In a recent Daily Mail column, Sybilla Hart argues that private schools can foster entitlement and snobbery, and she says she is glad most of her children have attended state schools. "The appalling, spoilt behaviour of private school children makes me so glad mine went to state school—otherwise they'd be entitled brats!" Hart writes, framing her reflection as a personal counterpoint to what she has witnessed among peers who attended private institutions.
Hart explains that her family’s schooling decisions were shaped by geography and circumstance rather than a desire to showcase private education. Her eldest, Isaac, now 18, was privately schooled until he was 16 because authorities could not secure a suitable state primary place in London. After relocating to the north Essex countryside two years later, the couple enrolled their second child, Beatrice, in a local village primary. With Isaac unable to transfer at that stage, they found him a local private school that offered strong sporting facilities. Hart notes that Isaac has since embraced the state school sixth form just as enthusiastically, and the three daughters and youngest son have known only the state system. The family’s experience, she contends, underscores a pragmatic approach to education rather than a litany of ideological commitments.
Hart goes on to describe a scene that she says illustrates the social dynamics at play. She recalls visiting a friend who cried over vicious bullying her daughter endured at boarding school, and she recounts an episode at a party this summer where a 13-year-old private school pupil asked her daughters, "Are they chavs?" The girls, she says, were mortified by the question and worried that their voices did not sound posh enough or that their clothes were not good enough. Hart writes that such exchanges are not unusual, and she believes they reveal an entitlement that can stem from the private-school environment. Some peers are gracious, she notes, but others openly snub state-school children by asking, "Oh, is that a state school?" before making the entire room aware of the remark.
The columnist argues that the contrast between private and state schooling extends beyond social snobbery. She asserts that the children she has met in the state sector are generally more grounded, polite and respectful. They are straight-talking, maintain eye contact, and understand boundaries. Hart says those traits become evident in everyday interactions, such as when she refuses to host an impromptu sleepover and sees how her daughter’s friends respond to being told no. In her view, private-school children too often assume they will get their own way, and the resulting dynamic can erode basic manners.
Hart offers additional anecdotes to illustrate her point about privilege and discipline. She recalls a shopping trip with private school friends in which her child’s desires were eclipsed by those of her companions, leaving her child carrying some of their purchases. She also cites reports of private-school pupils who have taken items or acted at the expense of their families, drawing a line between affection for material goods and the need to earn them. Another refrain in her household concerns why a birthday present should be expensive when a peer has access to items "for free." Hart links such attitudes to broader patterns she associates with private-school culture.
A recurring theme in Hart’s piece is time. She contrasts the daily oversight she maintains as a parent with the more limited windows for discipline available to boarding-school families. The latter, she says, can create an environment where boundaries are harder to enforce, and where the discipline that might accompany a long day together is reduced to brief windows rather than sustained parental guidance. Hart argues that this dynamic helps explain why she perceives private-school environments as prioritizing a polished curriculum and extracurricular prowess—such as fencing or lacrosse—over manners like saying please and thank you.
The piece closes with a personal reflection: if Hart had privately educated all of her children, she believes she would have spent weekends and holidays apart from them, arguing about why the car was old or why they could not have the latest fashion item or makeup. She imagines an ongoing cycle of tension and bargaining, played out in a private-school framework. In her view, a state-school education offers a different, more tangible sense of family life and discipline. "Give me a state school education over that any day," she concludes, signaling a preference for the values she associates with the state system over the prestige of private schooling.
Hart’s column arrives amid ongoing public debate over whether private education fosters privilege and snobbery or whether it provides opportunity and excellence. While her experiences are personal and particular, they touch on broader discussions about social mobility, parental involvement, and the ways in which schooling environments shape children’s behavior and attitudes. The discussion also reflects how families navigate the tension between affordability, access, and the perceived long-term outcomes of different school systems. The response to her column, from readers and commentators, has varied, with supporters praising the emphasis on character and daily discipline, and critics arguing that private schooling can offer benefits in resources, networks, and opportunities that merit broader access and reform. For now, Hart’s piece stands as a pointed, personal contribution to a multifaceted conversation about education, class, and culture within contemporary society.