Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Summer born babies - am I wrong?

749 replies

Sunflowermuma · 08/01/2019 12:31

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?

OP posts:
PhilomenaButterfly · 08/01/2019 13:44

DS2 was born in August, his yr1 teacher kept saying how behind he was, how bad his behaviour was, I pointed out his birthday, she said "we can't keep using that as an excuse." A study has shown that August born yr7s are still behind, but I didn't bother mentioning that to her.

paap1975 · 08/01/2019 13:45

I am a late August baby and although I didn't struggle academically, I feel I did socially. I wasn't as mature as my classmates and ended up being bullied

Emsonline · 08/01/2019 13:46

My youngest is due to start this coming September. She will have turned 4 in the May. No way is she anywhere near ready, I too shall be trying to have her start in 2020 instead

Emsonline · 08/01/2019 13:47

To add - Hopefully she will go in to reception rather than year 1

FluffySlipperSocks · 08/01/2019 13:49

I should note that the option to defer reception entry is not possible in our district. He would have had to go in at year 1 if he'd have started a year later.. or indeed halfway through reception if he'd started a few months later

Emsonline · 08/01/2019 13:50

@DarkDarkNight - Do you feel this was the right decision? As I'm hoping to do the same.

BonfiresOfInsanity · 08/01/2019 13:50

Statistically the youngest in year groups are more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD. I'm sure there was a study in the US recently as well.

What on earth has being born in the summer got to do with ADHD? Surely this has to be an overzealous misdiagnosis due to maturity rather than them actually having ADHD?

StarUtopia · 08/01/2019 13:51

DD is Sept baby - top of the class by miles.

DS is June baby - he's no where near where she was, but I remind myself he's still little. Personally, I think it's got nothing to do with the child and everything to do with the Mum not wanting to let go of her baby! Quite cruel really (unless there is a proper reason). Someone has to be the youngest. All kids progress differently but by Year 4, if they're bright, they're bright.

CmdrIvanova · 08/01/2019 13:53

Yes bonfires that's the point.

www.vox.com/2018/12/17/17263874/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder-symptoms-diagnosis

DarkDarkNight · 08/01/2019 13:53

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

It’s not that I don’t want my son to be the youngest. It’s that I didn’t want him in School at just-turned 4. The Spring born children will be that little bit older.

I still wouldn’t be happy, as I think Early Years should be much more play-based than it is but I would have to deal with it. There is an alternative in place for Summer-born children (although some LEAs are very awkward about it).

CmdrIvanova · 08/01/2019 13:55

Yes star. Parents who consider their child's emotional, physical and academic maturity and decide not to send a just 4 year old into full time formal education for which they are not ready are dysfunctional Oedipus types unable to cut the apron strings Hmm

MrsKoala · 08/01/2019 13:55

I think it depends where you live. In my county you have to go straight into year 1 if you skip a year (my ds2 was due mid sept but was born 3 weeks early on the last few days of August). So we decided missing out on reception would be worse for him.

We enquired about delaying the start and they said they would have to have evidence of him having a delay of some sort and would really scrutinise it. Also they said that each summer they would review it and the school could put him up a year if they felt he had caught up. And when he started secondary school it was likely he would start in year 8

He started as the youngest in the school this September and it hasn't gone well. He really dislikes it and has regressed and is now very babyish at home, even describing himself as the baby and drawing himself in my tummy and our baby as being bigger than him. It was especially heartbreaking over Christmas when every morning (even Christmas day) he looked at me with tears in his eyes and said 'mummy do I have to go to school today?'

This is in stark contrast to the confident little boy who went to preschool happily. And also a massive contrast to DS1 who is born beginning of Sept and who loved school from the beginning. The only thing which I think makes it bearable is ds1 is yr1 and ds2 is yrR (despite them being 2 years apart) and they get to eat lunch together. When I ask him what he likes about school he says 'eating lunch with ds1 and coming home'.

toobreathless · 08/01/2019 13:55

I'm really against parents Having the option to choose to defer without good reason such as prematurity/SEN.

Because the most disadvantaged children who are looked after or whose parents aren't invested in their education or can't afford to defer them won't be deferred and then bamm they may be up to 17 months younger than a deferred April born who would be fine anyway. It just widens the gap for these children.

(Mum of 2x summer borns and 2x Autumn borns!)

HermioneWaslib · 08/01/2019 13:56

We looked into deferring because I believe the "job" of childhood is play, not learning to read and write at 4 years 1 month. In the end we didn't go for it. But it wasn't about "getting ahead", it was about what environment is better for a four year old, vs a five year old.

MamaDane · 08/01/2019 13:56

She probably knows what's best for her son. So many studies have shown the disadvantages of being born in August as opposed to September.
In fact I think British kids start school too early.

DontMakeMeShushYou · 08/01/2019 13:57

There are some advantages to being older in your school year, although it depends on the individual child as well.

My DD is a late summer baby so went to school at 4 and a few weeks. I didn't consider delaying entry since she was showing signs of being bored at nursery by 3 and a half. She is a child who very much likes structured and more formal learning. Nursery had way too much free time for her liking. She's pretty bright, I think I can safely say now she's at secondary and still a high achiever. Interestingly, related to what LisaSimpsonsbff said, almost every one of her friends has a birthday in November-January.

loubluee · 08/01/2019 13:57

Mine was a June baby, and was the most ahead in his class at reception (was already reading and writing but that was his nursery that pushed him in those areas as he was capable), until year four and some others caught up. When he entered Year 7 was in top sets but I would say the middle of top set.

So for us being young had no impact at all, but also showed that although very bright, a lot of the children matured later and caught up or over took.

I will say there was about 3 children who started reception and appeared very young- couldn’t sit still, couldn’t be quiet for a story etc. But within a few weeks had easily got to grip with it, and I think it benefited them from being around the others in reception as they learnt from them. Had they stayed in nursery they would have still had the same problem but were older when they started.

MrsKoala · 08/01/2019 13:57

Agree with other posters - it's not about not wanting them to be the youngest, it's about no wanting them to be just 4 a few days before school starts. DS1 was 5 the day after he started school and the difference in them is amazing. I am worried we have put him off school for life. I think if you start hating it you have to really work hard to turn that dread around.

NotUmbongoUnchained · 08/01/2019 13:58

We thought about if for our DD, who was born 30th August. But we just decided to see how she was. She was absolutely ready even though she’s almost a whole year younger all the September borns and she’s one of the top in her class now.

nojellybabies · 08/01/2019 13:59

some of us who really really needed to defer (parents of the correct candidate children) have had a harder time because exhausted professionals think we are just part of the "get ahead" crowd like your friend.

but on the other hand we also face stigma when our young kids have problems and making it a free choice reduces that stigma.

Year deferral for us was the best decision we ever made.

TinklyLittleLaugh · 08/01/2019 13:59

Lucky you that you got to plan

For the most part, luck doesn't come into it though. I would have stopped ttc if it had meant my child was born in June or later.

DD1 is October born and certainly benefitted from being both able and socially confident. If I'm honest she slid down the class rankings slightly as the years progressed: by Y6 she wasn't the stand out clever kid she was in reception as others caught up. But she has always had that (benevolent) queen bee thing going on, even now as an adult.

Drivenmad80 · 08/01/2019 13:59

Mine are both August born and started school the term they turned 4. Both of them have thrived and are very happy. I don't see the point in delaying school a year if there is no concerns with anything. Plus if I'd delayed them they wouldn't have gone up with all their nursery friends

Coldilox · 08/01/2019 14:03

I’ve delayed my son’s start, he “should” have gone last September, but instead he’s starting later this year. His birthday is 19th Aug, but he was just over 3 weeks premature.

It’s not about wanting him not to be the youngest. I just know he was not ready for school at just turned 4, and he wouldn’t be ready for the massive leap to year 1 at just turned 5. I’ve given him an extra year to develop emotionally, the same year he would have had had he been born on time. If he was the youngest in a school system that started at age 6 or 7 like many other countries, I would be far less concerned.

Children don’t have to be in full time school until the term after their 5th birthday, so he’s starting school when he has to rather than when I can. The only thing you need permission for is to start them out of cohort in reception rather than year 1.

In Scotland, parents of children born within a couple of months of the cut off automatically have a choice which year to send their children. The government in england announced they would look to do similar, and promised a consultation, which we are still waiting for (they are mostlynpreoccupied with Brexit at the moment!)

I don’t regret my decision at all. I can already see how much he has progressed in the last three months and hopefully when he does start school he will thrive rather than cope. Our nursery (he goes three days a week) had never heard of it before but are now telling us they can completely see why we made that choice and say he will do much better when he transitions to school in September.

You just need to look at the stats on summer borns to see how damaging starting school before children are ready can do. Summer borns are more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, results are affected even as far as A Levels and university entrance. It’s not about being the youngest, it’s about being too young.

Original poster
Sunflowermuma · 08/01/2019 14:03

Thank you for all the replies your stories are really interesting

I wasn't trying to judge my friend, it's not something I have experience of. My Dd is may born and I've no worries about her starting in Sept she's very bright and certainly isn't young compared to her peers at nursery (although she's shorter).

Maybe I'll feel like I need to consider it when DD2 is older

OP posts:
Firesuit · 08/01/2019 14:05

(Haven't time to read the thread, on my way out, so may not be the first with a post like this.)

I wanted to delay DD so she could not be the youngest, but it turns out that although you're allowed to delay when they actually start going to school, that makes no difference to what year they're put in. Put it simply, if I'd kept her home an extra year, she would simply have started in year 1, alongside the same pupils she would have been with had she gone to reception.