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

One of DD's friends is a summer born who was deferred at school and she is not allowed to play in the same football team (grass roots league) as her classmates as she is the age bracket above, so has to play with kids in the year above her school year. DD is U11 but her friend has to play U12. You're right that it is your team for the whole year, so next year DD will be U12 and her friend U13.

In NI the age cut off is the end of June for September start and Scotland is March/April for August but deferring is v common in lots of Scotland

I think universities will do this in the future.

I doubt it.

It makes a few months difference, it's been common in Scotland for years to defer. Kids in Scotland, and many many coming from abroad, sit exams at slightly different ages to English kids.

They're not going to change a whole system based on a handful of English kids starting school a few months older.

I think your judgement is uneducated. You do you and your child and let other parents handle their own.
If you were to research anything in line with deferring a child you would see the benefits of doing so for the child.
I am a mother that has deferred their child, which statistics show is in my child's best interest.

Exactly!

People assume that the deferred children are SO much older than the rest of the class and it’s so unfair…..when in reality that’s hardly the case.

My deferred son is the oldest in the class, but only by 3 days.

In the month following my son’s birthday, another 4 children have their birthdays and turn the same age as my son. There are then another 3 children who turn the same age as my son the month after that.

How is him being the oldest by 3 days putting him at a massive advantage and one that should be taken into account by Universities?!

I am August born and diagnosed with combined ADHD. I would not have benefited from being deferred, I don’t think. It’s an issue of focus and executive functioning that would have been there regardless of the year. I was lucky to have a massively supportive school though, even though they wouldn’t have had a clue what ADHD was back then, and the structure alongside their support, was massively more beneficial than I think an extra year at home would have been. But we’re all different and what worked for me won’t work for everyone in the same position.

He must be late August Born? A 1st April born deferred child would be 18 months older than my 31st August child. I’m assuming it’s that kind of gap people are referring to.

Thought was 3 in Wales

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.

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.

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?

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).

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 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.

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'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.

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.

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 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.

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. 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.

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.

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.

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

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.