Unfair to defer summer borns

[ifyoudont]

Dd was born late august, is the youngest in her year but instead of rest of her class being just under a year older than her , there’s 4 children who are nearly a year and a half older because they were born April -august the year above and deferred.

Somebody has to be the youngest and somebody the oldest but surely the fairest way is to keep the age difference within a year.

Dd is doing well academically and socially and only really struggling during playtime and PE as she is smaller. A boy in her class has early May birthday but because he was deferred instead of being 3+ months older than her is 15+ months older and the biggest and strongest in the class leading to several incidents where he has injured her.

A family member has a baby due in June and is already mentioned deferring them without knowing how advanced or behind they are going to be.

I definitely do think there are a few exceptions where it can be necessary but it seems to to be often done just because it can. Maybe there should be be stricter guidelines and some sort of test required?

AIBU? If so what am I missing?
I don’t hear people share this opinion often and haven’t shared it with family member

I am so disappointed by this thread. Being born in September is also an unfair advantage if being deferred is.

I deferred my July born. She had a speech delay and has selective mutism. She is also rather small size wise. She would have been in pieces if she started reception aged 4. And threads like this make me worry that people are going to be arseholes for the next 15 years.

There’s no assumption that ‘all’ summer borns will experience any of the above. Of course there’s some very able, successful summer borns. Data doesn’t mean it’s all anything, it talks in averages. Many parents may feel that they wouldn’t be able to read the data and then decide they would roll the dice with their child’s future/education. Some parents may not feel like that at all. For some summer borns it works out fine and that’s great but how do you know it won’t be your child who struggles? It’s a tricky one!

FWIW, I think the solution is to make school age starts between April to March. That way every child is at least 4Y6M.

Deferring should be an exception, some good examples have been given. I share the OPs concern if it becomes the norm.

Family went overseas for 5 yrs, attended international school. Quickly learned that it was popular & common to “hold back”. My DS had many friends 1-2 yrs older. He played rugby which was interesting to watch when it’s year 6, and boys are mix from age 10-13/14. The out of school rugby clubs were strictly age based so he would play with some boys in school team, but on weekends they were in older teams.

It could look like a disadvantage if your child was correct age but others were much more mature.

Apparently many in the “international” crowd want to hold kids back so that they are more likely top of class academically/socially & sports. For some it’s impt for child to be “top of class” even if he is 13 or 14 in year 6.

Oh and I feel the ID thing. I’m also a summer born - solidarity 😝

For most summer borns it works ok. There's been kids youngest of school classes for at least 2 centuries. Without all this fuss.

Maybe just go back to the 3 entry input where kids start the term before they are _5 rather than the Sept after they are 4. So August born starts after easter holidays, April after Xmas etc

In your opinion.

My summer born child actively looks forward to school. The same cannot be said for some of their autumn born friends.

One size doesn't fit all.

@ifyoudont

I completely agree with you. Schools need to address the environment/support they give before starting to apply ‘boxes’ of what they deem normal, and try to shift round children who don’t quite fit their adult-defined box.
I think a child who has been taken out of year will ask why as they get older, think there is something ‘wrong’ with them, wonder why they have a different birthday and may have trouble getting back ‘in year’.

Particularly young children who just may need a bit more time.

Some children at 4 years and a few days are ready for school- my DD would have been, although she's a Feb birthday.

My SD is an October birthday and was only just ready for school at 4 years and 11 months. There's no way she'd have coped if she'd been an August birthday.

There are some children in DD's class who are taller than most of the Y1s and some who are smaller than most of preschool, even though there were no deferrals in her year, and a whole range of academic ability.

You cannot judge based on age whether a child has the maturity for school; they are all different, hence why parents get to make the decision to wait a bit longer if their child is younger in the year.

If your child is being injured by another child, it's irrelevant how old he is, that needs to be dealt with.

School isn't the Hunger Games, it shouldn't be a case of the biggest being a threat to the smallest.

I agree OP. I think it’s fine to defer kids if they aren’t ready to start reception but they should give them an at home programme to catch up and then go into the year they’re supposed to be in still. So: if you want to defer your August 2025 baby to not start reception, they follow a settling programme - then join year 1 in September 2026.

UNLESS - there is some other reason like the poster whose child has selective mutism or kids being born premature etc. They are treated as exceptions and can start reception.

It might also put people off doing it unless it’s absolutely necessary.

I'd have deferred your child. What is the rush to send her off to school? She has years ahead of her to study and 'do well academically'.

I'm in favour of deferring.

Although my son’s school was happy for him to be deferred, in Year 1 they kept putting pressure on me and my DH to move him back up a year to where he “should be”.

They basically wanted him to jump from Year 1 to Year 3 and miss out Year 2. I think they wanted it because my son was academically able and so would have been to skip a year from that respect, but for us his deferral was never about academic worries, it was all about his emotional and social level of development.

And just as sport has been mentioned earlier, with regards to his football team we were told he can choose whether he wants to play with his peers, I.e the year group he’s currently in, or whether he wants to play with the year group above, I.e the cohort he “should” be in. The sports league said that parents of deferred children are always given the option to choose which age group they want to play with.

In Scotland school age runs from 1st March to end of February.

So kids are aged 4.5 to 5.5 when starting school in August.

Even then anyone with a child who will still be 4 when starting school can defer until the following year and a great many do.

We Scots are all very relaxed about it and always view the English system as 😳

And how does that work if both parents are working?

I am summer born June - I wished they deferred my school start - I struggled in school and could never catch up - never went to university - it was all too much for me!

My child is one of the eldest (maybe IS the eldest), I'm not entirely sure. I can guarantee we haven't ever come across a disadvantage in being among the eldest in the class. Take this worry out of your head. DC is due to start secondary soon.

I deferred partly because everyone else seems to and in the next class up he’d have been really young and various kids over a year older. Generally I think we begin formal education a bit young so an extra year in nursery is often a good thing.

You also are making a decision at 3 when you apply for school. I can fully understand the thought process why take the chance when the policy is there. The only disadvantage to deferring I can see is financial, another year of nursery fees. Hence why wealthy more likely to defer.
It’s the difference between being just about fine/managing/they’ll catch up and wanting dc to thrive.
l’m on a parents uni facebook and there’s lots of angst re young in year ones eg Kid who has worked in a care home and been able to get work experience as 18 in September yr13 is more likely to get offer on certain competitive medical/health courses - lots of places won’t have under 18s for insurance reasons. Gap year for young in year seems popular.

I fully agree with the OP. Deferring should be reserved to extreme cases, summer born with for example development delay following an early birth or significant delays supported by HV letter maybe.
Someone has to be the youngest, birth date is a fair criteria, parental input is not.

“One size doesn’t fit all.”

I wish that those who are against deferral shared the same view as you.

I agree. We are in a grammar area. Many April, May, June borns are deferring as they will be a year older for grammar test and it’s not adjusted to take account.

My boy is April. He should would be in the youngest half of the year but not summer born. I wasn’t going to defer but because everyone is and he will be youngest of classes a year and a half older now I am feeling am I letting him down by not deferring?!

It’s ridiculous honestly.

Wanting to delay school entry isn’t about making a fuss — it’s about using data and child development principles to correct a clear disadvantage faced by children born at the end of the academic year.

The entire school system is long overdue for an overhaul. Starting formal education at age 4 should be the first thing on the agenda. The current cut-off date of 31st August has nothing to do with what’s best for children — it’s a relic of the harvest calendar, not pedagogy.

Other parts of the UK and much of Europe start school later, and their outcomes speak for themselves. Just because “it’s always been this way” doesn’t mean it’s right — or that it should continue.

YABU

You have the same exact opportunity to defer your child. But it is your choice not to.

You can't then complain that other people take that opportunity.

I can only go by my son’s school, they refused to allow him to go into reception if deferred. So it must be up to the schools discretion

It's no longer so, the law was clarified recently meaning that if they accept a deferral they are accepting into reception the following year