holding boys back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"I agree, that is one of the most selfish, horrid explanations I've ever seen for holding a child back! OMG. I wonder if she stops at red lights or thinks that's for suckers too. Or pays her taxes. Or does any other thing that makes this a civil society in which we all bear some sort of responsibility for basic caring for others."

The person you are responding to was rude and obnoxious. But that person never gave the reason for why s/he redshirted DC ... it might have been for reasons that even you would agree were legitimate. Maybe not. Some people get angry and write postings like that one because they are tired of being second guessed and having to defend their decisions.

Well, I hope you're right.

I have a really stupid question to post in the middle of this "debate" - but here it is. Is it only spring and summer bday children that are being held back?

[Anonymous]

To 14:49 -- I think there has been plenty of sentiment about general reasons why many feel it is ok to redshirt a child. Disability, social immaturity etc are all valid reasons.

The poster in question never stated any of those reasons (nor is anyone asking for justification). I think the outrage comes when it is clear because a parent feels there is some sort of leg up provided by starting a child late, and there are no other mitigating circumstances..

The poster at 13:39 clearly has her own aganda for her child, with a "world be damaned" attitude regarding the potential impact that others with "normal age" children are feeling on a daily basis.

There is obvious frustration over this and only the schools and school systems can mandate who is going to be in what grade.

[Anonymous]

Ugh--so unpleasant this discussion. I agree with poster who says all this thread resolves is that there is indeed a population of obnoxious, self-centered people who feel "legally" entitled to do as they please. Gross. Truly gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I have a really stupid question to post in the middle of this "debate" - but here it is. Is it only spring and summer bday children that are being held back?

It seems that is the case. Say the published cut-offs are September 1, if you are an August birthday, then you are going to be the youngest in the class, unless you redshirt. For private schools, they like older boys, so the effective cut off is more like June. Thus the Spring birthdays are being redshirted.

I have personally seen cases of January/February redshirts (both boys and girls). This is where, in my opinion, it begins to get absurd.

[Anonymous]

I had a co-worker that was the only one in her neighborhood that planned on starting her son the year he was eligible to go to kindergarten. Everyone else with a boy was holding their son back a year and they looked at her like she was crazy for starting him on time. I've heard all the advantages for having your child start later - when I mention I may want to actually start my daughter (who misses the cutoff) early. I spoke to all my friends that are girls and asked them if they felt like they needed an extra year or missed out by being the youngest (one even skipped a grade) and none of them could imagine what their life would have been like if their parents had held them back a year - especially since they were ahead of the game in schoolwork and managed to find their social niche. So at the end of the day I've found people have strongly held convictions on both sides and nothing you say or do will change minds either way. For every story you hear about "not regretting giving your child the gift of extra time", someone was in class with the rufian/class bully that was clearly older than the other kids. It's possible the kid would have been a bully even if he/she started on time and it is possible the kid that received the extra year would have been fine starting on-time. There are so many things that can influence the ultimate outcome of a child's school career - the makeup of the other kids that happen to be in the same class - you've seen it in high school where the main cliche or personalities may be different one year to the next, if there are issues in the home or the parents' relationship that impacts a child, if a kid moves or changes school. There are just too many things - some of which you may have no control over - that can impact if your child does well in school that isn't related to his/her capacity to learn. My neighbor gave me the best advice - she says you know your child and probably your first instinct as to if your child is ready is the best one and agonizing and second guessing yourself probably talks you out of doing what you think is right. So I've learned to quote the "you have to do what you think best for your child" and leave it at that so my reasons for making a decision for my child really isn't up for a debate or put someone on the opposite side if they or their parents have made a different decision in a similar situation.

[Anonymous]

Agree with PP. Each parent does what SEEMS best to them for their child. It sounds so selfish to those who wish certain parents would make a different decision. But I don't think it is selfish at all. Sometimes misguided, perhaps. If I was waffling about the decision, this thread would make me angry and defensive rather than informed and more thoughtful. We did not redshirt our boy and he has struggled a bit with understanding and playing with the older boys ... but he loves playing with the girls. Each child finds his/her niche and manages. Really.

[Anonymous]

There has been a lot of literature that has actually come out in favor of sending boys to kindergarten with summer birthdays, as long as there is not an identifiable delay or "issue." Having a delay combined with youngess seems to disadvantage these boys, but just being young does NOT. The literature shows that any differences in ability are gone 3rd grade, and that holding boys back just so that they won't be the youngest, has no social or academic advantages, and indeed negatively influences their self-concept. (ie: was there something wrong with me that made people hold me back despite my making the birthday cut-off.)

[Anonymous]

Classes are supposed to be designed for specific developmental ages. I can understand the desire not to have your son left out of sports because he is the smallest, especially if you or DH are on the small side and have bad memories of being picked last. But seriously, you are doing your child a disservice. He is not going to become an Olympic athelete because he was left back one year or get into Harvard if his IQ isn't that high anyway. He may not even gain that self confidence you were hoping for since he may wonder why he is so much older and boys his age at doing things more advanced in the bigger class. He will be outside his developmental group. The entire class, including your precious child, is further harmed as the teachers must not only balance large class sizes but extreme differences in developmental age.

The PP who said do your homework is right on the mark. If a school is pressuring boys to be held back then there is a problem. They may be simply teaching to the skill areas that girls develop earlier and not focusing the right attention on the boys. Holding them back a year is not going to help if the school is not balancing their teaching approach. A school that encourages red shirting could also have teachers who are less capable of dealing with the natural energy that boys and girls have at those ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ugh--so unpleasant this discussion. I agree with poster who says all this thread resolves is that there is indeed a population of obnoxious, self-centered people who feel "legally" entitled to do as they please. Gross. Truly gross.

Ugh!. For all those honing in on the word "legally", I meant that if I'm not doing anything illegal to my child (i.e., abusing, endangering or otherwise causing harm) then I would expect no one to make whatever I'm doing their business. Obviously, if I'm doing something illegal then it's anyone's right to make it their business. Those who are quick to call someone obnoxious or self-centered or gross should look within. You have no idea why we decided to give our child an extra year. You're not entitled to know, and I'm in no way obligated to explain just so you can JUDGE whether I'm obnoxious or not. Many are prejudging before you have any facts. That, I find obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 14:49 -- I think there has been plenty of sentiment about general reasons why many feel it is ok to redshirt a child. Disability, social immaturity etc are all valid reasons.

The poster in question never stated any of those reasons (nor is anyone asking for justification). I think the outrage comes when it is clear because a parent feels there is some sort of leg up provided by starting a child late, and there are no other mitigating circumstances..

The poster at 13:39 clearly has her own aganda for her child, with a "world be damaned" attitude regarding the potential impact that others with "normal age" children are feeling on a daily basis.

There is obvious frustration over this and only the schools and school systems can mandate who is going to be in what grade.

You know nothing about our family or my "agenda" or even whether I have an agenda, and I never used the phrase "world be damned". That's your language. I'm merely stating that people (you all included) do what's best for their children everyday. Why are parents who've held their child back doubted just because others have made a different choice. Public school versus private school, organic food versus not, hybrid car versus not, one child versus several...all of these (and many, many more things) have an "impact" on the public....but do we have an "agenda" because we've made a parenting/life decision?

[Anonymous]

"Why are parents who've held their child back doubted just because others have made a different choice. Public school versus private school, organic food versus not, hybrid car versus not, one child versus several...all of these (and many, many more things) have an "impact" on the public...."

There's a distinction between your own parenting or lifestyle choices and gaming or exploiting the system to maximize your perceived benefits while harming others. The key difference is that you are harming others. Holding back a child who does not have any developmental delays in order for the child to be perceived as a higher achiever, is harming others in the class. You are changing the bar for the normal aged kids, affecting the class structure, affecting the teachers, and everyone else. It is the business of EVERYONE in the class who is being DIRECTLY affected not indirectly as in some mild market effect when you buy organic or McDonalds.

There are many parents of preemies who have real developmental delays and need extra support in the classroom. They deserve and need exceptions to the cut off. Sadly, they are probably the most harmed by the terrible, obnoxious self-centered parents who change the age and development stage of the class in order to get ahead.

It seems that there are a good number of self absorbed posters similar to the PP out there. I guess the only solution would be to lobby for strictly enforced cut off dates and require parents to gain multiple approvals with appropriate evalutions and sign offs to hold kids back. IMO this should be a parental decisions but just reading the PP's responses made me change my mind. There are too many out there who abuse this ability to decide on their own.

[Anonymous]

to the PP

+1 and exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Why are parents who've held their child back doubted just because others have made a different choice. Public school versus private school, organic food versus not, hybrid car versus not, one child versus several...all of these (and many, many more things) have an "impact" on the public...."

There's a distinction between your own parenting or lifestyle choices and gaming or exploiting the system to maximize your perceived benefits while harming others. The key difference is that you are harming others. Holding back a child who does not have any developmental delays in order for the child to be perceived as a higher achiever, is harming others in the class. You are changing the bar for the normal aged kids, affecting the class structure, affecting the teachers, and everyone else. It is the business of EVERYONE in the class who is being DIRECTLY affected not indirectly as in some mild market effect when you buy organic or McDonalds.

There are many parents of preemies who have real developmental delays and need extra support in the classroom. They deserve and need exceptions to the cut off. Sadly, they are probably the most harmed by the terrible, obnoxious self-centered parents who change the age and development stage of the class in order to get ahead.

It seems that there are a good number of self absorbed posters similar to the PP out there. I guess the only solution would be to lobby for strictly enforced cut off dates and require parents to gain multiple approvals with appropriate evalutions and sign offs to hold kids back. IMO this should be a parental decisions but just reading the PP's responses made me change my mind. There are too many out there who abuse this ability to decide on their own.

Here you go again. You don't know why I held my child back so how could you know whether w are gaming or exploiting the system to maximize perceived benefits? How could you know if in holding my child back, some harm has been brought upon my child's classmates or my child's teacher? How do you know that my child wasn't a preemie? You don't, but you judged. But I'm the one who is obnoxious or self absorbed.

[Anonymous]

It is irrelevant why you held your hold back. You made the argument in your post that it was only your business and your legal right to hold your child back for whatever reason you saw fit as the parent. That is simply wrong and sadly probably accurately reflects the attitude of many of the parents of perfectly developmentally capable older kids in K! These parents probably believe that their child is the best kid ever and would never introduce any problems. Wrong again. So yes, you are self absorbed and obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is irrelevant why you held your hold back. You made the argument in your post that it was only your business and your legal right to hold your child back for whatever reason you saw fit as the parent. That is simply wrong and sadly probably accurately reflects the attitude of many of the parents of perfectly developmentally capable older kids in K! These parents probably believe that their child is the best kid ever and would never introduce any problems. Wrong again. So yes, you are self absorbed and obnoxious.

Thank goodness I'm not looking for you to validate who I am versus not. It is irrelevant what you think, and STILL none of your business why I (and others) have held a child back. So I hope the name calling makes you feel better.