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

To not want an August baby?

360 replies

DodgyApostrophe · 19/11/2008 20:49

I'm not ttc this month.

I don't want a baby in August as I feel they are definitely at a disadvantage throughout school.

I do want a baby, desperately. Have been ttc for 2 years and have had 2 mc since ds1.

Is it really that bad to be born in August?

OP posts:
VinegarTits · 23/01/2009 12:18

Your comparing the risk of being the youngest in the class to the risk of not wearing a seatbelt

Farking ell the mind doth boggle

Are you the type of people who would buy a perfect clone, like a stepford baby? (if they existed) rather than have a normal healthy happy AUGUST baby

Picante · 23/01/2009 12:19

I'm surprised this is still going on! I'm the OP a couple of namechanges back.

I'm now over 10 weeks and could not be happier (apart from the morning sickness and current throat infection!). Official due date is 18th August.

I'm sorry I came across as insensitive towards those ttc... I'd now just say I'm happy to be pregnant.

snorkle · 23/01/2009 13:34

Picante:

Glad to hear your news. I am the

Vinegartits:

If you are summerborn you are 19 percentage points more likely to have statemented SEN at age 11 than an autumn born and 59 percentage points more likely to have non-statemented SEN.

63% of people killed in car accidents are not wearing seatbelts and 37% are. That's a 26 percentage point increase.

As you see the levels of risk are similar(ish). The consequences of the risks are very different of course, I am absolutely not trying to compare SEN with dieing in a car crash, but isn't it interesting that nearly everyone agrees that wearing seatbelts saves lives even though it's never actually saved their life; but many can't accept that being youngest in a year might make it more likely a child might underachieve because they themselves didn't.

expatinscotland · 23/01/2009 13:38

Wouldn't it make more sense to get politically active to change the stupid system in England, which would benefit far more people, than arrange trying to conceive around a month?

VinegarTits · 23/01/2009 13:45

I dont need to know statistics snorkle, your missing my point

You cant compare the risk of not wearing a seat belt (life threatening) with the risk (not even a risk in my eyes)of how old your dc will be when he starts school (not life threatening in any way)

Your trying to compare these 2 risks. Its a ridiculous comparison to try and make

snorkle · 23/01/2009 13:47

The sentence I didn't complete was ment to say I'm also the proud parent of a perfectly happy August child & wouldn't swap .

snorkle · 23/01/2009 14:04

And I think you are missing my point too Vinegartits...

What I'm trying to compare is not the level of the threat itself, but people's understanding of the situation. When the seatbelt laws first came in, many, many people thought it was an infringement of personal liberty, unneccesary and refused to acknowledge the safety benefits. It has taken time and much government reinforcing of the message to get to the point we are at today where most people will 'belt-up' for every journey even though they are very unlikely to have an accident on that particular journey.

Now it seems that in the same way, many people (maybe you included) refuse to acknowledge that summerborns are more likely to be educationally disadvantaged by our system and are less likely to attend university. Obviously as it's not life threatening, we aren't going to have advertising campaigns to set people straight, but that doesn't mean the effect isn't there - the amount of risk is different, but the likelyhood of it is comparable.

Incidentally, SEN or lack of a degree is arguably life affecting, though not, as you rightly say, life threatening.

smudgethepuppydog · 23/01/2009 14:21

I'm an August baby (28th) so was one of the youngest in my year I really can't say I ever felt disadvantaged by it. In fact, it meant I could move on to college while my Sept born, same age friend had another year of school to go.

smudgethepuppydog · 23/01/2009 14:23

Good luck with your August baby and I hope you feel better soon.

lingle · 23/01/2009 14:49

"Wouldn't it make more sense to get politically active to change the stupid system in England"

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes !

There is a consultation period running on Sir Jim Rose's draft report right now in fact....

VinegarTits · 23/01/2009 17:36

I havent missed your point snorkle, i know what your trying to say, but IMO (which i am quite entitled to have)its a pretty ridiculus argument to try and compare the level of understanding between the two, no seat = possible death, summer born baby = possibly educationally disadvantaged, there is no comparision, its a no brainer, but that my opinion so you will have to agree to disagree ok.

Now on to this summerborn baby shit, i agree with what expat said, if its having such an affect on summerborn babies then change the way the education system works, dont stop TTC in DEC. Congrats on your summerborn baby OP.

snorkle · 23/01/2009 18:49

Trouble is, I'm not sure there's sufficient evidence that any other educational system work any better.

womblingfree · 23/01/2009 20:39

It's all a bit personal really. When we were TTC DD I told hubby we'd have to take a break around March cos I'd have hated having a Christmas baby. We were v. lucky to conceive within aabout 6 weeks of trying.

DD was actually due 31st August but arrived 2 weeks late on 13th September!

I think having older ones can be problematic in it's own way. DD is more than ready for school but doesn't start until September when she'll be about a week off her 5th birthday. She's already pretty advanced with her reading, writing and numeracy and I'm wondering what they'll do with her TBH.

lingle · 23/01/2009 21:24

the solution is greater flexibility on starting age - even a move to the scottish system would be a great start.

pointydug · 23/01/2009 21:35

I can understand the op's feelign as there is no option to defer in England.

However, if someone was having difficulty conceiving, I woulnd't imagine this would make it worth missing out a month of trying for many people.

snorkle · 23/01/2009 22:59

I know the Scottish system seems appealing but I'm not aware of any research that indicates whether or not it improves the situation for everyone or justs shifts the situation elsewhere. You have to remember that in the Scottish system, children who don't defer become the youngest in their year by even more than a year instead of just a year and are in an even smaller minority. Is it actually possible to ensure that the right children defer or will some of those that don't be even more disadvantaged than before? Will the even bigger spread of ages in each year lead to spring born children becoming more disadvantaged as well.

I'd prefer a later start to formal schooling, but studies have shown that that too can be detrimental to some groups - (usually lower social groups that already fare quite badly) I suspect with top quality nursery provision that effect could be mitigated, but I believe that you will never get a system that is absolutely fair to everyone.

FairLadyRantALot · 23/01/2009 23:11

expat...I think that would be a very sensible plan....the system over here in England is stupid! They can be sooooo young!

Saying that, as op is now pg with an august baby....my ys, who's birthday is the 12th of August and who started last september is getting on fantastically in school! So, you never know in that respect!

petetong · 23/01/2009 23:13

Im end of July ds is beginning August. In some ways I do feel he is disadvatanged but mainly in the emotional stakes rather than the educational stakes. I do feel that he started school at easter and all the other boys had started and made friend before he had a chance, but now he has moved on to secondary school he seems to have caught up educationally and emotionally. I don't feel that being a summer baby has made a lot of differnece to me and I think that in the long term he will be ok. Having said that, neither he nor I know what it feels like to be the oldest in and most able in the class. I think it is probably a nice feeling.

pointydug · 23/01/2009 23:14

I'm not quite sure what you are suggesting, snorkle.

That there is always someone who will be the youngest?

Nursery teachers play a big part in recommending a child is deferred or not. But the choice ultimately lies with parents, so it allows them to make what they think is the best choice for their child.

It can perhaps get to a stage where you might ask where the line should be drawn. I know of three October/November children (off the top of my head) who have been deferred, and even though I might not see any good reason for this, it has had no ill effect on those children and I can't see what ill effect it could have had on others in teh class.

pointydug · 23/01/2009 23:15

but the oldest does not always go along with being the most able. Not by any means.

snorkle · 23/01/2009 23:24

pointydug, yes, someone will always be the youngest and I don't know that you can trust nursery teachers and parents (who may have financial and social reasons to defer or not) to make the correct decisions? Is it always clear at nursery who should defer and who shouldn't? (Sometimes yes, I'm sure, but always?) I contend that you can't know this without a study.

You can't see that the presence of those older children has had a detrimental effect, but without a study (really needs a series of studies) you can't know that it hasn't. There's plenty of people who can't see that being the youngest has a detrimental effect at all so you really can't rely on gut feelings and non quantative observations.

Rindercella · 23/01/2009 23:37

I have a summer baby (30th Aug). She is nearly 17 months & today I called a prep school to start the ball rolling for her schooling (mostly been scared by people saying they are too late to get their 18mo DC into state nurseries & primary schoolds!).

I spoke to the Head who was absolutely lovely & fully understood the concerns we have about DD's birth date. She said that while DD may be very bright etc. (which of course she is!!), there is still her emotional development to consider and she may well be less equipped emotionally to start school at such a young age than her older counterparts.

I thank God that we will be able to opt out of the State education system as that route may well force us down a route that is not best for our DD. Each child must be treated as an individual and given an education that will enable that child to thrive.

pointydug · 23/01/2009 23:40

do you work for a university education department?

Rindercella · 23/01/2009 23:40

Please excuse the typos - it's late, I have had copious amounts of wine and I need to go to bed!

pointydug · 23/01/2009 23:41

in scotland, emotional and social readiness is also considered