Why don’t schools have stronger policies about redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

The pro-redshirters are just as crazy.

Agree, though, that irl most people don't care. Outside of private schools that push for redshirting, even in high income areas, only a small portion of the students redshirt.

The people who claim otherwise--that their classrooms are full of Spring redshirters--are either mistaken or outliers.

On DCUM, no, the pro-redshirters are not nearly as crazy. I say that as someone who didn’t redshirt but has read these threads for years. There are occasional crazy redshirters, but they are dwarfed by the insane anti-redshirters. Those people are both nuts and weirdly unable to do math.

Agree nobody cares, though.

Eh, parents who want to redshirt normal, bright children are also the same people who probably had their panties in a bunch when their kid didn't take their first steps on the same day as the kid down the street. Have some faith in your kids.

Likewise, assume parents know their children best and are doing what they think is right. Have some faith, indeed.

It's hard having faith in redshirting parents after reading this thread. I can't decide which one of you is crazier. It's either the person who says they redshirt their kid because being an adult "sucks" and they want to prolong their kid's childhood or maybe it's the parent who said their preschool says she'd rather be traveling the world and practice her second language or maybe it's the person who says redshirting "gives the edge you need to become a champion" or perhaps it the person who said their kid is too smart to move on to the next grade or possibly it's the person who said it's necessary to be good at lacrosse, which is possibly the least competitive sport there is.

No, it’s just you. Obsessed with other people’s kids, assuming the worst intentions of others, gossiping, keeping track of birthdays, and constantly comparing. You never know what people are dealing with or why they do what they do.

Have you not been paying attention? The redshirting people just told you why they do it. No one has the guess or assume anything. Also, let's not forget which group is tracking other children's birthdays. It's not the people who think redshirting is silly.

There are good reasons to redshirt (and generally the school will encourage it when those factors are present) but these threads are always full of crazy, competitive, angry redshirters who are like "you're just mad that you didn't think of it first!" People who redshirt for real, valid reasons don't have to "advocate" for the practice because no one is going to argue that a kid who, for instance, has motor skills delays or selective mutism should be forced to start K at 4 or just-turned 5.

The people who freak out about ANY criticism of redshirting are the people who genuinely just can't bear the thought of their son being the smallest boy in class, or who are using redshirting to make their kid popular (they'll say "confident" but confidence comes from within so that's not it).

DP here

Interesting that you mention selective mutism. Every child is different but selective mutism is not a delay, it's an anxiety disorder, and it's treatable. Without treatment you could wait years for it to go away on its own and then potentially face other mental health issues.

I would be concerned about deciding to redshirt based on this. My kid had selective mutism. We treated it in the preschool years. She was definitely ready for K on time and loved it. Holding her back a year would have been a huge disservice to her. I do recognize getting the treatment is really difficult and hard to find trained providers that take insurance but I'm not sure that redshirting solves anything and could cause harm.

PP here. My kid also had selective mutism in preschool which is why it's top of mind for me. We also did not redshirt, but instead worked with the school and it resolved towards the end of PK4 and into the beginning of K. But we were at an elementary school with integrated PK, so the problem was identified after she was already enrolled in her elementary school and we were able to work with the same people who would be handling it as she entered upper grades. But I can imagine a situation where a family is at a separate PK and wants to remain there until they see improvement. Since it does stem from anxiety, I could see being reluctant, for good reasons, to move a child dealing with that from a preschool environment that is at least familiar, to an elementary school that will be brand new. Especially when the added academic expectations of K are added on.

But yes, it's a very case by case situation and one I'd want to discuss with the school and our doctor and make a judgement call based on the nuances of the particular case. Which is why, even though we didn't redshirt our kid in that situation (also a summer birthday), I wouldn't judge other parents for doing so.

But that's so different than most of the reasons for redshirting on this thread, which seem to be more about trying to optimize a child's school experience from the first second in order to ensure they become a specific kind of student and adult -- popular, "a leader", dominant.

I agree that these are difficult choices and do not judge but I personally (not as an expert but as a parent with experience with this) don't think redshirting for selective mutism is something that should be recommended to families. It is a challenging situation for sure. Definitely the most challenging and painful part of my parenting journey and our child was later diagnosed with autism, which has been far less distressing for us and less acutely impairing for our child. So I have nothing but empathy for parents going through this.

This is a wild statement to make as a black-and-white, across-the-board recommendation. No nuance at all.

It's just my opinion based on my experience, as I said. I say it because I don't want people reading this to think they need to redshirt their kids because they have selective mutism. Do any experts recommend redshirting a kid for this?

I really think it's a case by case basis.

My kid only had one year of preschool due to Covid. I discovered that one year of preschool really compresses the time you have to prep a child for elementary if a problem arises that requires a diagnosis and therapies. So I can easily see a situation where the selective mutism is not caught until a month or two into the PK4 year (selective mutism is almost always viewed as simply shyness or being slow to warm at first, unless the child already has an ASD or similar diagnosis, and it's only after all the other kids have acclimated and the teachers realize it can't just be shyness that it gets flagged). Then you have the time it takes for diagnosis and therapy. If it was April or May prior to the K year, and the child was diagnosed but still not talking at all in class, I think there is a decent argument for retaining in preschool. Both because it will be easier to start K if the selective mutism is totally over, and also because at that point I may be concerned that the preparation for K that most kids receive in preschool won't be there for this particular kid.

Not an issue for kids who get more than a year of preschool, but there are plenty who don't for a variety of reasons. Selective mutism is a special case because it will not emerge until a child is in some kind of classroom environment, and it's also hard for parents to spot because these kids talk at home so you really need the daycare or preschool teachers to be prepared to flag it. Some are better at this than others, and it can also depend on the environment.

I have a kid with a language disorder. It’s actually the opposite and sending on time opens them up to more academics and supports that a regular preschool will not provide. Many parents take the approach to hold back with no supports or extra help. So you are only delaying help, which means the kids lose a year.

Many kids don’t go to preschool and it’s fine. Part of the prep is parents working with their kids at home.

Selective mutism would start at home with unknown visitors and when you go out. You’d see it before.

DP
You might "see it" but many parents would not recognize it, and you also wouldn't get a diagnosis.

That being said I agree with you that in this particular case, the impulse of redshirting is coming from well meaning parents but it does not actually help the child (and you are putting them in a class with younger kids for their entire school career, which is most likely not appropriate for them).

How can you NOT see a langauge disorder (except if its exclusively receptive language or auditory processing and even then you see your kid not responding)? Its one thing for parents who aren't educated, have issues themselves, etc. but that's not the population holding back their kids. I could see something wrong at around 8 months. I got blown off for many months by doctors and we did private speech at 18 months till I could find doctors who would believe us and help/advocate for insurance to pay.

Selective mutism is... selective. My kid was very verbal and articulate at home. Yes you obviously see the disorder when you take your kid out of the house, but we're talking about a 2 or 3 year old. They get labeled as "shy" or "slow to warm" and people assume that with time they will start to talk to other people.

It's not until they are in a classroom environment and the mutism lasts well past when you would expect even a shy child to start talking and interacting. As another poster noted, it's not generally caused by language processing issues, it has to do with anxiety. So it can definitely hide in plain sight.

I'll also note that I still see symptoms of it with my kid even though she's had treatment and is no longer mute at school. For instance she still really struggles with things like letting a teacher know she has a problem (like that she has to use the bathroom or has an injury). As she's gotten older this continues to pose challenges because where an ECE teacher will naturally accommodate this (prompting bathroom breaks, noticing a kid seems off and checking in), as the grades progress the teachers do this less and less.

I understand the argument for starting a kid like this on time to access therapy and services, and in fact that's what we did. But I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to think. I can also see a valid argument for redshirting to give therapy time to work so that a child can have a school experience where they aren't dealing with a challenge like this.

DP

They will still be having a "school experience" with SM in preschool if they are redshirted.

I can say my kid who got treatment got more confident by moving into a new environment and if you search reddit many other kids with SM do as well. Kids that are developmentally ready for K (cognitively, motor skills wise) should go to K and get appropriate treatment for their anxiety if needed. If a parent is in a position to redshirt they also have the choice to get an IEP in place and work with the teacher to do fade ins and work on exposures outside of school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A 32 page thread for this issue? Again?

Why do people care about this issue so much? For background: I have 3 kids (none of whom are redshirted) but are all in the oldest half of their grade due to their birthdates. If I had a summer birthday kid, I definitely would’ve considered redshirting. Among people we know, it seems to be about 50/50 (redshirted vs non) for summer birthdays. I don’t know any kids with NON summer birthdays who are redshirted with the exception of one kid with a medical issue.

Why do people on DCUM care so much about this? Can someone explain to me how, exactly, this issue matters to you and/or your kid? I genuinely don’t understand it. The only argument I’ve heard is that it “having older kids in K increases expectations for everyone in K”….but unfortunately I think kindergarten is not ever going to back to “how it used to be” (and should be). As an individual parent, there is nothing one can do to change the K standards. To do so would require a huge campaign for change, and 95%+ parents simply do not care about this issue to bother (same as any other issue concerning public schools, it seems).

Because people feel their non-redshirted kid is getting overshadowed or would somehow rank high in their class, have that AAP spot, or be first string on varsity if it weren’t for all those redshirted kids. This isn’t true…but it’s how these specific parents here feel. Then there is a subset of the anti redshirt parents that have adult kids, that haven’t been in the elementary scene in decades (unless you count their grands) that feel “well back when my kids were in K…” and like to insert their irrelevant, dated opinion.

I don’t think it’s the hyper-competitive stuff (AAP, Varsity) that had people anxious. I think it’s that they know their kids are in competition with children whose parents have more resources than they do. A year of PreK, more tutors/coaches, more enrichment. They thought they were at one end of the bell curve and have found themselves in the middle or on the other side and it’s frightening.

OP says in the first post that they would have redshirted too if she had known people in her school were redshirting Spring birthdays. It doesn't sound like they have less resources than other parents in their local school.

I think that supports my point. The parents who *did* red shirt didn’t wait to see what other children were doing. Their decision was based on an optimal environment for their child, with no consideration of resources.

Her decision was based on what the majority of people were doing. To assume resources were a consideration, when it's never mentioned, is a stretch.

Parents who redshirt are concerned primarily about their kids fitting in socially. Sounds like OP was too.

I think this is the dichotomy that creates problems. It's not so much redshirters v. non-redshirters. It's people who are angling for an advantage for their kids versus people who want a healthy childhood environment. I fall in the second camp and think it's both redshirters and non-redshirters who are seeking advantages who create the conflict.

The advantage seekers who redshirt do it specifically because they want their kids to be oldest, to be leaders, to have an edge in sports and academics if possible. The advantage seekers who don't redshirt feel threatened by this and freak out about it, and these people fight with each other.

On the other side, those of us who just want healthy educational environments don't fight with each other whether we redshirt or not, because we have the same goal -- a positive environment. My kid isn't redshirted but I don't have any issue with redshirted kids as long as the goal is for all the kids to get what they need in the classroom. All the redshirted kids I know are great (I only know a few) and positive additions to the classroom. I don't get the feeling their parents are trying to get them ahead, only that they were worried they weren't ready for K so held them back a year. NBD.

That first group will never be happy no matter what the rule is because they are all in competition with each other and all deeply insecure and everything is motivated by trying to get their kid to the front of the line. They are also the people who lose their minds over age cut offs in summer swim and other sports. They are crazy!

Insightful comment. I actually would add another group that’s a problem: the equality seekers who somehow believe redshirting gives an advantage.

I think you’re right on this. I don’t say much to anyone but deep down I just feel it’s unfair and that really bothers me.

As someone who didn’t redshirt and has a young for grade kid, this fascinates me. Why on earth does this, of all the many more unfair ways people advantage their children, make you feel this way? So much that you have identified this and think about it? Why do you spend the mental energy on this particular one? I cannot understand feeling this way.

I read this threads and sometimes I feel like I am reading the posts of aliens. I do not understand.

Fair or not it puts kids with age inappropriate peers.

But it’s only “age inappropriate” if it’s another parent’s decision, right? If your child is profoundly gifted in math and invited to have math classes one or two grades ahead, does the fact that their classmates are “age inappropriate” still matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

The pro-redshirters are just as crazy.

Agree, though, that irl most people don't care. Outside of private schools that push for redshirting, even in high income areas, only a small portion of the students redshirt.

The people who claim otherwise--that their classrooms are full of Spring redshirters--are either mistaken or outliers.

On DCUM, no, the pro-redshirters are not nearly as crazy. I say that as someone who didn’t redshirt but has read these threads for years. There are occasional crazy redshirters, but they are dwarfed by the insane anti-redshirters. Those people are both nuts and weirdly unable to do math.

Agree nobody cares, though.

Eh, parents who want to redshirt normal, bright children are also the same people who probably had their panties in a bunch when their kid didn't take their first steps on the same day as the kid down the street. Have some faith in your kids.

Likewise, assume parents know their children best and are doing what they think is right. Have some faith, indeed.

It's hard having faith in redshirting parents after reading this thread. I can't decide which one of you is crazier. It's either the person who says they redshirt their kid because being an adult "sucks" and they want to prolong their kid's childhood or maybe it's the parent who said their preschool says she'd rather be traveling the world and practice her second language or maybe it's the person who says redshirting "gives the edge you need to become a champion" or perhaps it the person who said their kid is too smart to move on to the next grade or possibly it's the person who said it's necessary to be good at lacrosse, which is possibly the least competitive sport there is.

No, it’s just you. Obsessed with other people’s kids, assuming the worst intentions of others, gossiping, keeping track of birthdays, and constantly comparing. You never know what people are dealing with or why they do what they do.

Have you not been paying attention? The redshirting people just told you why they do it. No one has the guess or assume anything. Also, let's not forget which group is tracking other children's birthdays. It's not the people who think redshirting is silly.

There are good reasons to redshirt (and generally the school will encourage it when those factors are present) but these threads are always full of crazy, competitive, angry redshirters who are like "you're just mad that you didn't think of it first!" People who redshirt for real, valid reasons don't have to "advocate" for the practice because no one is going to argue that a kid who, for instance, has motor skills delays or selective mutism should be forced to start K at 4 or just-turned 5.

The people who freak out about ANY criticism of redshirting are the people who genuinely just can't bear the thought of their son being the smallest boy in class, or who are using redshirting to make their kid popular (they'll say "confident" but confidence comes from within so that's not it).

DP here

Interesting that you mention selective mutism. Every child is different but selective mutism is not a delay, it's an anxiety disorder, and it's treatable. Without treatment you could wait years for it to go away on its own and then potentially face other mental health issues.

I would be concerned about deciding to redshirt based on this. My kid had selective mutism. We treated it in the preschool years. She was definitely ready for K on time and loved it. Holding her back a year would have been a huge disservice to her. I do recognize getting the treatment is really difficult and hard to find trained providers that take insurance but I'm not sure that redshirting solves anything and could cause harm.

PP here. My kid also had selective mutism in preschool which is why it's top of mind for me. We also did not redshirt, but instead worked with the school and it resolved towards the end of PK4 and into the beginning of K. But we were at an elementary school with integrated PK, so the problem was identified after she was already enrolled in her elementary school and we were able to work with the same people who would be handling it as she entered upper grades. But I can imagine a situation where a family is at a separate PK and wants to remain there until they see improvement. Since it does stem from anxiety, I could see being reluctant, for good reasons, to move a child dealing with that from a preschool environment that is at least familiar, to an elementary school that will be brand new. Especially when the added academic expectations of K are added on.

But yes, it's a very case by case situation and one I'd want to discuss with the school and our doctor and make a judgement call based on the nuances of the particular case. Which is why, even though we didn't redshirt our kid in that situation (also a summer birthday), I wouldn't judge other parents for doing so.

But that's so different than most of the reasons for redshirting on this thread, which seem to be more about trying to optimize a child's school experience from the first second in order to ensure they become a specific kind of student and adult -- popular, "a leader", dominant.

I agree that these are difficult choices and do not judge but I personally (not as an expert but as a parent with experience with this) don't think redshirting for selective mutism is something that should be recommended to families. It is a challenging situation for sure. Definitely the most challenging and painful part of my parenting journey and our child was later diagnosed with autism, which has been far less distressing for us and less acutely impairing for our child. So I have nothing but empathy for parents going through this.

This is a wild statement to make as a black-and-white, across-the-board recommendation. No nuance at all.

It's just my opinion based on my experience, as I said. I say it because I don't want people reading this to think they need to redshirt their kids because they have selective mutism. Do any experts recommend redshirting a kid for this?

I really think it's a case by case basis.

My kid only had one year of preschool due to Covid. I discovered that one year of preschool really compresses the time you have to prep a child for elementary if a problem arises that requires a diagnosis and therapies. So I can easily see a situation where the selective mutism is not caught until a month or two into the PK4 year (selective mutism is almost always viewed as simply shyness or being slow to warm at first, unless the child already has an ASD or similar diagnosis, and it's only after all the other kids have acclimated and the teachers realize it can't just be shyness that it gets flagged). Then you have the time it takes for diagnosis and therapy. If it was April or May prior to the K year, and the child was diagnosed but still not talking at all in class, I think there is a decent argument for retaining in preschool. Both because it will be easier to start K if the selective mutism is totally over, and also because at that point I may be concerned that the preparation for K that most kids receive in preschool won't be there for this particular kid.

Not an issue for kids who get more than a year of preschool, but there are plenty who don't for a variety of reasons. Selective mutism is a special case because it will not emerge until a child is in some kind of classroom environment, and it's also hard for parents to spot because these kids talk at home so you really need the daycare or preschool teachers to be prepared to flag it. Some are better at this than others, and it can also depend on the environment.

I have a kid with a language disorder. It’s actually the opposite and sending on time opens them up to more academics and supports that a regular preschool will not provide. Many parents take the approach to hold back with no supports or extra help. So you are only delaying help, which means the kids lose a year.

Many kids don’t go to preschool and it’s fine. Part of the prep is parents working with their kids at home.

Selective mutism would start at home with unknown visitors and when you go out. You’d see it before.

DP
You might "see it" but many parents would not recognize it, and you also wouldn't get a diagnosis.

That being said I agree with you that in this particular case, the impulse of redshirting is coming from well meaning parents but it does not actually help the child (and you are putting them in a class with younger kids for their entire school career, which is most likely not appropriate for them).

How can you NOT see a langauge disorder (except if its exclusively receptive language or auditory processing and even then you see your kid not responding)? Its one thing for parents who aren't educated, have issues themselves, etc. but that's not the population holding back their kids. I could see something wrong at around 8 months. I got blown off for many months by doctors and we did private speech at 18 months till I could find doctors who would believe us and help/advocate for insurance to pay.

Selective mutism is... selective. My kid was very verbal and articulate at home. Yes you obviously see the disorder when you take your kid out of the house, but we're talking about a 2 or 3 year old. They get labeled as "shy" or "slow to warm" and people assume that with time they will start to talk to other people.

It's not until they are in a classroom environment and the mutism lasts well past when you would expect even a shy child to start talking and interacting. As another poster noted, it's not generally caused by language processing issues, it has to do with anxiety. So it can definitely hide in plain sight.

I'll also note that I still see symptoms of it with my kid even though she's had treatment and is no longer mute at school. For instance she still really struggles with things like letting a teacher know she has a problem (like that she has to use the bathroom or has an injury). As she's gotten older this continues to pose challenges because where an ECE teacher will naturally accommodate this (prompting bathroom breaks, noticing a kid seems off and checking in), as the grades progress the teachers do this less and less.

I understand the argument for starting a kid like this on time to access therapy and services, and in fact that's what we did. But I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to think. I can also see a valid argument for redshirting to give therapy time to work so that a child can have a school experience where they aren't dealing with a challenge like this.

DP

They will still be having a "school experience" with SM in preschool if they are redshirted.

I can say my kid who got treatment got more confident by moving into a new environment and if you search reddit many other kids with SM do as well. Kids that are developmentally ready for K (cognitively, motor skills wise) should go to K and get appropriate treatment for their anxiety if needed. If a parent is in a position to redshirt they also have the choice to get an IEP in place and work with the teacher to do fade ins and work on exposures outside of school.

If you spend much time on the SN boards here you will see that IEP enforcement varies hugely, and even getting an IEP in place is challenging. Much easier to get all the appropriate interventions (and more of them) in a prek setting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

The pro-redshirters are just as crazy.

Agree, though, that irl most people don't care. Outside of private schools that push for redshirting, even in high income areas, only a small portion of the students redshirt.

The people who claim otherwise--that their classrooms are full of Spring redshirters--are either mistaken or outliers.

On DCUM, no, the pro-redshirters are not nearly as crazy. I say that as someone who didn’t redshirt but has read these threads for years. There are occasional crazy redshirters, but they are dwarfed by the insane anti-redshirters. Those people are both nuts and weirdly unable to do math.

Agree nobody cares, though.

Eh, parents who want to redshirt normal, bright children are also the same people who probably had their panties in a bunch when their kid didn't take their first steps on the same day as the kid down the street. Have some faith in your kids.

Likewise, assume parents know their children best and are doing what they think is right. Have some faith, indeed.

It's hard having faith in redshirting parents after reading this thread. I can't decide which one of you is crazier. It's either the person who says they redshirt their kid because being an adult "sucks" and they want to prolong their kid's childhood or maybe it's the parent who said their preschool says she'd rather be traveling the world and practice her second language or maybe it's the person who says redshirting "gives the edge you need to become a champion" or perhaps it the person who said their kid is too smart to move on to the next grade or possibly it's the person who said it's necessary to be good at lacrosse, which is possibly the least competitive sport there is.

No, it’s just you. Obsessed with other people’s kids, assuming the worst intentions of others, gossiping, keeping track of birthdays, and constantly comparing. You never know what people are dealing with or why they do what they do.

Have you not been paying attention? The redshirting people just told you why they do it. No one has the guess or assume anything. Also, let's not forget which group is tracking other children's birthdays. It's not the people who think redshirting is silly.

There are good reasons to redshirt (and generally the school will encourage it when those factors are present) but these threads are always full of crazy, competitive, angry redshirters who are like "you're just mad that you didn't think of it first!" People who redshirt for real, valid reasons don't have to "advocate" for the practice because no one is going to argue that a kid who, for instance, has motor skills delays or selective mutism should be forced to start K at 4 or just-turned 5.

The people who freak out about ANY criticism of redshirting are the people who genuinely just can't bear the thought of their son being the smallest boy in class, or who are using redshirting to make their kid popular (they'll say "confident" but confidence comes from within so that's not it).

DP here

Interesting that you mention selective mutism. Every child is different but selective mutism is not a delay, it's an anxiety disorder, and it's treatable. Without treatment you could wait years for it to go away on its own and then potentially face other mental health issues.

I would be concerned about deciding to redshirt based on this. My kid had selective mutism. We treated it in the preschool years. She was definitely ready for K on time and loved it. Holding her back a year would have been a huge disservice to her. I do recognize getting the treatment is really difficult and hard to find trained providers that take insurance but I'm not sure that redshirting solves anything and could cause harm.

PP here. My kid also had selective mutism in preschool which is why it's top of mind for me. We also did not redshirt, but instead worked with the school and it resolved towards the end of PK4 and into the beginning of K. But we were at an elementary school with integrated PK, so the problem was identified after she was already enrolled in her elementary school and we were able to work with the same people who would be handling it as she entered upper grades. But I can imagine a situation where a family is at a separate PK and wants to remain there until they see improvement. Since it does stem from anxiety, I could see being reluctant, for good reasons, to move a child dealing with that from a preschool environment that is at least familiar, to an elementary school that will be brand new. Especially when the added academic expectations of K are added on.

But yes, it's a very case by case situation and one I'd want to discuss with the school and our doctor and make a judgement call based on the nuances of the particular case. Which is why, even though we didn't redshirt our kid in that situation (also a summer birthday), I wouldn't judge other parents for doing so.

But that's so different than most of the reasons for redshirting on this thread, which seem to be more about trying to optimize a child's school experience from the first second in order to ensure they become a specific kind of student and adult -- popular, "a leader", dominant.

I agree that these are difficult choices and do not judge but I personally (not as an expert but as a parent with experience with this) don't think redshirting for selective mutism is something that should be recommended to families. It is a challenging situation for sure. Definitely the most challenging and painful part of my parenting journey and our child was later diagnosed with autism, which has been far less distressing for us and less acutely impairing for our child. So I have nothing but empathy for parents going through this.

This is a wild statement to make as a black-and-white, across-the-board recommendation. No nuance at all.

It's just my opinion based on my experience, as I said. I say it because I don't want people reading this to think they need to redshirt their kids because they have selective mutism. Do any experts recommend redshirting a kid for this?

I really think it's a case by case basis.

My kid only had one year of preschool due to Covid. I discovered that one year of preschool really compresses the time you have to prep a child for elementary if a problem arises that requires a diagnosis and therapies. So I can easily see a situation where the selective mutism is not caught until a month or two into the PK4 year (selective mutism is almost always viewed as simply shyness or being slow to warm at first, unless the child already has an ASD or similar diagnosis, and it's only after all the other kids have acclimated and the teachers realize it can't just be shyness that it gets flagged). Then you have the time it takes for diagnosis and therapy. If it was April or May prior to the K year, and the child was diagnosed but still not talking at all in class, I think there is a decent argument for retaining in preschool. Both because it will be easier to start K if the selective mutism is totally over, and also because at that point I may be concerned that the preparation for K that most kids receive in preschool won't be there for this particular kid.

Not an issue for kids who get more than a year of preschool, but there are plenty who don't for a variety of reasons. Selective mutism is a special case because it will not emerge until a child is in some kind of classroom environment, and it's also hard for parents to spot because these kids talk at home so you really need the daycare or preschool teachers to be prepared to flag it. Some are better at this than others, and it can also depend on the environment.

I have a kid with a language disorder. It’s actually the opposite and sending on time opens them up to more academics and supports that a regular preschool will not provide. Many parents take the approach to hold back with no supports or extra help. So you are only delaying help, which means the kids lose a year.

Many kids don’t go to preschool and it’s fine. Part of the prep is parents working with their kids at home.

Selective mutism would start at home with unknown visitors and when you go out. You’d see it before.

DP
You might "see it" but many parents would not recognize it, and you also wouldn't get a diagnosis.

That being said I agree with you that in this particular case, the impulse of redshirting is coming from well meaning parents but it does not actually help the child (and you are putting them in a class with younger kids for their entire school career, which is most likely not appropriate for them).

How can you NOT see a langauge disorder (except if its exclusively receptive language or auditory processing and even then you see your kid not responding)? Its one thing for parents who aren't educated, have issues themselves, etc. but that's not the population holding back their kids. I could see something wrong at around 8 months. I got blown off for many months by doctors and we did private speech at 18 months till I could find doctors who would believe us and help/advocate for insurance to pay.

Selective mutism is... selective. My kid was very verbal and articulate at home. Yes you obviously see the disorder when you take your kid out of the house, but we're talking about a 2 or 3 year old. They get labeled as "shy" or "slow to warm" and people assume that with time they will start to talk to other people.

It's not until they are in a classroom environment and the mutism lasts well past when you would expect even a shy child to start talking and interacting. As another poster noted, it's not generally caused by language processing issues, it has to do with anxiety. So it can definitely hide in plain sight.

I'll also note that I still see symptoms of it with my kid even though she's had treatment and is no longer mute at school. For instance she still really struggles with things like letting a teacher know she has a problem (like that she has to use the bathroom or has an injury). As she's gotten older this continues to pose challenges because where an ECE teacher will naturally accommodate this (prompting bathroom breaks, noticing a kid seems off and checking in), as the grades progress the teachers do this less and less.

I understand the argument for starting a kid like this on time to access therapy and services, and in fact that's what we did. But I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to think. I can also see a valid argument for redshirting to give therapy time to work so that a child can have a school experience where they aren't dealing with a challenge like this.

DP

They will still be having a "school experience" with SM in preschool if they are redshirted.

I can say my kid who got treatment got more confident by moving into a new environment and if you search reddit many other kids with SM do as well. Kids that are developmentally ready for K (cognitively, motor skills wise) should go to K and get appropriate treatment for their anxiety if needed. If a parent is in a position to redshirt they also have the choice to get an IEP in place and work with the teacher to do fade ins and work on exposures outside of school.

If you spend much time on the SN boards here you will see that IEP enforcement varies hugely, and even getting an IEP in place is challenging. Much easier to get all the appropriate interventions (and more of them) in a prek setting.

Well this is just a difference between public and private schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

The pro-redshirters are just as crazy.

Agree, though, that irl most people don't care. Outside of private schools that push for redshirting, even in high income areas, only a small portion of the students redshirt.

The people who claim otherwise--that their classrooms are full of Spring redshirters--are either mistaken or outliers.

On DCUM, no, the pro-redshirters are not nearly as crazy. I say that as someone who didn’t redshirt but has read these threads for years. There are occasional crazy redshirters, but they are dwarfed by the insane anti-redshirters. Those people are both nuts and weirdly unable to do math.

Agree nobody cares, though.

Eh, parents who want to redshirt normal, bright children are also the same people who probably had their panties in a bunch when their kid didn't take their first steps on the same day as the kid down the street. Have some faith in your kids.

Likewise, assume parents know their children best and are doing what they think is right. Have some faith, indeed.

It's hard having faith in redshirting parents after reading this thread. I can't decide which one of you is crazier. It's either the person who says they redshirt their kid because being an adult "sucks" and they want to prolong their kid's childhood or maybe it's the parent who said their preschool says she'd rather be traveling the world and practice her second language or maybe it's the person who says redshirting "gives the edge you need to become a champion" or perhaps it the person who said their kid is too smart to move on to the next grade or possibly it's the person who said it's necessary to be good at lacrosse, which is possibly the least competitive sport there is.

No, it’s just you. Obsessed with other people’s kids, assuming the worst intentions of others, gossiping, keeping track of birthdays, and constantly comparing. You never know what people are dealing with or why they do what they do.

Have you not been paying attention? The redshirting people just told you why they do it. No one has the guess or assume anything. Also, let's not forget which group is tracking other children's birthdays. It's not the people who think redshirting is silly.

There are good reasons to redshirt (and generally the school will encourage it when those factors are present) but these threads are always full of crazy, competitive, angry redshirters who are like "you're just mad that you didn't think of it first!" People who redshirt for real, valid reasons don't have to "advocate" for the practice because no one is going to argue that a kid who, for instance, has motor skills delays or selective mutism should be forced to start K at 4 or just-turned 5.

The people who freak out about ANY criticism of redshirting are the people who genuinely just can't bear the thought of their son being the smallest boy in class, or who are using redshirting to make their kid popular (they'll say "confident" but confidence comes from within so that's not it).

DP here

Interesting that you mention selective mutism. Every child is different but selective mutism is not a delay, it's an anxiety disorder, and it's treatable. Without treatment you could wait years for it to go away on its own and then potentially face other mental health issues.

I would be concerned about deciding to redshirt based on this. My kid had selective mutism. We treated it in the preschool years. She was definitely ready for K on time and loved it. Holding her back a year would have been a huge disservice to her. I do recognize getting the treatment is really difficult and hard to find trained providers that take insurance but I'm not sure that redshirting solves anything and could cause harm.

PP here. My kid also had selective mutism in preschool which is why it's top of mind for me. We also did not redshirt, but instead worked with the school and it resolved towards the end of PK4 and into the beginning of K. But we were at an elementary school with integrated PK, so the problem was identified after she was already enrolled in her elementary school and we were able to work with the same people who would be handling it as she entered upper grades. But I can imagine a situation where a family is at a separate PK and wants to remain there until they see improvement. Since it does stem from anxiety, I could see being reluctant, for good reasons, to move a child dealing with that from a preschool environment that is at least familiar, to an elementary school that will be brand new. Especially when the added academic expectations of K are added on.

But yes, it's a very case by case situation and one I'd want to discuss with the school and our doctor and make a judgement call based on the nuances of the particular case. Which is why, even though we didn't redshirt our kid in that situation (also a summer birthday), I wouldn't judge other parents for doing so.

But that's so different than most of the reasons for redshirting on this thread, which seem to be more about trying to optimize a child's school experience from the first second in order to ensure they become a specific kind of student and adult -- popular, "a leader", dominant.

I agree that these are difficult choices and do not judge but I personally (not as an expert but as a parent with experience with this) don't think redshirting for selective mutism is something that should be recommended to families. It is a challenging situation for sure. Definitely the most challenging and painful part of my parenting journey and our child was later diagnosed with autism, which has been far less distressing for us and less acutely impairing for our child. So I have nothing but empathy for parents going through this.

This is a wild statement to make as a black-and-white, across-the-board recommendation. No nuance at all.

It's just my opinion based on my experience, as I said. I say it because I don't want people reading this to think they need to redshirt their kids because they have selective mutism. Do any experts recommend redshirting a kid for this?

I really think it's a case by case basis.

My kid only had one year of preschool due to Covid. I discovered that one year of preschool really compresses the time you have to prep a child for elementary if a problem arises that requires a diagnosis and therapies. So I can easily see a situation where the selective mutism is not caught until a month or two into the PK4 year (selective mutism is almost always viewed as simply shyness or being slow to warm at first, unless the child already has an ASD or similar diagnosis, and it's only after all the other kids have acclimated and the teachers realize it can't just be shyness that it gets flagged). Then you have the time it takes for diagnosis and therapy. If it was April or May prior to the K year, and the child was diagnosed but still not talking at all in class, I think there is a decent argument for retaining in preschool. Both because it will be easier to start K if the selective mutism is totally over, and also because at that point I may be concerned that the preparation for K that most kids receive in preschool won't be there for this particular kid.

Not an issue for kids who get more than a year of preschool, but there are plenty who don't for a variety of reasons. Selective mutism is a special case because it will not emerge until a child is in some kind of classroom environment, and it's also hard for parents to spot because these kids talk at home so you really need the daycare or preschool teachers to be prepared to flag it. Some are better at this than others, and it can also depend on the environment.

I have a kid with a language disorder. It’s actually the opposite and sending on time opens them up to more academics and supports that a regular preschool will not provide. Many parents take the approach to hold back with no supports or extra help. So you are only delaying help, which means the kids lose a year.

Many kids don’t go to preschool and it’s fine. Part of the prep is parents working with their kids at home.

Selective mutism would start at home with unknown visitors and when you go out. You’d see it before.

DP
You might "see it" but many parents would not recognize it, and you also wouldn't get a diagnosis.

That being said I agree with you that in this particular case, the impulse of redshirting is coming from well meaning parents but it does not actually help the child (and you are putting them in a class with younger kids for their entire school career, which is most likely not appropriate for them).

How can you NOT see a langauge disorder (except if its exclusively receptive language or auditory processing and even then you see your kid not responding)? Its one thing for parents who aren't educated, have issues themselves, etc. but that's not the population holding back their kids. I could see something wrong at around 8 months. I got blown off for many months by doctors and we did private speech at 18 months till I could find doctors who would believe us and help/advocate for insurance to pay.

Selective mutism is... selective. My kid was very verbal and articulate at home. Yes you obviously see the disorder when you take your kid out of the house, but we're talking about a 2 or 3 year old. They get labeled as "shy" or "slow to warm" and people assume that with time they will start to talk to other people.

It's not until they are in a classroom environment and the mutism lasts well past when you would expect even a shy child to start talking and interacting. As another poster noted, it's not generally caused by language processing issues, it has to do with anxiety. So it can definitely hide in plain sight.

I'll also note that I still see symptoms of it with my kid even though she's had treatment and is no longer mute at school. For instance she still really struggles with things like letting a teacher know she has a problem (like that she has to use the bathroom or has an injury). As she's gotten older this continues to pose challenges because where an ECE teacher will naturally accommodate this (prompting bathroom breaks, noticing a kid seems off and checking in), as the grades progress the teachers do this less and less.

I understand the argument for starting a kid like this on time to access therapy and services, and in fact that's what we did. But I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to think. I can also see a valid argument for redshirting to give therapy time to work so that a child can have a school experience where they aren't dealing with a challenge like this.

DP

They will still be having a "school experience" with SM in preschool if they are redshirted.

I can say my kid who got treatment got more confident by moving into a new environment and if you search reddit many other kids with SM do as well. Kids that are developmentally ready for K (cognitively, motor skills wise) should go to K and get appropriate treatment for their anxiety if needed. If a parent is in a position to redshirt they also have the choice to get an IEP in place and work with the teacher to do fade ins and work on exposures outside of school.

If you spend much time on the SN boards here you will see that IEP enforcement varies hugely, and even getting an IEP in place is challenging. Much easier to get all the appropriate interventions (and more of them) in a prek setting.

Well this is just a difference between public and private schools

And to clarify not that the private school will implement the interventions but they are more likely to allow you do get the interventions privately

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

In the case I know better (family member) the PreK 3 referred for EI because they suspected ASD. It was ultimately diagnosed as SM— and kid is a thriving 8 y/o now— but the amount of intervention they recommended was not going to be available to the child in public kindergarten, and by a huge margin (think, the child would get 5+ hours per week in PreK and 1-2 hours in K).

The second child my total body of knowledge is that “Dr. ______ says we’re better off starting him in 2027” so I’m sorry no more data there.

But none of these parents are just lazily deciding to wait out SM and the implication that they don’t know what they’re doing is pretty rude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read the whole thread. OP, the answer is that only weirdos care about redshirting because it’s a non-issue. I assume this thread is full of the usual sheltered anti-redshirting hysterics, but in real life, this is not an issue.

The pro-redshirters are just as crazy.

Agree, though, that irl most people don't care. Outside of private schools that push for redshirting, even in high income areas, only a small portion of the students redshirt.

The people who claim otherwise--that their classrooms are full of Spring redshirters--are either mistaken or outliers.

On DCUM, no, the pro-redshirters are not nearly as crazy. I say that as someone who didn’t redshirt but has read these threads for years. There are occasional crazy redshirters, but they are dwarfed by the insane anti-redshirters. Those people are both nuts and weirdly unable to do math.

Agree nobody cares, though.

Eh, parents who want to redshirt normal, bright children are also the same people who probably had their panties in a bunch when their kid didn't take their first steps on the same day as the kid down the street. Have some faith in your kids.

Likewise, assume parents know their children best and are doing what they think is right. Have some faith, indeed.

It's hard having faith in redshirting parents after reading this thread. I can't decide which one of you is crazier. It's either the person who says they redshirt their kid because being an adult "sucks" and they want to prolong their kid's childhood or maybe it's the parent who said their preschool says she'd rather be traveling the world and practice her second language or maybe it's the person who says redshirting "gives the edge you need to become a champion" or perhaps it the person who said their kid is too smart to move on to the next grade or possibly it's the person who said it's necessary to be good at lacrosse, which is possibly the least competitive sport there is.

No, it’s just you. Obsessed with other people’s kids, assuming the worst intentions of others, gossiping, keeping track of birthdays, and constantly comparing. You never know what people are dealing with or why they do what they do.

Have you not been paying attention? The redshirting people just told you why they do it. No one has the guess or assume anything. Also, let's not forget which group is tracking other children's birthdays. It's not the people who think redshirting is silly.

There are good reasons to redshirt (and generally the school will encourage it when those factors are present) but these threads are always full of crazy, competitive, angry redshirters who are like "you're just mad that you didn't think of it first!" People who redshirt for real, valid reasons don't have to "advocate" for the practice because no one is going to argue that a kid who, for instance, has motor skills delays or selective mutism should be forced to start K at 4 or just-turned 5.

The people who freak out about ANY criticism of redshirting are the people who genuinely just can't bear the thought of their son being the smallest boy in class, or who are using redshirting to make their kid popular (they'll say "confident" but confidence comes from within so that's not it).

DP here

Interesting that you mention selective mutism. Every child is different but selective mutism is not a delay, it's an anxiety disorder, and it's treatable. Without treatment you could wait years for it to go away on its own and then potentially face other mental health issues.

I would be concerned about deciding to redshirt based on this. My kid had selective mutism. We treated it in the preschool years. She was definitely ready for K on time and loved it. Holding her back a year would have been a huge disservice to her. I do recognize getting the treatment is really difficult and hard to find trained providers that take insurance but I'm not sure that redshirting solves anything and could cause harm.

PP here. My kid also had selective mutism in preschool which is why it's top of mind for me. We also did not redshirt, but instead worked with the school and it resolved towards the end of PK4 and into the beginning of K. But we were at an elementary school with integrated PK, so the problem was identified after she was already enrolled in her elementary school and we were able to work with the same people who would be handling it as she entered upper grades. But I can imagine a situation where a family is at a separate PK and wants to remain there until they see improvement. Since it does stem from anxiety, I could see being reluctant, for good reasons, to move a child dealing with that from a preschool environment that is at least familiar, to an elementary school that will be brand new. Especially when the added academic expectations of K are added on.

But yes, it's a very case by case situation and one I'd want to discuss with the school and our doctor and make a judgement call based on the nuances of the particular case. Which is why, even though we didn't redshirt our kid in that situation (also a summer birthday), I wouldn't judge other parents for doing so.

But that's so different than most of the reasons for redshirting on this thread, which seem to be more about trying to optimize a child's school experience from the first second in order to ensure they become a specific kind of student and adult -- popular, "a leader", dominant.

I agree that these are difficult choices and do not judge but I personally (not as an expert but as a parent with experience with this) don't think redshirting for selective mutism is something that should be recommended to families. It is a challenging situation for sure. Definitely the most challenging and painful part of my parenting journey and our child was later diagnosed with autism, which has been far less distressing for us and less acutely impairing for our child. So I have nothing but empathy for parents going through this.

This is a wild statement to make as a black-and-white, across-the-board recommendation. No nuance at all.

It's just my opinion based on my experience, as I said. I say it because I don't want people reading this to think they need to redshirt their kids because they have selective mutism. Do any experts recommend redshirting a kid for this?

I really think it's a case by case basis.

My kid only had one year of preschool due to Covid. I discovered that one year of preschool really compresses the time you have to prep a child for elementary if a problem arises that requires a diagnosis and therapies. So I can easily see a situation where the selective mutism is not caught until a month or two into the PK4 year (selective mutism is almost always viewed as simply shyness or being slow to warm at first, unless the child already has an ASD or similar diagnosis, and it's only after all the other kids have acclimated and the teachers realize it can't just be shyness that it gets flagged). Then you have the time it takes for diagnosis and therapy. If it was April or May prior to the K year, and the child was diagnosed but still not talking at all in class, I think there is a decent argument for retaining in preschool. Both because it will be easier to start K if the selective mutism is totally over, and also because at that point I may be concerned that the preparation for K that most kids receive in preschool won't be there for this particular kid.

Not an issue for kids who get more than a year of preschool, but there are plenty who don't for a variety of reasons. Selective mutism is a special case because it will not emerge until a child is in some kind of classroom environment, and it's also hard for parents to spot because these kids talk at home so you really need the daycare or preschool teachers to be prepared to flag it. Some are better at this than others, and it can also depend on the environment.

I have a kid with a language disorder. It’s actually the opposite and sending on time opens them up to more academics and supports that a regular preschool will not provide. Many parents take the approach to hold back with no supports or extra help. So you are only delaying help, which means the kids lose a year.

Many kids don’t go to preschool and it’s fine. Part of the prep is parents working with their kids at home.

Selective mutism would start at home with unknown visitors and when you go out. You’d see it before.

DP
You might "see it" but many parents would not recognize it, and you also wouldn't get a diagnosis.

That being said I agree with you that in this particular case, the impulse of redshirting is coming from well meaning parents but it does not actually help the child (and you are putting them in a class with younger kids for their entire school career, which is most likely not appropriate for them).

How can you NOT see a langauge disorder (except if its exclusively receptive language or auditory processing and even then you see your kid not responding)? Its one thing for parents who aren't educated, have issues themselves, etc. but that's not the population holding back their kids. I could see something wrong at around 8 months. I got blown off for many months by doctors and we did private speech at 18 months till I could find doctors who would believe us and help/advocate for insurance to pay.

Selective mutism is... selective. My kid was very verbal and articulate at home. Yes you obviously see the disorder when you take your kid out of the house, but we're talking about a 2 or 3 year old. They get labeled as "shy" or "slow to warm" and people assume that with time they will start to talk to other people.

It's not until they are in a classroom environment and the mutism lasts well past when you would expect even a shy child to start talking and interacting. As another poster noted, it's not generally caused by language processing issues, it has to do with anxiety. So it can definitely hide in plain sight.

I'll also note that I still see symptoms of it with my kid even though she's had treatment and is no longer mute at school. For instance she still really struggles with things like letting a teacher know she has a problem (like that she has to use the bathroom or has an injury). As she's gotten older this continues to pose challenges because where an ECE teacher will naturally accommodate this (prompting bathroom breaks, noticing a kid seems off and checking in), as the grades progress the teachers do this less and less.

I understand the argument for starting a kid like this on time to access therapy and services, and in fact that's what we did. But I don't think it's as clear cut as people seem to think. I can also see a valid argument for redshirting to give therapy time to work so that a child can have a school experience where they aren't dealing with a challenge like this.

DP

They will still be having a "school experience" with SM in preschool if they are redshirted.

I can say my kid who got treatment got more confident by moving into a new environment and if you search reddit many other kids with SM do as well. Kids that are developmentally ready for K (cognitively, motor skills wise) should go to K and get appropriate treatment for their anxiety if needed. If a parent is in a position to redshirt they also have the choice to get an IEP in place and work with the teacher to do fade ins and work on exposures outside of school.

If you spend much time on the SN boards here you will see that IEP enforcement varies hugely, and even getting an IEP in place is challenging. Much easier to get all the appropriate interventions (and more of them) in a prek setting.

Well this is just a difference between public and private schools

And to clarify not that the private school will implement the interventions but they are more likely to allow you do get the interventions privately

Sure, but do you see why sending a kid into kindergarten to get significantly less intervention isn’t necessarily the right answer for SM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

In the case I know better (family member) the PreK 3 referred for EI because they suspected ASD. It was ultimately diagnosed as SM— and kid is a thriving 8 y/o now— but the amount of intervention they recommended was not going to be available to the child in public kindergarten, and by a huge margin (think, the child would get 5+ hours per week in PreK and 1-2 hours in K).

The second child my total body of knowledge is that “Dr. ______ says we’re better off starting him in 2027” so I’m sorry no more data there.

But none of these parents are just lazily deciding to wait out SM and the implication that they don’t know what they’re doing is pretty rude.

I didn't say or imply this. Let me repeat since you are clearly just here to fight and bash people: I have nothing but empathy for parents in this situation.

I will also say it sounds like you actually know of zero cases of a child whose therapists recommended redshirting for SM.

Kindly please stop using other people's kids to advance your own agenda you POS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

In the case I know better (family member) the PreK 3 referred for EI because they suspected ASD. It was ultimately diagnosed as SM— and kid is a thriving 8 y/o now— but the amount of intervention they recommended was not going to be available to the child in public kindergarten, and by a huge margin (think, the child would get 5+ hours per week in PreK and 1-2 hours in K).

The second child my total body of knowledge is that “Dr. ______ says we’re better off starting him in 2027” so I’m sorry no more data there.

But none of these parents are just lazily deciding to wait out SM and the implication that they don’t know what they’re doing is pretty rude.

I didn't say or imply this. Let me repeat since you are clearly just here to fight and bash people: I have nothing but empathy for parents in this situation.

I will also say it sounds like you actually know of zero cases of a child whose therapists recommended redshirting for SM.

Kindly please stop using other people's kids to advance your own agenda you POS

“Nothing but empathy” except you’re sure these people you don’t know and who didn’t ask you are acting without “qualified support”

Yup I’m the one with an agenda here…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

There's also a big difference between making this recommendation for an August or September birthday kid, who would be starting kindergarten at 4 yo if they went on time in VA or DC, versus a December/January birthday who is firmly in the middle of the grade already.

I'd never have a 4 yo start kindergarten unless they seemed really ready. Their birthday is past the cutoff in many states, putting them reasonably in either grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

In the case I know better (family member) the PreK 3 referred for EI because they suspected ASD. It was ultimately diagnosed as SM— and kid is a thriving 8 y/o now— but the amount of intervention they recommended was not going to be available to the child in public kindergarten, and by a huge margin (think, the child would get 5+ hours per week in PreK and 1-2 hours in K).

The second child my total body of knowledge is that “Dr. ______ says we’re better off starting him in 2027” so I’m sorry no more data there.

But none of these parents are just lazily deciding to wait out SM and the implication that they don’t know what they’re doing is pretty rude.

I didn't say or imply this. Let me repeat since you are clearly just here to fight and bash people: I have nothing but empathy for parents in this situation.

I will also say it sounds like you actually know of zero cases of a child whose therapists recommended redshirting for SM.

Kindly please stop using other people's kids to advance your own agenda you POS

“Nothing but empathy” except you’re sure these people you don’t know and who didn’t ask you are acting without “qualified support”

Yup I’m the one with an agenda here…

Why do you keep implying you know so much about this and then when pressed it turns out nope?

The reason people don't have appropriate support is because that support is very difficult to get, not because I think those parents are lazy or don't care about their kids. Jfc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We live in a very heavy redshirt area. We moved from DC right before kinder. My son is June and his grade is very old. I just found out two more friends are now being held back. He’s incoming first. One has a Feb bday and the other March. Our cut off date is Sep1. They are struggling with reading but the gap is just becoming very large for the kids on time. This is a public school. Right now even with June he’s the youngest boy in the grade. When we started I actually asked admin these questions and they weren’t honest about it and said most went on time born in summer. Once we started I realized almost everyone from March on redshirted so he’s significantly younger. He’s doing fine but I wish the school was honest about it prior to starting as he’s made friends now so it would be a big transition to do it now.

Going back to MARCH?! I have never heard of such a thing barring a strong academic or social reason.

My second grader is a June, started on time, and has at least 4-5 classmates with summer birthdays.

Yes, it’s a thing in some places. I didn’t realize it until my early April birthday kids had classmates over a year older than them. The parents shared that it’s because they wanted their kids to be the oldest in the class for academic and athletic advantages.

I call BS on their sharing those reasons since those reasons are what DCUM lunatics always claim are the reasons. We redshirted our son since he was born 6 weeks early and we didn't believe elementary school is well suited for active boys. Our son will be a junior this year, no regrets with redshirting him. He does travel soccer, no advantage in sports and we've always supplented public school with tutors if/when needed - so no academic advantage with the redshirting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with selective mutism who are redshirted have parents who are working with EI and private therapists, not asking DCUM in August whether they should redshirt their kids. I’m sure they’re deeply worried that in the opinion of non-experts they’re doing the wrong thing.

Are you saying EI and private therapists are actually recommending this?

I only know two cases personally, but in both of those cases the professionals recommended delaying kindergarten while the kid continued to do a supportive PreK program and get more therapy than would have been available in a public kindergarten schedule. I have no idea if that’s the “standard” recommendation. But the idea that the parents are sitting by idly just waiting for their kid to get older is a DCUM fiction.

Was this for selective mutism? Genuinely curious.

Many parents with kids with selective mutism don't recognize it. We thought our kid was just shy. When we realized what it was we definitely considered switching preschools and we talked to the therapist and she explained what our kid needed was treatment and that would not help.

Many people believe kids will outgrow SM and many kids do (with potential mental health consequences if the SM went on for many years). The treatment for SM is hard to access (most therapists don't take insurance) and requires extensive participation from parents as well as supportive teachers. I hear that you know of two whole cases (of SM? Or something totally different?) but I have absolutely no doubt many families in this situation are acting without qualified support. They are in a really stressful situation and I have nothing but empathy for them but it's simply not true everyone is making these decisions because their therapist suggested it.

In the case I know better (family member) the PreK 3 referred for EI because they suspected ASD. It was ultimately diagnosed as SM— and kid is a thriving 8 y/o now— but the amount of intervention they recommended was not going to be available to the child in public kindergarten, and by a huge margin (think, the child would get 5+ hours per week in PreK and 1-2 hours in K).

The second child my total body of knowledge is that “Dr. ______ says we’re better off starting him in 2027” so I’m sorry no more data there.

But none of these parents are just lazily deciding to wait out SM and the implication that they don’t know what they’re doing is pretty rude.

I didn't say or imply this. Let me repeat since you are clearly just here to fight and bash people: I have nothing but empathy for parents in this situation.

I will also say it sounds like you actually know of zero cases of a child whose therapists recommended redshirting for SM.

Kindly please stop using other people's kids to advance your own agenda you POS

“Nothing but empathy” except you’re sure these people you don’t know and who didn’t ask you are acting without “qualified support”

Yup I’m the one with an agenda here…

Why do you keep implying you know so much about this and then when pressed it turns out nope?

The reason people don't have appropriate support is because that support is very difficult to get, not because I think those parents are lazy or don't care about their kids. Jfc

I have a child with a different SN. The number of people (on the internet and real life) willing to assume that they 100% know better than I do about the decisions we make for her you would not believe. It’s a very common experience, ask around on the SN board.

Oh they’re so “empathetic” because surely if I only knew about their essential oil/crystal healing/one doctor up in Philly who lost his license to practice medicine then I would absolutely make different decisions for my child than the one we made in consultation with our pediatrician and specialist.

So how about: assume every parent in this situation cares more about their kid than you do, cares more about getting them the right support and intervention than you do, and doesn’t need to be “saved”.