Deferring a May born child

[Kingfisher4]

I have a daughter born 29th May. She is currently 3, due to start school next year.

I am currently thinking about deferring her, but only if she is able to start in reception the following year.

Would most people think that is crazy? She is not developmentally behind as such, although she is not fully toilet trained yet. I have been trying for months, but she still has more than one accident a day.

My reasoning is more based on how I feel about the education system in general. I don't mind reception as it's still very play based, but I hate the idea of 5 year olds going into key stage 1 and starting formal education so young. I have 3 older sons, none of them summer born, so have never been able to make this decision.

They don't automatically go into year 1 if you defer. You can request to start in reception and they remain with their adopted cohort all through school.

You will have reapply for deferred entry again when you apply for secondary school.

As a mother her deferred her august born child I would say unless there were developmental or ND concerns, absolutely don’t defer. I understand the not agreeing with the British school system, I feel the same, but reception children spend a lot of time at play and build those important social bonds with their peers. You could potentially be disadvantaging your DD as she will be with significantly younger children and the teachers are going to cater to the majority. Going through the school years she’s also going to be much older than her peers which could have an effect. Same with social aspects, when she’s 18 and wanting to go out to celebrate all her friends will be a lot younger than her and so on.

Parents shouldn’t be able to defer. Either skip Reception and start Year 1 or start Reception the closest September to turning 4. Your child would be over a year older than my July born!

Isn’t it absolutely blindingly obvious that an older child is going to perform better than a younger child at a population level?
did we really need statistics and echo chambers of deferral support groups to tell us this?

you can choose to shift your child being the youngest on to another child if you wish, but it’s hardly a kind thing to do.

as everyone has patiently pointed out on this thread, none of the problems of deferring are there until the children are older at the end of their schooling.

of course there is evidence to suggest it’s absolutely wonderful for your 8 year old to be on top table for maths. It’s obvious isnt it. That isn’t the problem. The problem is you’ve now made some 6.5 ye old on the bottom table feel even worse, and your kid will not be thanking you when they’re 18.

You can, but I would be careful. My cousin (different European country) was held back as her parents didn’t agree with the system. She was through her school life st least 6 months older than everyone else , bored senseless in lessons and socially it became very difficult from about year 7/8 onwards.
She also got it in her head that she must be absolutely dumb - why would her parents have delayed her otherwise? She absolutely is not, she is actually extremely clever (and her parents tried to reinforce that belief, but she thought they weren’t truthful) - but as she was bored, she didn’t pay attention, became the class clown and then fell behind. That corrected itself around gcse/A-levels, but she went through hell between about year 3 and 9.
Obviously, if a child is behind, it makes sense. For an august born, you really can’t go wrong either.
For a may/june born without any real challenges, I really, really wouldn’t.

Because she might not be able to join the Year 4 team when she's in Year 4... She'd be too old and would have to join the Year 5 team for example.

My dd was born at the very end of August and we didn’t defer and I would never judge anyone for deferring a late summer bit, but for a child born in May? Unless there is significant SEN you’ve not mentioned that is ridiculous

And thus can’t play for any school team at all once she’s in her final year of both primary and secondary.

You should definitely be able to get more information from the school about this. You never know what the options are unless you talk to someone at the school. For example a friend's child who has recently started reception is doing half days at first. Another friend homeschooled for reception, then her daughter entered at year 1 and is doing really well.

Does your daughter currently attend nursery or preschool, and if so do they have any concerns?

My son is August 22 born, with a speech delay, so for us it’s a no brainier to delay his start to CSA. I appreciate in your case it’s a lot harder to decide, but I would go on the Flexible Summer Born Starts Facebook group and read the experiences of other people.

We deferred our April born!

We had very good medical reasons though, and if it hadn't been an option we'd have had to homeschool instead. We may have to eventually anyway, but school is working right now 🤞

We are a couple of years in and no one thinks about her being deferred except when her birthday comes around. She's still one of the smallest in her class and about average for the work.

I know many July and August kids that could have done with the extra time, and think they should have been deferred.

Before that though, I'd be more hesitant to recommend it just on the basis of them being summer born. They won't be the oldest, but won't be the youngest either, by a long way. If they need the extra time though, for whatever reason, then fair enough, but I wouldn't do it just on principle.

My son’s birthday is 30th August and we briefly considered this but he’s in an independent school (senior now) and they won’t take anyone out of age group for a number of reasons. In his sport at school and club (rugby) they are incredibly strict and won’t let anyone play out of the age range so he wouldn’t be able to play at all if I’d held him back. Worth thinking about

I think it's fair for preemies to be "held back" to their adjusted age

But she won't have to wait a 'whole year'. She won't be a whole year older than the rest of her class - it'll be a few months until her classmates start turning 16 as well. Just as September born would have to 'wait' for their friend born in January or Feb - but that's totally OK? Don't you see the absurdity of it?

And heaven help us if the September borns start making friends with those born in July or August in the same class. They'll be massively resentful and it will be the worst thing ever.

You’ve missed the point.
the standard is sep- aug, max 1 year apart, everyone knows this, and it’s an accepted size of year group.
parents are deliberately choosing to hold their child back, essentially without any consent, putting them one year behind everything they do for the rest of their life. One year behind where they should have been for gcse, alevels, accruing money, possibly retirement age one year behind. Obvo things happen along the way naturally anyway, and can still happen to the deferred child, but that tends to then be conscious decisions on behalf of the child. This is a parent choosing for their child to be a year behind simply so that they’re not on the bottom table in reception.

But also, and the more I think about this, the crosser I am on behalf of the children, won’t the very point of doing this affect their confidence? You are essentially saying to your child (in their eyes as they think black and white and the worst) that they weren’t clever enough to start with their cohort. So, the reports saying how well September borns normally do, and what deferring parents base decisions on, aren’t like for like as the child isn’t also working out it’s because they weren’t ready?

You've missed the point - if you read what I was replying to. She won't be a whole year older than her classmates, she will be a few months, just as those born in Sept will be older by a few months than Spring children, and those spring children will be a few months older than those born in July/Aug.

She won't have to wait a whole year for the rest of her class to go to 16+ events with her, which is what was being claimed.

The rest is just dramatic. A whole year behind for the rest of her life. It's not a race, life isn't linear. Some people take years to get a job, some are multi millionaires within a few years of leaving school. Some have children early, some do it after 40, some don't do it at all. If you really must label it as such she'll be a year 'behind' a very tiny subsection of UK children who happened to be at school with her, and to a very tiny subsection of adults like yourself who care so much about it - the rest of the globe won't give a crap.

She won't be a whole year older than her classmates, she will be a few months

Well except for the 25% of her class who she will be 12, 13, 14, and 15 months older than.......

This is a parent choosing for their child to be a year behind simply so that they’re not on the bottom table in reception.

Which they might not be anyway. I was the youngest child at my primary school, but I could read far more fluently than some older children.

Holding a child back from learning to read, and therefore opportunities to learn and develop their imaginations through books, seems a dreadful thing to me.

I shall be interested to see in the future (if I'm still around to see them) studies of the outcomes for children who were deferred solely so that they wouldn't be the youngest.

Yep, that's exactly what the PP meant when she said 'nobody' to go to 16+ events with. She meant just those children in the summer.

"Or go to the pub with while she waits a year for her classmates?". Exactly what she meant-just the 25%. How astute of you.

I have a May born and hadn’t even considered that she would be eligible for being kept back a year 🤨

My son was born May 2022. He is due to start reception Sept 26 but i intend to defer him until 2027. For context, he has ASD, delays and an EHCP.

However, i would still defer if he had normal/ advanced development as have read lots of evidence that boys benefit from being active/ physical play/ outdoors. I think their childhood is precious and i would prefer my child to have longer to be a child (the way the world is going, it’s not like job prospects are likely to be that amazing at the end of their education so why rush things!)

Things for you to consider

1. Join Flexible school admissions for summer borns on FB
2. There is also a local Flexible school admissions for local areas which give advice re local schools
3. It can have impact on sports down the line eg football teams although i don’t know too much about this
4. Nurseries/ pre schools will vary in their support of keeping your child for the additional year. I changed pre school for this reason.

If she turns out to be sporty it will have an impact on the teams she can play in and she won’t be able to play with her year group for competitions etc. same for other year specific comps/events. You have no idea what her path looks like yet. I wouldn’t be creating a divide from her year when you don’t need to. Kids all develop at different times, she could be absolutely fine. See how it goes.

Really won’t make a difference.

It makes a massive difference if you’re in to sport. Your pe lessons timetable wise would be with your cohort. Eg your football PE session would be with year 10. If you want to play against other schools you would have to be picked for the year 11 team. Who you don’t train with, possible timetable clashes etc etc