I don't want my kid to be put back a year

[2006hildy]

Heard from independent EP they are thinking of ds back a year. ASD 6 August baby.

They have failed him and now they want to put him back a year. Can they do that?

He has grown up with his peers right from toddler group, preschool infants and then school.

From an OT point of view a more mature class will be quieter. He has Sensory Processing Disorder to Sound, Touch, Vestibular and Proprioception. The other kids will already know his ways.

Socially I don't want him to start all over again. His rigid thinking will seem less significant in a more structured environment and his current class are less likely to laugh as his babbling.

NO NO NO I don't want it.

Can I take them to tribunal? What can we do?

Didn't want to read and run.

Really shocked that an independent EP suggested this! My DS was in a mainstream independent school and they asked him to redo year 1 (but he is a December baby). My instincts screamed NO for the very reasons that you have said above. I also thought the school had failed him once and what if they put him back a year and they failed him a second time? I refused (with the very strong backing of an independent EP) and he didn't redo the year.

Ultimately, I was proved right - the school didn't have a clue and I've had to home school him throughout year 4. If he'd redone the year, then we would still be at the stage we are at now but a year behind - fighting a useless Statement that isn't worth the paper isn't written on.

Don't know what the legal position is in state schools. But I would say you HAVE to go with your gut instinct NO NO NO for all the reasons you said.

Does ds have a statement? Be very careful, an independent EP suggested the same for my dd who also has an August birthday. I disagreed, the school agreed with me, but she was secretly decelerated. When she found out two months later, she never attended again. (indy school so year groups are not as regimented as mainstream schools)

Read SENCOP - I can't remember which section, but there is a bit that states if a child is to be placed in a different chronological year, this has to be specified in the statement.

Ensure your ds's statement states his correct year group.

Hildy I didn't think ANY schools did this? Presumably the indi EP heard this from the school itself?

We had DS2 introduced to Y1 from reception over the course of a term (despite being a May baby functioning below the level of pre-school it simply wasn't socially appropriate for any longer than that, plus, yes, the small Y1 classroom was a lot quieter and more structured than the huge, busy EYFS unit) but the situations where repeating a whole year is appropriate or useful are very few and far between. If your DC cannot keep pace with their peers, then the chances are they wouldn't keep up with the year below, either, plus they'd lose the social advantages of being with children who are the same age and have maturity appropriate to that age.

Your DS's curriculum needs to be tailored to your DS's capabilities. If this means that your DS needs constant, highly qualified 1:1 support, then that's what they should be providing, or else he's simply going to keep on not accessing the curriculum and he'll not have any chance of forming friendships.

I would totally agree with you, try to avoid him being held back a year. What they may need to do is to provide additional support within his current yr group.
Putting him back a yr is the cheaper option.

Also it MUST be formally approved by the LEA otherwise when he reaches the age that he is due to leave primary school he will be expected to leave primry regardless of which yr group he is being taught with. this happened to a friends son who had (she later found out) an informal agreement between school, sen officer etc but not approved by the LEA, he effectively missed a yr of primary education, so not a great long term solution & meant he knew none of his peer group when he transferred to high school.
Most LEA's are very reluctant to hold back a yr as they are ultimatly paying for compulsory education for a yr longer.

I have been advised by ABA staff that plonking an asd child into a new mainstream class at 7+ often does not work socially they had seen this happen (eg where a child transfers in from SS or home programme) and not really gel. Whereas when the child grows up with the other children from 2/3/4 etc then socially the other children tend to stick with the asd child better for longer. We were debating whether we should abandon current lazy m/s school for another and decided against because of the change of the peer group. While DS could not care which children he was in a class with, the other children go out of their way to include and look after him. I don't expect this to stick forever, I fully expect the wheels to come off by top primary but I think having always known ds as he is and growing up with him the children are more willing to make allowances, they just accept him and don't know anything other than having ds in the class. I doubt they would do this for an unknown child arriving at this stage. DS is about to go into year 2 and its apparent he will need more individualised academic curriculum going forward as other children move ahead and that will demand more teacher time / planning etc. But that can be costed and funded for and is part and parcel of inclusion. I'd be doubtful LA will agree to hold back as they will see it as having to pay for an extra year's education and few LAs queue up to do that.

Yes Handy, indi EP heard this from the school itself- they haven't told me yet.(So unprofessional) I presume they will tell me in the TAF meeting or soon.

Hence my thread I want to be forearmed with other reasons to blow them out of the water!

Is it legal? I feel another tribunal coming on!

I don't think it is unlawful in theory BUT I think it requires very cogent and persuasive evidence that it benefits the child and shouldn't be done because they are falling behind a bit.

Ask your LA for its policy on children educated out of year group or google for it.

Are you absolutely sure, taking your gut reaction aside, that this is not a positive option? You seem to have a very visceral aversion to the concept and you are viewing the school's communication with the EP as unprofessional, rather than giving a full picture for your DS's benefit. The school may not have told you yet because they are simply considering it.

Hopefully the lea will not be keen at all, so you wont have any problems with this. Completely understand why you are not keen on the idea at all, I think as a parent you have a strong feel for whether repeating a year would benefit your child as an individual.

Mmmm. My son is a summer baby and foundation was hideous for him and us as a family. He would still have been behind his peers if he had started a year later, but his language developed so much more in that time and his understanding. I often wish that he had been born a few weeks later. It wouldn't take away his ASD but I do wonder if it would have been easier.

Just to back up mymatemax about the missing out on a year later down the line altho my situ is a bit different.

I've elected for my DD to stay down a year (like zzzzz in the sense that I've delayed her start at school) and I've been told by my LA that my DD will "lose" the last year of her education.

So, I've been told that she will be able to stay in her primary till end of Y6 and will go into Y7 in a secondary but that she will not be entitled to the year of education when she turns 19.

I'd want to know that if they were to try and insist on a deferral that there would be no such detriment to your DS. That said, I can completely see why you wouldn't want your DS to be held back at all and separated from his known peer group.

Good luck

Starting a year later was transformative for us but I see the problem if your child is already settled in this year group.

I would not have hesitated for one moment to defer even if his education stopped being funded later.

I don't think you can just work backwards. I remember touring the private schools:none of them were interested in year deferral because it would affect his chances in the 11plus. They didn't seem to grasp that the next two years would be the crucial ones.