Please sign this petition regarding when summer-born children start school [headline edited by MNHQ]

[Sootball]

Yes I'm posting for traffic. But this is important. It really is. Because very few people know that the UK government are currently consulting on whether to change the guidance for allowing summer born children to defer a year.

And yes I know many start school at 4 and are ready, they have no problems, that they are the top set. But the research evidence does now show that socially and emotionally the summer born effect lasts for some into adulthood. This is simply about allowing those children who are NOT ready for school, whose self esteem and confidence will be impacted to wait a year.

If you care or have faced this issue then please can I ask you to take a moment and respond using this link >www.gov.uk/government/consultations/changes-to-the-school-admissions-code

Even if you are not sure what to write I have been advised in a box 5 the following will suffice Parents who wish their summer born (April 1st – August 31st inclusive) child to enter Reception class at compulsory school age must submit an application for the relevant academic year. The application must be treated equitably with children starting school prior to compulsory school age, and the child can remain with that year group cohort for the remainder of their education.

AND THANK YOU

www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/05/7940/4

I live in Scotland and am in a minority of people who hate deferment. As others have said, someone always has to be the youngest but in my son's class the oldest is 16 months older than the youngest! How can that possibly be fair? It is a system it is used by middle class parents to ensure their child has an advantage over their peers. Schools should be able to cater for the needs of the youngest and if they can't then the school needs to change not the child.

Done.

DS was born aug 27. We will likely emigrate to canada before he's 4 and I'm pushed even more now to do so.

"It is a system it is used by middle class parents to ensure their child has an advantage over their peers."

Rubbish. My son was not emotionally mature enough to stsrt school at 4. It was nothing to do with his peers, it was to do with his comfort and welfare.

My son wasn't emotionally mature when he started school at 4 either but school helped him to develop this more than a further year at nursery would have done.

Good for you. We all parent differently.

My son did one year at nursery- he started nursery instead of starting school.

But this isn't about parenting, it is about having a fair education system for all. We just don't agree about how this is achieved.

But it is about parenting. I made a decision about what was in the best interests of my son.

and what about the best interests of the children who are more than 1 year younger than your son?

That's for their parents to decide, not me.

We all make decisions that are in the best interests of our children, that's exactly why some parents would be likely to try and defer their child's place so that they end up with an advantage when they are doing the 11+, or GCSEs, or even just in class when they want their child to be top of the class.

If your son didn't start nursery until he was at the usual age to start school, you will never know how well prepared he could have been if he'd started nursery around the same time most children do. Unless of course he has a specific delay in his development, which is obviously another matter.

I agree that it's about parenting, and that's why something like this shouldn't be down to parents. You might be a fabulous parent, but unfortunately, lots of people who have children aren't.

The headmaster of my son's school was extremely supportive. He always supports parents who want to defer- he handled all the paperwork for me.

" You might be a fabulous parent, but unfortunately, lots of people who have children aren't."

But thse "bad" parents would be unlikely to even know what deferement is.

Isn't that all the more reason not to disadvantage their summer born children by making them well over a year younger than the oldest in their class?

Or all the more reason not to disadvantage them by allowing their peers who are around their level of development be held back?

"But thse "bad" parents would be unlikely to even know what deferement is"

Isn't that the point, parents are too variable.

Hi there, just to let everyone know that we're about to move this to our Petitions noticeboard. Lisa MNHQ

I do what is best for my children. If I have options that help and support my kids why wouldn't I take them?

So you think it's okay that children of "bad" (less resourceful/less informed) parents should be disadvantaged, as long as you can avail yourself of the option to give an advantage to your son?

Nice.

I am not seeking an advantage for my son. I wanted him to start school when I feel he is developmentally ready.

If I have options that help and support my kids why wouldn't I take them?

Exactly!

So do you think it would be right that I as the parent of an intelligent late summer born child be able to defer my sons entry to school? I've got my eye on the super selective grammar school nearby you see, and competition is fierce, so if I defer my child's 11+ exam for a year, then he has a much higher chance of getting a place as his competition would be children who are more than a year younger than him. I could make a pretty good case for my son being deferred, as he also has Aspergers so his social skills arent very well developed, and the pre school he attends would back me up on that.

It doesn't really matter that he'd have an unfair advantage, or that he'd be taking a much sought after place away from a child who should be in the year below him, because I have an option that would help and support my child, so why shouldn't I take it?

Combust, you are missing the point by only seeing this from your own perspective. There is a bigger picture that includes people whose parenting and whose children aren't exactly like your own, and those people need to be considered when it comes to something provided by the state as well.

No I am not missing the point. My son was too young to start school at 4 and I used a legitimate route supported by my headteacher and the LA to allow him to start a year later.

What other people do with their children is their own business.

I deferred both my DS's. Both have November birthdays.

Neither were quite ready for school (but different reasons for each one) so yes I took advantage of the deferral option.

Oh and there's no taking places away from others thing up here. Everyone pretty much goes to the nearest school. I've never even heard of someone not getting a place. And there's none of this grammar school stuff either.

Iv'e never heard of people not getting a place at school either. Yes and of course we don't have grammar schools.

Nor do we have the 11+

You're still focusing only on your own situation and closing your mind to the situations of others.

If a nationwide amendment is made allowing parents to put a case forward and then defer their child's entry, then it will affect selective areas, and areas that have the odd super selective.

You might not have heard of people not getting a place at school, but it happens every year.

You are right though that what other people do with their children is their business, but no one is attacking the choice you made for your child, I am pointing out the flaws if this were something that could potentially affect every child. Because while you only have to think of you own child, the government has to think of everyone's, and oddly enough, this wouldn't be legislation that affects you and you alone. By continuing to talk about only your child without considering what could happen to others, you are spectacularly missing the point.

The difference is woowoo is that I live in an area where deferement actually happens, your scenarios are speculation and conjecture.