Sibling preference/enrollment question

[Anonymous]

If I enroll sibling #2 in a school based on sibling preference after sibling #1 is accepted, what happens if sibling #1 is then offered a more desirable spot elsewhere? Does sibling #2 get to stay enrolled at the first school, even though s/he would not have otherwise been accepted?

[Anonymous]

Yes, sibling #2 gets to stay enrolled. Once a child is enrolled the preference no longer matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, sibling #2 gets to stay enrolled. Once a child is enrolled the preference no longer matters.

Not true according to MySchoolDC FAQ.

[Anonymous]

You are at risk of your younger child losing their slot. Call MySchoolDC and the school in question for guidance.

[Anonymous]

Situation - Sibling #1 and #2 currently enrolled at school A

Sibling #1 gets into school B and #2 get pulled in through sibling preference. Both now enrolled in B.

Sibling #1 gets into 1st choice school - school C and enrolls.
Sibling #2 does not clear the waitlist at school C. Are you saying that #2 does not get to stay at school B? and gets nothing?

[Anonymous]

Depends on where sibling Bs number places them wrt any other students without the preference.

Sibling preference exists to facilitate and support families attending the same school. Not families using their child's siblings to game wait lists all over town.

Whether sibling B loses out will depend on how closely the school adheres to the rule and probably when in the process this all happens. If sibling A moves Sept 1 after attending they probably stay. But now - not so clear cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on where sibling Bs number places them wrt any other students without the preference.

Sibling preference exists to facilitate and support families attending the same school. Not families using their child's siblings to game wait lists all over town.

Whether sibling B loses out will depend on how closely the school adheres to the rule and probably when in the process this all happens. If sibling A moves Sept 1 after attending they probably stay. But now - not so clear cut.

I agree- to think otherwise is unethical. But then again in this town, ethics are flexible based on economiuc impact asnd personal gain.

[Anonymous]

Probably calling MySchoolDC is best but they might direct you to call the school.

[Anonymous]

OP, I would not rely on DCUM for this - call MSDC and ask.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Situation - Sibling #1 and #2 currently enrolled at school A

Sibling #1 gets into school B and #2 get pulled in through sibling preference. Both now enrolled in B.

Sibling #1 gets into 1st choice school - school C and enrolls.
Sibling #2 does not clear the waitlist at school C. Are you saying that #2 does not get to stay at school B? and gets nothing?

They are both enrolled but neither is attending?

[Anonymous]

Depends on where sibling Bs number places them wrt any other students without the preference.

Sibling preference exists to facilitate and support families attending the same school. Not families using their child's siblings to game wait lists all over town.

Whether sibling B loses out will depend on how closely the school adheres to the rule and probably when in the process this all happens. If sibling A moves Sept 1 after attending they probably stay. But now - not so clear cut.


I agree- to think otherwise is unethical. But then again in this town, ethics are flexible based on economiuc impact asnd personal gain.

This very situation happened to a very good friend of mine. They were not gaming the system, and their younger kid ended up getting hurt. Here's how it played out.

Entered both in lottery with first choice - school A
entered younger kid in lottery with current kid school with preference -- school B (second choice)
Put younger kid in lottery with third, fourth and fifth choices.

Lottery played out. Both kids WL for school A - younger kid admitted to school B
Both kids enrolled for school B
A week before school started - older kid accepted from WL for school A -- they accepted and enrolled. Younger kid still on the WL
School B called the family and told them that they were disenrolling their younger child, who now had ZERO school placement - they were bumped out of choice three, four, five because they had got a spot with choice #2.

It wasn't kind, it wasn't child friendly, and they weren't trying to game the system. It was like they were being punished by the school for lack of loyalty. It was mean-spirited, and the younger child was summarily kicked out of school.

[Anonymous]

Disenrolling may be the rule but whether the school enforces it or not depends on the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Depends on where sibling Bs number places them wrt any other students without the preference.

Sibling preference exists to facilitate and support families attending the same school. Not families using their child's siblings to game wait lists all over town.

Whether sibling B loses out will depend on how closely the school adheres to the rule and probably when in the process this all happens. If sibling A moves Sept 1 after attending they probably stay. But now - not so clear cut.


I agree- to think otherwise is unethical. But then again in this town, ethics are flexible based on economiuc impact asnd personal gain.

This very situation happened to a very good friend of mine. They were not gaming the system, and their younger kid ended up getting hurt. Here's how it played out.

Entered both in lottery with first choice - school A
entered younger kid in lottery with current kid school with preference -- school B (second choice)
Put younger kid in lottery with third, fourth and fifth choices.

Lottery played out. Both kids WL for school A - younger kid admitted to school B
Both kids enrolled for school B
A week before school started - older kid accepted from WL for school A -- they accepted and enrolled. Younger kid still on the WL
School B called the family and told them that they were disenrolling their younger child, who now had ZERO school placement - they were bumped out of choice three, four, five because they had got a spot with choice #2.

It wasn't kind, it wasn't child friendly, and they weren't trying to game the system. It was like they were being punished by the school for lack of loyalty. It was mean-spirited, and the younger child was summarily kicked out of school.

No - they were no longer entitled to the preference that got the second child in. That's how it is supposed to work - and no one was kicked out. The change in status happened before school started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Depends on where sibling Bs number places them wrt any other students without the preference.

Sibling preference exists to facilitate and support families attending the same school. Not families using their child's siblings to game wait lists all over town.

Whether sibling B loses out will depend on how closely the school adheres to the rule and probably when in the process this all happens. If sibling A moves Sept 1 after attending they probably stay. But now - not so clear cut.


I agree- to think otherwise is unethical. But then again in this town, ethics are flexible based on economiuc impact asnd personal gain.

This very situation happened to a very good friend of mine. They were not gaming the system, and their younger kid ended up getting hurt. Here's how it played out.

Entered both in lottery with first choice - school A
entered younger kid in lottery with current kid school with preference -- school B (second choice)
Put younger kid in lottery with third, fourth and fifth choices.

Lottery played out. Both kids WL for school A - younger kid admitted to school B
Both kids enrolled for school B
A week before school started - older kid accepted from WL for school A -- they accepted and enrolled. Younger kid still on the WL
School B called the family and told them that they were disenrolling their younger child, who now had ZERO school placement - they were bumped out of choice three, four, five because they had got a spot with choice #2.

It wasn't kind, it wasn't child friendly, and they weren't trying to game the system. It was like they were being punished by the school for lack of loyalty. It was mean-spirited, and the younger child was summarily kicked out of school.

So are you saying the younger child didn't eventually get into School A? he/she would have been bumped to the top of the waitlist, right? They never got him/her in?

While I think it's regrettable the way School B handled it, it also would not have been fair to children with zero preference for that child to keep his/her spot who only received it because of the older sibling. The school should have offered to put the child back on the waitlist and MSDC should have added the child to the other waitlists. But no, you should not be able to invoke sibling preference in order to get in and then have that older sibling leave and still expect to stay. And perhaps your friend should have worked with School B before jumping ship for School A. They should have sought assurances that the younger child could stay. Treating schools like they are expendable stinks. The week before school starts teachers are ready. They have their student lists. Now that school has to deal with calling off the waitlist too. Sucks for everyone, not just your friend.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Thanks everyone. I can't actually find guidance on My School DC, so I will need to ask directly, plus consult with relevant principals before acting.

But the specific circumstance is that my kids had identical lottery lists, with the goal of keeping them together as siblings. As is often the case, one child drew a much better number than the other.

Child A got into choice #4 school, pulling in Child B. Both kids are now enrolled in our choice #4 school. Thus, neither child is on any WLs anymore for schools ranked below choice #4.

Child A has a good WL number at choice #1 school. If offered a spot into choice #1 school, I'd like to accept it. My hope is that both kids can attend choice #1. However, if choice #1 cannot accept both siblings, I don't want child B to be "unenrolled" from choice #4 school, having already been booted off of numerous WLs.

If some on this chain think this conundrum constitutes conniving and playing the system, I can live that. Presumably others see things differently.