Q. My great-granddaughter’s parent’s relationship did not survive. The child’s mother now has another daughter. As I have the means to give my great-granddaughter education in the private sector, I have offered this, but the child’s mother wants both daughters educated at the same school for family harmony. Is there anything that you could suggest other than paying for both and using the inheritance of my great-granddaughter for this other non-related child? Thank you cordially.
Name and address withheld
A. I have consulted a veteran of the same dilemma. In the 1970s her very bright daughter was accepted at Godolphin, a London girls’ school which, at that time, was first choice for quality of education. Godolphin was then grant-aided and completely free. Yet she also had a son whom she knew would not pass the exam for Latymer, the equivalent boys’ school. For family harmony she therefore sent both children to London’s then notorious Holland Park comprehensive. She takes up the tale. ‘My daughter, now 50, has never forgiven me. You must definitely send your great-grand-daughter to the private school. If the mother makes light of it and lets the second girl see she has not been personally differentiated against then, rather than causing resentment, her sister’s different education should act as a stimulus to her. It will pace her and give her a motive for trying to do better.’ The mother should see that such two-pronged schooling benefits both girls. Rather than confining them in their own cliques, it will broaden their horizons and their social access in both directions.
Q. I enjoy an enduring correspondence with my former history master who suggested recently that the appellation ‘Esq’ on the envelopes of my letters to him was antiquated and may be suggestive of the addressee’s advanced years. I reassured him that this was not my intention. I have reverted to the use of ‘Mr’ and suggested to him that he may wish to address me with my title ‘Dr’. Is this disrespectful?
S.L., by email
A. No, but why not forget this storm in a teacup and revert immediately to using the courtesy of yore? Men widely agree that an ‘Esq’ on an envelope suggests the contents concern social life rather than commerce. It lifts the spirits and is far preferable to ‘Mr’.
Q. I agree with your advice to L.K. (6 March) about coping with the tedium of the election by making bets on it with a group of friends. May I suggest that he would be better advised to use the peer-to-peer betting service Betfair, where millions of people are doing just this? The idea of potentially making money at politicians’ expense will give the next few weeks a genuine novelty.
S.G., London SW8
A. Surely it is more fun to compete against friends? In any case I do not condone the wagering of more than £50.
Q. Your advice — ‘it is not the norm to issue dress codes for parties within a private house’ leaves for non-black-tie occasions a problem for those between the formal older generation and the informal younger one. I find ‘Men: ties’ (or ‘no ties’) very helpful.
R., Henley-on-Thames
A. Thank you for broadening this debate.
Comments