Unfair to defer summer borns

If a child wishes to ‘give up’ it is better that they are not in a classroom distracting the other kids surely? Far better if they are out getting an apprenticeship.

But imo parents who defer until their kids are older are far more likely to be middle class parents whose kids grow up in an environment where third level education is the norm.
Before people come rushing to say otherwise, I am saying this imo from seeing the youngest kids in my own kid’s primary school having non UK born parents and parents in employment that is on the clock.

It's difficult. I have a July born who we considered deferring as I knew academically he wasn't ready. However physically and socially he was ready and was chomping at the bit to go and wanted to stay with his friends. Deferring just didn't sit right with me either for some reason.

He's in year 2 and still behind and hates the sitting down lessons. I constantly question my decision and almost wish the option wasn't available

I’m in Scotland and deferred my DS, so he’ll be 5.5 not 4.5 when he starts school. There’s a cohort of 9 kids going into his P1 who have deferred with birthdays ranging from October - March (intake is different up here). I think it’s a lot more common in Scotland so more “acceptable”. DS is bright but wasn’t socially ready for school at all last year, he would have really struggled. Deferring him has given us the chance to build his confidence and now he’s genuinely excited to start school, if we’d sent him last year I don’t think we have got him through the door. He’s a kind, sweet, sensitive boy and I have no regrets giving him an extra year to get ready.

These threads always polarise opinion, and quite frankly I don’t understand why anyone cares so much about what other parents do.

Such threads always have lots of “my DD was born at 11.59pm on August 31st and she was so ready for school, she’s the cleverest in her class” and also “my DS was just one day past his 4th birthday when he started school, and he’s the tallest in his class and the best at football”. As if these are reasons for no one being allowed to defer.

The fact is that parents know their kids best, and what will make them struggle or thrive. It’s not a sneaky plan to make their kids the biggest oldest strongest cleverest in their class. It’s an attempt to ensure that school is as good an experience for their child as it can be.

And at the end of the day, research has shown time and again that summer born kids, especially boys, do less well at school if they start very young.

Well it won't because many of those who have deferred have done so because their child wasn't ready. If anything, insisting children whose parents consider them not ready come to school at the same time as everyone else will widen the gap.

You seem to be looking at school as a competition with classes as age categories, but it isn't.

No-one is deferring their summer born child to give them a better chance of "winning" Reception or to get one over on your daughter, they are doing it to give them a better chance of getting through school emotionally and psychologically unscathed.

Parents know their children best and there is nobody more qualified to do the best thing for their child to achieve their full potential in the longterm.

We deferred entry to reception for our 22nd August born premature twins - no evidence required beyond the head teachers of the 3 schools saying that they would place the twins in reception do they were successful in getting a place at their school.

There is another child also deferred in their class, birthday is the day before the twins and the parents reason for deferral was the same - premature birth pushing them into the academic year ahead of when they would have started school if born on the date they were due!!

Its allowed because research shows premature summer born children are disadvantaged if they start school days after their 4th birthday and it’s an option for all summer born children thanks to the guidance produced by the government!

My dd is end of August as well and we chose not to defer as she seemed academically gifted, and I’m really glad we didn’t! She has friends that are almost a year older than her but as she is top of her class and succeeding in everything she does. Honestly, it sounds like the school needs to be tackling the behaviour of the older children in the school to safeguard your child.

April-April would be better really, they'd all be a bit older. It's why we used to have staggered entry - because just turned four is too young for many.

in rural areas schools have age 3-7 in one classroom (nursery to y2). Usually less than 30 kids though.

The tallest child in my daughters class is Summer born and wasn’t deferred, she’s the tallest by a huge margin too.

I can’t see the problem with deferring - I think parents opt to do it if they don’t believe their children are ready for school, not to avoid being the youngest. A solution would be to have children start school at 5 when more children are likely to be ready for school, or to allow flexibility for parents to choose when their kids start school.

There are children with two year age gaps within the same classroom all over the world without any injuries - if your child is regularly being injured at school I would raise that as an issue with the school, urgently.

Further down the line there is nothing to stop deferred entry children leaving school at the end of year 10, as they will already be 16 and legally allowed to leave and do an apprenticeship. They can do so without parental consent.

I agree. Both mine are summer born. And much later than your May example! One is miles ahead academically and always has been (birthday summer holidays). The other has always been a bit behind/just about there. But I don't think she would have benefitted at all from being delayed. I think it's her personality and attitude to learning that stop her scoring higher. That hasn't really changed in all the years. What she does have in abundance is all the charm and emotional intelligence for the family though! So I think she'll do well ultimately.

how old is your child out of curiosity.

my child is mid August. I didn’t defer. He walked in the smallest. He was about average in the year until about year 4 where he started to overtake the other children height wise and academically.

as it turns out I would have done something terribly erroneous to my child if I had deferred him.

I agree with you OP

When deferral started it was July and August born only.

With the expansion to April onwards it’s a bit of a joke.

What will happen is that over time more and more summer born parents will defer - as they won’t want to be by far the youngest - until effectively the admissions birth year runs April to April.

There maybe some that defer for advantage but not in my personal experience.
Friends and I all deferred for the same reason of giving an extra year allowed for the child to cope with all the challenges school brings (including the social aspect). None of us viewed it as 1 year either we all considered it across all aspects of attending school.

I think it's just new in England so becomes an outroar once it's bedded in will most likely be more akin to Scotlands reaction of shrug shoulders your child your choice and gets on with it!

I just don't personally feel I gain by making it harder for others to achieve, because what would really benefit us all is more people doing better educationally. So if a neighbour's child defers, I think it benefits me if it benefits them.

I'm not naive, I don't see everything as blissful. But neither is our society pure competition. The idea a child being three months older than my child would negatively affect mine as much as my child being in a class with a child who is not mature enough to cope with school is nonsense. I'd far rather they were in with kids who are ready.

It benefits my kid if the other kids in the class are ready. It benefits the kid in question. And it benefits society, which benefits me too.

My DS is the only early May deferral I've known, and I worked in primary schools for 20 years. Never came across an April deferral.

Obviously only my experience, but it's usually July/August babies that are deferred.

DS was born at 25 weeks and was still playing catch up in terms of speech when he started. He was in age 2-3 clothes. He's still the smallest now and is about mid class in terms of academics.

I think what happens in practice is the vast majority of parents see what’s coming up the pipeline and defer. In Scotland and my local school has always had a quite positive attitude to deferral and if you can you do.

We deferred and had an extra year of funded school nursery but if we hadn’t then DS would of shared his birthday with a girl a year older and would of been the youngest in the class by several months.

Yes, your experience sounds like what would have happened if I had tried to defer my later summer child. It’s theoretically possible in my area but the council are going to throw every obstacle at you and state in bold on their application pack that children are taught in their birth year ie younger but miss a year. In other education authorities it seems an easier choice to make.

my child had the best prep with nursery but they have struggled, were badly impacted by COVID absence and are very negative about education. I feel sad and a little guilty that I should have pressed for deferment. Many additional needs take years to be identified and the school are normally part of that identification process. My child took until 10 for additional needs to be identified and I think that’s quite common. It’s less common for the situation to be clear age 3 when you need to start acting on plans to defer.

I think one thing noticeable from this thread is that everyone seems to agree that children with additional needs should defer as necessary. The children who don’t have additional needs I assume are being deferred because of either parents thinking 4 is too young to start school or because they want their child to have the advantage of being eldest in their class.

I Know that people who have deferred their kids on this thread have said it’s not a competition etc but I assume they’re not that daft to think that it isn’t a reason why SOME defer (especially as if you have deferred your kids you’re likely to have ready threads and articles about it).

It widens the age gap between the oldest and youngest child. Rather than there being 12 months, there could be 19 months. In a class, you could have a just turned 4 year old and nearly 5 and a half year old. That is a huge difference in age at that age. You could potentially have a nearly 5.5 year old child who is meeting all of the things 'expected' of their age in a class with a 4 year old who is not. The gap is widened. Parents views of whether their child is ready for school will all be different.

If it's about whether a child is ready for school, surely all children should be able to defer? What about children born of the 31st of March?

Yeah, he is August 20th, and would have been 4 years and 2 days if I had sent him when I “should” have.

I would be really interested to know how many April/May/June babies are deferred, and also if the parents find it a harder process than the parents of the July/August babies.

I know the deferral policy is open to all children born from April onwards, but I imagine that in reality the parents of the April/May/June babies probably face a lot more push back from the schools.

I can’t speak for others, but I can say that I delayed my child’s start because of SEN. There were also issues about provision and it was a complicated nightmare to sort out, but was also in my child’s best interests. I would have loved her to have started school at the ‘right’ time, but had to do what was right for her. My other child is also summer-born, but doesn’t have SEN and was packed off to school when she was 4.