Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask what your thoughts are on siblings getting priority at over-subscribed schools?

381 replies

goingeversoslowlymad · 19/04/2012 15:55

So the letters have gone out advising parents which school they have gained a place for their 4/5 yr old for September. As happens every year as dc1's school is badly over subscribed, there have been people who have lost out.

The school admission criteria gives priority to children who already have siblings in the school, after they have been admitted it then goes down to catchment area and distance from the school. Is this the norm most places? There was quite a lot of bad feeling today when I was at the park. A few of the mums were really angry and saying that the school is discriminating against first-born and only children as it is making it impossible to get a place. I felt a bit guilty as DC2 was one of those who got a place.

I can really see their argument and really do feel for them but what is the solution? I would not physically be able to get my children to 2 different schools in the mornings. Sorry if this has been done before but would just love to know if there is a fairer solution.

OP posts:
Fizzylemonade · 19/04/2012 21:18

We researched the school before we moved into a house very near to an outstanding primary school. Got ds1 in, it has 90 intake in reception, got ds2 in then moved.

We needed a bigger house as DH often works from home and was literally squatting at ds1's desk. Sometimes the house you want isn't available still within catchment. We were bursting at the seams.

Our school doesn't actually have a catchment area, it will accept anyone who applies as long as there are enough spaces. However being an outstanding primary and it has been for years it is always oversubscribed. So it is SEN/fostered children first, then siblings, then anyone else.

As to people having to live very close to the school, they do, but they drive to school on their way to work so there are always lots of cars especially in a school with over 600 primary children. Also some parents just don't walk the half mile or less.

echt · 19/04/2012 21:18

So why should their first choice be bumped by a sibling?

Unfair.

fuckwittery · 19/04/2012 21:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

halcyondays · 19/04/2012 21:22

AFAIK, LEAS are obliged to provide transport for the second child if they end up at a different school which the parent(s) can't get them to. So it may well be the LEA's problem. I read about a family where children were placed in different schools and the LEA were going to provide a taxi to take the second child to school but the parents were complaining that thy didn't want the child to travel alone in a taxi.

halcyondays · 19/04/2012 21:25

Why should the sibling be bumped by a first born? Whatever way you do it someone will miss out on their first choice. Generally it will be more of a problem for a second born to be at a different school than the first, than for a first born to get their second choice of school.

LibrarianByDay · 19/04/2012 21:26

I'm sure if your first-born has failed to get into the school you wanted because siblings have taken priority then you must feel pretty peeved. But I'm sure that as soon as you were in the position of having two children to get to school, your priorities would change. If you have siblings who have failed to get into the same school because a child in care has taken priority that must be equally galling.

Since schools are oversubscribed there have to be some criteria to decide who gets a place. Sibling priority is the only sensible option.

Maryz · 19/04/2012 21:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LibrarianByDay · 19/04/2012 21:28

echt - because it is no longer just their 'first choice'. It is often their only practical choice.

echt · 19/04/2012 21:30

Still not a good enough reason in my book.

Maryz · 19/04/2012 21:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LibrarianByDay · 19/04/2012 21:35

But a perfectly good enough reason in mine.

UniS · 19/04/2012 21:40

living out in the sticks, 4 miles from the next primary school( in a town), with no public bus service to that town before school start time... I've very glad the village school DS attends prioritise catchment children over out of area siblings. About 50% of the school ARE out of area children, but with no public transport those are largely families who have CHOSEN to buy the school place they want with petrol. The town primary is under subscribed.

This week there are going to be some disappointed town families, there is a bulge year of village children starting in September, at least 17 in catchment children. In DS's year only 10 live in area.

LibrarianByDay · 19/04/2012 21:44

We are in a similar position UniS. I also live on the edge of a local authority area so our next nearest school is in the next county.

OptimisticPessimist · 19/04/2012 21:46

I'm in Scotland and my local council uses the list many others have posted, SN/looked after kids, siblings in catchment, others in catchment, siblings out of catchment, others out of catchment.

We moved out of the catchment after DS1 got his place at the school - I had no choice. The house was rented and the owners put it up for sale, I took the nearest house I could find (at significant additional expense and travel time) but it's 3 miles away. I understand there is a problem as described upthread of people doing this deliberately but I imagine (given that a lot of people are unable to buy and are forced into the private letting market) that many others are in the same situation I was. Private renting is extremely insecure, most tenancies are only fixed for 6 months which does cause problems with struggling to stay in the catchment area for your school.

DS1 has additional needs so a change of school would have been extremely disruptive to his education, the school have worked very hard for the last 4 years to help him access the curriculum. Thankfully it is not over-subscribed and I have had confirmation the DS2 has a place for August, hopefully the situation will be the same for DD in two years time. It's a horrid position to be in, to know that if either of the younger two don't get a place there I will have to remove DS1 from a school where he is settled and thriving after lots of input from various agencies. I think there does need to be priority for siblings, but that out of catchment siblings should come after all of those inside the catchment area.

exoticfruits · 19/04/2012 21:49

It will not be the LEAs problem,halcyon days. You are missing the point that you got your DC into a school outside your catchment area. You can send the second to your catchment school and if you can't cope with it then they will say 'send them both to the catchment school'. They will only have responsibility in a case like UniS -if she couldn't get a place.It is the very reason why they put catchment first! They don't want to pay. Send your DC to a school that is not your catchment and it is entirely your problem-and so it should be.

Whatmeworry · 19/04/2012 21:50

If parents move away, then I think the sibling rule should be cancelled - that would stop families moving into catchments for good school, and moving away as soon as the first child starts

I agree with that - surely the first rule is "in catchment" (or was in catchment when DC1 started) but if people move out-catchment then all bets should be off.

exoticfruits · 19/04/2012 21:51

LEAs have clearly defined criteria-end of story. Find out what it is and weigh the risk.

halcyondays · 19/04/2012 21:58

Then why did the article I read say that the LEA was going to provide a taxi for the second child? It may have been the case that there were no spare spaces available for the other child, so it wasn't possible to get them both in to the other school. The LEA has a responsibility wrt to transport to school, if parents are unable to transport a child to school through no fault of their own. They provide transport for primary school children who live more than 2 miles away, if this is the closest school that has spaces.

exoticfruits · 19/04/2012 22:02

I have no idea. It doesn't work like that in my area. They have gone on a waiting list and got a place when someone goes, given up and gone private or sent the first DC to the same as the second. I should be very sure of your facts before you weigh the risk.

jellybeans · 19/04/2012 22:08

I think it is unfair that a child living right near a school can't get a place yet someone who lives miles away can because their older sib is there as their parents rejected nearer schools (in many cases). Many people prefer local schools. That is where most people went years ago before all this 'choice malarky'. LEAs keep changing the rules near me so I can't keep up but I will be peeved if DS3 doesn't get our local school as I can't get to any others.

exoticfruits · 19/04/2012 22:11

That is exactly why the criteria puts catchment first.

LibrarianByDay · 19/04/2012 22:11

That wouldn't happen though Jellybeans as siblings who live outside the catchment area are lower down the pecking order than anyone who lives within the catchment area. That is certainly true of most, if not all, LEAs.

exoticfruits · 19/04/2012 22:13

Basically school choice is a myth. You only get choice if space.

Primafacie · 19/04/2012 22:14

My eldest is only 3, so this isn't an issue yet, but our nearest school (400m away) had a maximum distance of 220m this year. There were 446 applications for 30 places, of which 10 were taken by siblings. That's 20 non-sibling applications per available place - beat that, Eton :)

We are also 'too far' to get in the next nearest (non denominational) 4 schools, so unless something gives by next year when DD starts reception, we are fucked! We would be allocated our 5th or 6th nearest school which, you've guessed it, is crap and therefore undersubscribed, and miles away. Our street is one of those 'black holes', close to lots of schools but never quite close enough.

I think the siblings rule should be scrapped if you move further away from the school than when child no. 1 got in. Taking our nearest school as an example, I'm tempted to do a FOI request to the LEA to find out the siblings' distance from the school. I suspect a lot of them are further away than we are. And I mean MUCH further away. I think if you are relying on a public (state-provided, 'free' service), then you can't insist on a particular school if you move further away - the same as healthcare really, in London you have to be 'in catchment' to get tx in some hospitals. If you move, then your child(ren) should move schools. That's as simple as that.

I really disagree with the poster upthread who said 'we had no choice but to move, we were bursting at the seams'. Fine, move, but take your children with you :)

halcyondays · 19/04/2012 22:14

I'm speaking hypothetically. We don't have catchment areas here and I don't know of anyone who hasn't been able to get siblings in to the same school. Siblings get priority over most other children so it would be unlikely to happen.

But if you didn't give priority to siblings and there were people who could not get a sibling in to the same school, then as I understand it the LEA may have a responsibility for transport, depending upon the family's circumstances.