 'catholic' schools. I've never heard until recently of a school refusing a child admission based on their religion - why would anyone stand for that; surely it's highly illegal?

Ickle Magoo

pickarooney wrote: »

There were many non-catholics at both my primary and secondary 'catholic' schools. I've never heard until recently of a school refusing a child admission based on their religion - why would anyone stand for that; surely it's highly illegal?

No, the Irish statute enshrines the right for schools to give preference to pupils that follow their ethos...it's against the Human Rights Charter but it's perfectly acceptable under Irish law.

Stercus Accidit

Doesn't the constitution and EU law and the charter of human right trump Irish statutes?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=64806556&postcount=23

There's a post in the A&A forum on the matter which I really liked.

parsi

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

No, the Irish statute enshrines the right for schools to give preference to pupils that follow their ethos...it's against the Human Rights Charter but it's perfectly acceptable under Irish law.

As a counterpoint - my young fella will be going to secondary school shortly. The nearest school is also the one that we'd like him to attend as reports suggest that it meshes well with his type of personality. It also seems that our NS is traditionally a feeder for this school.

However as he isn't a Protestant (or the 7 / 8 varieties listed) he will be down at the bottom of the list.

So it's an issue in respect of all faith-based schools rather than one particular religion.

Ickle Magoo

Stercus Accidit wrote:

Doesn't the constitution and EU law and the charter of human right trump Irish statutes?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showp...6&postcount=23

There's a post in the A&A forum on the matter which I really liked.

You can certainly jump up and down demanding constitutional rights once your child is a pupil at a faith school, the problem is getting into the school in the first place if one of the legal selection criterion is to discriminate based on faith.

parsi wrote: »

So it's an issue in respect of all faith-based schools rather than one particular religion.

I'm not sure how that's a counter-point to me...I wasn't trying to suggest the issue was with only one faith. Obviously this thread is in respect to RCC baptism certs but it's certainly a wider issue with any & all non-secular schools, I agree. or should that be

we'llallhavetea_old

i had my daughter baptised because i didn't want her to feel left out in school.

don't really care about the catholic church having more numbers, my daughters happiness is my concern.

i'm still trying to figure out wether she would be better off going through with communion if she wants to or just not at all.

i can understand how people who are passionate about not adding to the catholic churches strength, but tbh, i'm more passionate about my daughter.

Ickle Magoo

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

i can understand how people who are passionate about not adding to the catholic churches strength, but tbh, i'm more passionate about my daughter.

Just for the record, the two are not mutually exclusive...

In fact, it's partly due to the passion we have for our children that we wouldn't slap a fake faith on them just so they can pretend to have less of a personal identity. Don't understand that logic, tbh.

we'llallhavetea_old

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Just for the record, the two are not mutually exclusive...

In fact, it's partly due to the passion we have for our children that we wouldn't slap a fake faith on them just so they can pretend to have less of a personal identity. Don't understand that logic, tbh.

she doesn't have to take part in any of the sacraments if she doesn't want to, and tbf, i doubt she will.

just because she is baptized doesn't mean she will be practicing.

saying that she will be pretending to have less of a personal identity is a bit ridiculous in fairness. most of the population of ireland are catholic, are you saying that non religious people have more of an identity? that non religious people are more special? because i really don't feel anymore special than anyone else on the planet.

at the end of the day, i am not really concerned about being a hypocrite, my daughter is not going to grow up and think she has been abused by me by christening her. (well i feckin hope not )

Nevyn

pickarooney wrote: »

There were many non-catholics at both my primary and secondary 'catholic' schools. I've never heard until recently of a school refusing a child admission based on their religion - why would anyone stand for that; surely it's highly illegal?

Schools are funded on a per head capitation grant.
So the schools want to have a two full classes of jr infants enrolled.
So if the school has 50 places, they are awarded based on the list of criteria set out in the school's enrollment policy.
If there are 50 kids and 50 places the school tends not to care.
If there are more kids then places then there is a sorting process.

Children of the parish who have siblings in the school get rank at the top of the list.
Children who are not catholic, who have no siblings in the school and who have never had any family in the school get ranked at the bottom of the list.
When you have 52 children applying for 50 places those ranked at the bottom fail to get a place.

It's against UN charter of rights, EU law, the constitution but they are exempt under the acts of equality law.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/education/the-irish-education-system/constitution_and_education

This article means that there may not be discrimination between the different denominations and that children have the right to attend state aided schools without attending religious instruction. In practice, certain time periods may be set aside for religious instruction and the parents have a right to withdraw the child at these times. However, the nature of the curriculum is such that there is not generally a rigid divide between subjects and the school ethos tends to pervade all subjects.

It has been argued that the article means that a child may not be refused access to a publicly funded school on the basis of the child's religious beliefs.

Educational establishments in Ireland are subject to the Equal Status Acts 2000-8 (pdf). (Educational establishments in this context refers to preschools, primary, post-primary, an institution providing adult, continuing or further education, a university, third level or higher level institution whether or not they are publicly funded.) You can find an information booklet about Schools and the Equal Status Acts (pdf) on the Department of Education and Science website.

Under Section 7 of the Equal Status Act 2000 denominational schools are permitted to refuse to admit non co-religionists in certain circumstances.

The system is very broken, change won't happen until people hound their TDs over it.

Ickle Magoo

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

she doesn't have to take part in any of the sacraments if she doesn't want to, and tbf, i doubt she will.

just because she is baptized doesn't mean she will be practicing.

saying that she will be pretending to have less of a personal identity is a bit ridiculous in fairness. most of the population of ireland are catholic, are you saying that non religious people have more of an identity? that non religious people are more special? because i really don't feel anymore special than anyone else on the planet.

No, I was posting with my family in mind, my kids - they would be pretending to have less of a personal identity. Baptising them would be against our own beliefs and those of our larger families as well, it would be assimilating them with native traditions for the sake of being some kind of social chameleons rather than embracing what makes our family unique or having pride in our own heritage - for us, being passionate about our kids IS being passionate about not having to pretend to be something we're not.

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

at the end of the day, i am not really concerned about being a hypocrite, my daughter is not going to grow up and think she has been abused by me by christening her. (well i feckin hope not )

It's not really about hypocrisy for us...neither myself nor my spouse are religious, I was never baptised and so baptising our children just so they can compare gowns with classmates or pretend some kind of RC link would just be bizarre. We could also move to another country in which catholicism is the minority faith at any time, so it makes no sense to adopt local religious customs that are not our own.

we'llallhavetea_old

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

No, I was posting with my family in mind, my kids - they would be pretending to have less of a personal identity. Baptising them would be against our own beliefs and those of our larger families as well, it would be assimilating them with native traditions for the sake of being some kind of social chameleons rather than embracing what makes our family unique or having pride in our own heritage - for us, being passionate about our kids IS being passionate about not having to pretend to be something we're not.

i totally see your point.

its not at all alien to me or anyone i know for that matter, to be raised catholic. so i guess thats why i'm having difficulty with the whole situation (i started a thread, its in a&a "what to do")

its the complete and utter norm in her school and extended family to be raised catholic, thats why i fear that being non religious would make her the lone outcast.

It's not really about hypocrisy for us...neither myself nor my spouse are religious, I was never baptised and so baptising our children just so they can compare gowns with classmates or pretend some kind of RC link would just be bizarre. We could also move to another country in which catholicism is the minority faith at any time, so it makes no sense to adopt local religious customs that are not our own.

you're lucky

i wish it was the same for me. it would give me more support and confidence

Ickle Magoo

Yeah, I see a lot of threads about families leaning on posters with regards to religion and especially baptisms or christenings...it's funny because you would rarely hear a parent drum into a child what political party they must follow or vote for but religion here seems to be a free for all.

Nevyn

Why would she be an outcast? She'd still be family, still a neice, cousin, granddaugther ect?

we'llallhavetea_old

Thaedydal wrote: »

Why would she be an outcast? She'd still be family, still a neice, cousin, granddaugther ect?

of course she would!

i mean in school and with her peers. religion is so dominant in school that she will be inevitably be left out, different. (yes different is great to us adults, not so much to kids!)

Ickle Magoo

I'm not so sure, I often over-hear the kids telling people about their scottish relatives, wearing kilts, eating haggis or that they don't do X or do X instead. I think they take great pride in being a bit different.

Nevyn

It depends, my are glad they have the choice and they take part as they wish and is approriate, I will be with my son in the local church when his class makes thier confirmation as he wants to be there and see his friends under go something which is important for them in thier faith.

Deliverance

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

of course she would!

i mean in school and with her peers. religion is so dominant in school that she will be inevitably be left out, different. (yes different is great to us adults, not so much to kids!)

I do not agree with this point of view personally, but I can understand it through a parental concern point of view.

Simply: A system that makes a parent or a child feel different to the point of conformity for the sake of getting along? It is almost ridiculous and actually dangerous in some ways.

lazygal

its the complete and utter norm in her school and extended family to be raised catholic, thats why i fear that being non religious would make her the lone outcast.


This is the nub of the problem. Why is it the norm? Why do people continue to conform to something they have no intention of following through on? Is teaching your children to pretend to be something they are not good for them long term?
If one generation of parents stopped doing this ceremony to please grandparents, assuage guilt and get children into school this "outcast" fear would be made extinct.
What do others think? I've had this discussion with my OH and we have decided we will not be baptising our children or sending them to religious schools. I think its better for children not be part of something which the parents can't or don't want to see through. I;ve no problem with relgion, but if parents want a religious education it is not the duty of the State to provide it.
I am amazed modern parents don't kick up a fuss about this!

iguana

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

of course she would!

i mean in school and with her peers. religion is so dominant in school that she will be inevitably be left out, different. (yes different is great to us adults, not so much to kids!)

Three of the children in my primary class were Jehovah's Witnesses and they were far from left out. They had a minor celebrity status and were much envied when they got to draw/read/complete homework while we had religion lessons or English/Irish lessons that revolved around religious stories. Although we were also a bit appalled that they couldn't get presents as that's against their religion (which isn't a concern for an atheist/agnostic child). Most of the time though they were just treated like everyone else and nobody cared that they had a different religion. Not to sound like a Benetton ad but kids don't actually care about that kind of crap.

planetX

Depends where you live. I had no choice but the local catholic primary. My child is doing communion this year, which I think is a load of rubbish, but gave him the choice. He chose to do it, he would have been the only one left out if he hadn't. He has enough to deal with, without adding to it by making a stand. I don't want to use my child to stand up for an ideal, though I'm furious that religion is forced upon him - but since it all flies way over his head I don't think it'll matter in the long run.

parsi

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I'm not sure how that's a counter-point to me...I wasn't trying to suggest the issue was with only one faith. Obviously this thread is in respect to RCC baptism certs but it's certainly a wider issue with any & all non-secular schools, I agree. or should that be

Mea culpa.

It was meant as a counterpoint to the perceived "it's just one religion" view that is often aired. Not a counterpoint to you.