NOT redshirting an August birthday

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a late-summer birthday kid, and enrolled her in preschool at 2 and kindergarten at barely 5. She was always one of the youngest kids in class.

Her behavior marks in the early years of school (preK-3) weren't as good as the older kids in class. She didn't have as much self-control, due to being a full year younger than other kids in class. Teachers would point it out.

But over time, she learned to work hard for what she wanted. She developed a strong work ethic to get what came so easily for the "older" kids in her class. By upper elementary, you couldn't tell she was the youngest one. She started college at 17, is now on the dean's list and doing well.

Enroll your kid on time, OP. Don't hold him back. There will be a few "why can't your kid act like the kids one full year older??" moments, but soldier on. It will all work out well.

Yes, really want my child to develop work ethic via likely exposure to bullying and struggling through school. “but she’s on the dean’s list now!” 🙄

OTSS Only The Strong Survive! It's survival of the fittest starting in kindergarten. What a great concept!

This feels dramatic. I don’t think our parents thought this much about age cutoffs and redshirting and everyone is fine.

I went to half day kindergarten with naps, play time, singing, art, and fun. No reading. Kindergarten has evolved.

That is not k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

Young kids should not be mature and you have unrealistic expectations. You need to get your immature child help if it’s bad enough to hold back. Lazy parenting.

Ok. Because just turned 5 year olds are exactly like 6 year olds. Your unprofessional and unqualified opinion is as useful as the gum stuck to the bottom of my shoe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a late-summer birthday kid, and enrolled her in preschool at 2 and kindergarten at barely 5. She was always one of the youngest kids in class.

Her behavior marks in the early years of school (preK-3) weren't as good as the older kids in class. She didn't have as much self-control, due to being a full year younger than other kids in class. Teachers would point it out.

But over time, she learned to work hard for what she wanted. She developed a strong work ethic to get what came so easily for the "older" kids in her class. By upper elementary, you couldn't tell she was the youngest one. She started college at 17, is now on the dean's list and doing well.

Enroll your kid on time, OP. Don't hold him back. There will be a few "why can't your kid act like the kids one full year older??" moments, but soldier on. It will all work out well.

Yes, really want my child to develop work ethic via likely exposure to bullying and struggling through school. “but she’s on the dean’s list now!” 🙄

OTSS Only The Strong Survive! It's survival of the fittest starting in kindergarten. What a great concept!

This feels dramatic. I don’t think our parents thought this much about age cutoffs and redshirting and everyone is fine.

I went to half day kindergarten with naps, play time, singing, art, and fun. No reading. Kindergarten has evolved.

That is not k.

It was in the 80s when "our parents" were making decisions and we all turned out fine. If we all turned out so well, why did they tinker with something that wasn't broke?

[Anonymous]

This is almost always a hot button issue. IMO, if a child doesn’t have any physiological and developmental delays, that child should not be held.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a late-summer birthday kid, and enrolled her in preschool at 2 and kindergarten at barely 5. She was always one of the youngest kids in class.

Her behavior marks in the early years of school (preK-3) weren't as good as the older kids in class. She didn't have as much self-control, due to being a full year younger than other kids in class. Teachers would point it out.

But over time, she learned to work hard for what she wanted. She developed a strong work ethic to get what came so easily for the "older" kids in her class. By upper elementary, you couldn't tell she was the youngest one. She started college at 17, is now on the dean's list and doing well.

Enroll your kid on time, OP. Don't hold him back. There will be a few "why can't your kid act like the kids one full year older??" moments, but soldier on. It will all work out well.

Yes, really want my child to develop work ethic via likely exposure to bullying and struggling through school. “but she’s on the dean’s list now!” 🙄

Let me guess. You and your kids are the bullies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Not the PP you are responding to. You are insufferable and also wrong, but good luck in your parenting journey. I didn’t redshirt, and I also have kids with SNs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Speak for yourself. He's 12 now and doing great! Not that you actually care about my kid. You just want everyone to follow arbitrary rules so that some other kid benefits. Just as long as it's not mine, right? I see you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a late-summer birthday kid, and enrolled her in preschool at 2 and kindergarten at barely 5. She was always one of the youngest kids in class.

Her behavior marks in the early years of school (preK-3) weren't as good as the older kids in class. She didn't have as much self-control, due to being a full year younger than other kids in class. Teachers would point it out.

But over time, she learned to work hard for what she wanted. She developed a strong work ethic to get what came so easily for the "older" kids in her class. By upper elementary, you couldn't tell she was the youngest one. She started college at 17, is now on the dean's list and doing well.

Enroll your kid on time, OP. Don't hold him back. There will be a few "why can't your kid act like the kids one full year older??" moments, but soldier on. It will all work out well.

Yes, really want my child to develop work ethic via likely exposure to bullying and struggling through school. “but she’s on the dean’s list now!” 🙄

OTSS Only The Strong Survive! It's survival of the fittest starting in kindergarten. What a great concept!

This feels dramatic. I don’t think our parents thought this much about age cutoffs and redshirting and everyone is fine.

I went to half day kindergarten with naps, play time, singing, art, and fun. No reading. Kindergarten has evolved.

You must be very old. We did full day K that included naps and play time and art but we also absolutely did reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have a late-summer birthday kid, and enrolled her in preschool at 2 and kindergarten at barely 5. She was always one of the youngest kids in class.

Her behavior marks in the early years of school (preK-3) weren't as good as the older kids in class. She didn't have as much self-control, due to being a full year younger than other kids in class. Teachers would point it out.

But over time, she learned to work hard for what she wanted. She developed a strong work ethic to get what came so easily for the "older" kids in her class. By upper elementary, you couldn't tell she was the youngest one. She started college at 17, is now on the dean's list and doing well.

Enroll your kid on time, OP. Don't hold him back. There will be a few "why can't your kid act like the kids one full year older??" moments, but soldier on. It will all work out well.

Yes, really want my child to develop work ethic via likely exposure to bullying and struggling through school. “but she’s on the dean’s list now!” 🙄

OTSS Only The Strong Survive! It's survival of the fittest starting in kindergarten. What a great concept!

This feels dramatic. I don’t think our parents thought this much about age cutoffs and redshirting and everyone is fine.

I went to half day kindergarten with naps, play time, singing, art, and fun. No reading. Kindergarten has evolved.

That is not k.

It was in the 80s when "our parents" were making decisions and we all turned out fine. If we all turned out so well, why did they tinker with something that wasn't broke?

That's not in this area. We had a full day with academics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Speak for yourself. He's 12 now and doing great! Not that you actually care about my kid. You just want everyone to follow arbitrary rules so that some other kid benefits. Just as long as it's not mine, right? I see you.

Why didn't you get him OT if you saw the need? Clearly you could afford it. I will never get parents like you. They aren't arbitrary rules. If you are holding back your child for delays, common sense is to get them help. Typical hands off parent.

[Anonymous]

We didn't redshirt our August boy. He's in late ES and doing well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Speak for yourself. He's 12 now and doing great! Not that you actually care about my kid. You just want everyone to follow arbitrary rules so that some other kid benefits. Just as long as it's not mine, right? I see you.

Why didn't you get him OT if you saw the need? Clearly you could afford it. I will never get parents like you. They aren't arbitrary rules. If you are holding back your child for delays, common sense is to get them help. Typical hands off parent.

Stay clueless then. Am I gaming the system or staying hands off? You make no sense. No wonder are so confused.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Speak for yourself. He's 12 now and doing great! Not that you actually care about my kid. You just want everyone to follow arbitrary rules so that some other kid benefits. Just as long as it's not mine, right? I see you.

Why didn't you get him OT if you saw the need? Clearly you could afford it. I will never get parents like you. They aren't arbitrary rules. If you are holding back your child for delays, common sense is to get them help. Typical hands off parent.

Stay clueless then. Am I gaming the system or staying hands off? You make no sense. No wonder are so confused.

Don’t worry about the PP. That PP just isn’t a very good parent, and is angry at those who are. Of course your child is doing well, because you advocated for him and didn’t rush to medicalize him when a bit of time was all that was needed. That PP obviously thinks it’s totally fine that youngest kids are far, far more likely to be put on ADHD meds and probably early medicated her kid herself, so she is lashing out.

I’ll never understand parents like the PP who abdicate all parental responsibility and just assume that arbitrary timelines and immediate rushed to drugs dictate their child’s healthcare and educational needs, but there are appalling numbers of them on this website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sent my August bday boy. His best friend is an August bday boy who was held back. They’re all friends. I don’t think any of us have regrets.

When it was time for K, I said to myself - is there any actual reason to hold him back or would I be doing it for competitive reasons? There was no actual reason to hold him back. I felt he had been there / done that with preschool and would like not gain much from an additional year.

He has a lot of grit, which I attitude to trying to keep up when he was younger but idk - maybe he’s just like that.

YMMV.

+1. It doesn’t really matter much in the end. I do feel like the people who redshirted fell into 1 of 2 buckets. First bucket was people did it because even though the child was developmentally ready, they were anxious/insecure/competitive and felt this would give their kid an advantage. Second bucket was people whose kids had some not-yet-fully-understood delays. These kids all ultimately ended up with SN diagnoses of various flavors and while the parents had hoped the extra year would confer “readiness” the kids still had the same challenges a year later and the parents needed to address the needs directly.

My own kids were summer bday preemie twins. They were very academically ready for K and would have been bored with an extra preschool year. One did have mild SNs but he was not the only K kid who couldn’t sit still on the rug for extended periods of time. They’re older now and I don’t have regrets at all. They have a few friends a year older and you can’t really tell the difference. Most of the summer bday kids in our school went on time.

The special needs kids make sense but only if you are going to get them help during the year you hold them back. Ignoring the issues and holding them back isn't going to fix anything, just make them a year older and a year lost in treatment.

Except gaining a year of maturity helps a lot. Holding back isn't ignoring at all, in fact its exactly what some kids need. Spending $$$ on crap treatments wastes everyone's time and money. Why ignore the most obvious solution? It's bizarre that you think anything and everything comes before that. You sound disingenuous.

I mean, I completely disagree with you. I don’t think children entering kindergarten need any particular level of maturity. And I think kids who have early signs of ADHD or dyslexia or any other SN aren’t going to magically outgrow it by delaying kindergarten. I honestly think everyone should just follow the cut offs. In school systems where the cut offs are firm and parents don’t get to fool around with this, it keeps the age spread of the cohort consistent and better serves everyone involved.

Ok. Except kids can be delayed because they don't all reach milestones at the exact same time. Especially true for the very youngest in class. What they need is simply more time. You can ignore that and stick your fingers in your ears all you want, but delaying entry is very beneficial for some kids. I would do it all over gain given the chance. It was the right choice for us. When he got to kindergarten his fine and gross motor delays had resolved and he was much better able to access the kindergarten curriculum and get the most out of it. That busybodies might disagree would never be a factor in the decision making. I know you don't care about my kid, so I have to do what's best for him.

I have a young child who had delays. We did not hold back as then your kid missed a year of age appropriate help. We also got private services. See how that works. Holding back does not fix things. Your child is with a younger peer group so they artificially seem more mature than those kids but in reality they will always be less mature as they were not given age appropriate experiences. You are gaming the system. Funny thing my kid had no issue getting into privates. It was best for you not him. Best for him would be send him on time and get the help he needed. Did you get an ot? Kids in k have those needs. Your kid was normal

Speak for yourself. He's 12 now and doing great! Not that you actually care about my kid. You just want everyone to follow arbitrary rules so that some other kid benefits. Just as long as it's not mine, right? I see you.

Why didn't you get him OT if you saw the need? Clearly you could afford it. I will never get parents like you. They aren't arbitrary rules. If you are holding back your child for delays, common sense is to get them help. Typical hands off parent.

Stay clueless then. Am I gaming the system or staying hands off? You make no sense. No wonder are so confused.

NP - Kids develop at different rates. Sometimes all that is needed to resolve "delays" is time. Particularly in the case where kid is not ready for some relatively arbitrary deadline. Sometimes more intensive intervention is needed. It's not a bad thing to hold back a kid until they are more developmentally mature instead of providing intensive support. On the flip side, sometimes holding back can be bad for kids if it means they are bored. That is why there is no ONE right answer to OPs question.