Summer born babies - am I wrong?

[Sunflowermuma]

Hi all, I'm probably BU particularly as my friends plans don't actually have any impact on me but

I have 2DD D1 is 3 and May Born. DD2 is 6m July Born

My friend has 3 kids. DS aged 7Sept, DD 3Aug and DS 5mAug

Our two daughters are both due to start school in September at different schools, my friend told me this week how she is in contact with the school to have her daughter start Sept 2020 instead as she's summer born. I asked why as her daughter is already in nursery 5 days, has no health issues and certainly isn't behind on development. Her reasoning? She just doesn't want a child to be youngest in the year.

Her son is very bright and doing really well at school and she puts that down to his sept birthday.

I queried her and said someone has to be the youngest and surely if she doesn't have any developmental issues the school will just say no. She replied saying that she'll make something up as she'll do what she can to get her DD ahead. Again this made no sense to me as surely having another year at nursery won't be good for her and she may get picked on once the other kids realise? She got a bit snappy with me and told me to mind my own so I now feel bad for questioning her, I was polite and tbh just trying to understand her thinking

Do people really do this? I understand delaying for developmental reasons but just to make your child the oldest instead of youngest?

My youngest started reception having just turned 4. He’s doing absolutely fine. I was worried of course, but his teachers have no concerns and he’s doing really well. He’s ahead of some of the older ones. But obviously it varies from child to child.

I'm glad that my DCs were born where they were. DS1 was a Christmas baby and he benefits from being at the older end of the school year. He had speach delays which seem to be connected with literacy difficulties. He would have struggled as a July/ August baby. He is also smaller for his age which is a disadvantage in sport.

DS2 is an Easter baby. He is more confident, was articulate from an early age and more independently minded. Adjusting his reading to age, he's a good year ahead of DS1 at the same stage. It's more like a 1 year gap than two years. DS2 just about falls in the dates for deferring, and it really wouldn't have been in his interests.

DS1 needed those extra months to be ready and had he have been younger, I would have investigated if delaying would be to his benefit.

It's not that a summer birthday is a problem in itself, but some children do benefit from extra time to mature and close up the gap from older and more advantaged peers.

I was the youngest (bar one) and I just remember the sheer exhaustion and tiredness and feeling behind the eight ball (as it were) - not quite getting instructions, social cues etc. I also remember my hand muscles really aching as they made me colour in and begin to write. Academically I outdid my peers eventually, but those early days were hard and probably indelibly carved my social future.

In our area you apply for permission to defer when your cohort comes around. You don't actually apply for a place then. You get permission to defer, and then just apply as usual with the cohort of the following year.

In my DGS class is a boy who is taller than the others by a lot, socially excellent, and academically streets ahead of the others. His birthday is the very end of August. There is no one-size-fits-all.

Im in Scotland where the cutoff is the end of Feb and dc start school in P1 aged between 4.5 - 5.5.

ds(14) was only a few days before the cutoff so I deferred him (you are allowed to do this for Jan/Feb birthdays with no challenge, Nov/Dec birthdays are assessed). Nursery said he was ready to go to school, no problems. My concern was looking forward and being the youngest in secondary school not primary. Have never once regretted it and so glad I did, he is doing brilliant at secondary school.

His friends and other pupils know (because he has a birthday before a couple of his friends in the year above) but he has never ever been picked on because of my decision.

YABVU, her choices for her children are none of your business. No-one would actively choose for their child to be the youngest in an education system that puts children in sets, so if she chooses to defer and can why not?

Sounds like you are a bit concerned your dc are at the younger range, but you shouldn't project your problems onto her. Maybe save it for a system that sends dc to school too early and the years difference is more noticeable.

Fair play to her. I wish my eldest who's a summer baby had waited another year before attending school. OK he'd be the tallest year 6 you'd ever seen, physically he looks two years older, but his emotional and intellectual development is definitely a good chunk behind his peers. He was still being a bouncy puppy making fart noises when they were all on Whatsapp and it led to real problems for him at the end of juniors and he's finding secondary completely bloody overwhelming.

My youngest who's a November baby has glided through school and benefited from finding things manageable.

It really can be a problem.

Late August born DD here, have delayed her school start by a year (she will start in reception). No developmental issues.

Am so happy with our decision. She gets another year to play.

Statistically summer borns do worse, it’s more noticeable in the early years but the difference in achievement stays into and through secondary school. It’s pronounced in sports.

If you compare school systems in other countries, we start formal schooling in reading and writing much earlier. There’s a lot of research which suggests children benefit from more play time in early years. I reviewed this and used it to inform my decision for DD to postpone her school start.

It’s not so much reception I was concerned about. It’s year 1 when they’re expected to be in a classroom all day.

I look at my friends 4 year olds with homework and have no doubt that for DD we’ve made the right decision.

For me it’s not about making DD the oldest in the year - if I had an option I’d like her to be in the middle! But I don’t have that option.

My middle child is a May baby and still quite young for a 6 yr old. Lots of the other boys are gelling their hair and playing fortnight. He collects sticks, holds my hand while walk and skips everywhere.

My youngest is an October baby, so will be one of the oldest. Am interested to see how that pans out.

My DS is early Sept birth, we were living abroad in a country that has Dec-Jan school years so he went in to year 1 as one of the youngest. It was v bad for him and he got left behind. Moved back to UK and he repeated Year 1 as one of the older ones. It took about a year to catch up but he is ok now. There is also a very young August born child in the class so over a year younger, also a boy doing brilliantly. I think it depends on the child, if you are confident she can manage then great.

I just figure if all the summer born babies deferred just so that they weren't the youngest soon the spring babies would all be the youngest and their parents wouldn't be happy. Obviously I know that won't happen but the logic from my friend makes no sense.

But, in the nicest possible way, why would your friend care about that? That's like saying 'if all the parents who can afford it get tutors it disadvantages the children whose parents can't afford it' - yeah, it does, and the parents who can afford it still do it because they'd rather that if some children be disadvantaged it's not theirs. Your friend knows that someone has to be the youngest in the year, but she wants that child not to be hers.

I am a late august baby and i really wish that i had been able to wait a year to start school, i struggled all the way through.

If I had an August child i’d seriously consider it, esp at the end of August. Your child doesn’t have to legally start school until the term after they turn 5, so there’s nothing to ‘make up’ anyway. You can request for them to stay back. Some authorities may not grant this, but most do.
I know it is anecdotal, and there are plenty of late summer babies who achieve brilliantly, but on the whole I find late summer babies are on the lower achievement end overall in my classes. I would keep back a child who had just four if I didn’t think they were ready

I’m not in England so we have different dates for school age cut offs but I was born a week before the cut off. I should have started aged 4 and two months but my parents delayed it until I was 4 and 10 months. I wish I had delayed my youngest child. He was 4 and 3 months.

I haven’t read the whole thread so sorry if this has been said. I’m in Scotland where the cut offs are different but January and February babies are more often than not deferred so as not to be the youngest in the year so it happens commonly here without adverse impacts as far as I know. Of course you need to weigh up as to whether the individual child will benefit or be bored from another year in nursery. Also as you say it just leads to the youngest being a different point in the year - my youngest son is a November birthday and as all the Jan and Feb birthdays have been deferred he’s pretty much the youngest in the class.

My eldest is one of the oldest in his year and he’s always been so much ahead for his age than his younger brother.

Yr 1 was when my eldest struggled. The more nurturing atmosphere of reception was ok for her, but she wasn't ready for yr 1.

She went back to school last year into yr 4, and while she is 'behind' in some bits and extra few years of just being herself has served her well. She's more resilient and self assured, and physically very strong. She finds the limited physical activity of school days quite hard to adapt to.

Our secondary school won't accept deferrals. So, what year do you choose your child to miss if you defer? Surely that's more detrimental than being behind for a few years.

I know it might seem irrelevant but this is standard in Australia.
If your child is considered to be emotionally/behaviourally not ready for school, they will actively suggest delaying a year if there is a choice.

We start school later in Australia anyway - children HAVE to be in full time education by the time they turn 6, but they cannot start before they are 4 and a half.
So if your child was born in August, they would have to start school in the January following their 5th birthday, no choice.
But if the child was born in July, they could choose to start while they were still 4. Many people prefer to leave them another year under those circumstances, and some schools will, as I said, actively recommend that they do.
Children born in January (which is in the long school holidays here) can be already 6 when they start school but are still following the rules - I know 2 children personally who have done this.

It's a very normal thing to do and doesn't cause any such situation as you're suggesting - there is a wide range of ages in all years because of it.

Another thing here is that, if you do choose to start your child earlier, then if you find they're struggling a bit, you can pretty easily repeat a year. Another friend has just done that with her 11yo - he has just repeated year 6 rather than start high school last year.

Cheerbear23 there's no reason why a child should be forced into their 'correct' age group. Secondary schools would have to show why it is in a child's best interests to refuse them a year of education.

It's doable and down to the parent. The statistics and assumptions don't always fit though but they are there sometimes. I would be interested to know what happens when they get older, do they have to catch up a year before secondary?

My eldest started at 5 and 6 weeks. Much easier time of it.

DTs are end of august birthday, they shoud have been end of October so are technically a year ahead of their intended cohort.

They struggled tbh in r-Y2, academically and physically. neat writing came later as they struggled to control the pencil. There was no option to hold back when they were going into R.

By mid Y3 they had totally caught up, it just took them longer to get there.

September born children are much more likely to have higher GCSE results and become premereship footballers.

Probably not both, though!

Another summer born child here who definitely noticed a difference in school. Like someone else said, more socially than academically.

(There was one girl younger than me in my year, and I remember her commenting on the fact that she felt disadvantaged, too, at about age 15.)