School starting age, please advise

shirlgirl2004

Soniclord wrote: »

Thank you for your post, I'm glad someone else agrees with me. After all at the end of the day I'm doing nothing wrong and am legally entitled to defer my child going to school until she's 5. Something most people fail to realise is that I'm not breaking any laws!

Please don't be harsh on PPs. Government would have us believe that we have to send our children to school. The law doesn't state that but plenty of people believe that is the case. The Government like it that way. If we send our children to school they will learn what the Government wants them to learn when they want them to learn it.

You could accept a place at the school and then send your child once a week. There would be nothing they could do until your child is at an age which requires an education. You can't be fined for not providing an education when the law doesn't require it at the age of 4. You could, as an option, ask for flexi-schooling at your preferred school. It is at the school's discretion though. They might be happy with only 2 days a week until she is of statutory age. Maybe even just afternoons? Just a thought and might be worthy of consideration if it fits with your family life.

blue_monkey_2

Soniclord wrote: »

Thank you for your post, I'm glad someone else agrees with me. After all at the end of the day I'm doing nothing wrong and am legally entitled to defer my child going to school until she's 5. Something most people fail to realise is that I'm not breaking any laws!

And the reasons she is being deferred are simple, we would have to get up at 6.30am where we live now and get her to school for 8.30am now combine that with getting our 2 year old up and ready at that time as well and having to take her with us on the bus at that time just makes no sense at all! Not to mention 1 or the other will be at work at that time anyway so would have no option but to take them both to drop the elder one at school. It's frankly not feasible right now! And chances are she could quite possibly risk missing days at school and we all know they can't miss days without good reason!

And we are moving yes within the next 2-3 months hopefully, but we are still deferring the place so my eldest daughter can stay at her nursery where she does learn a lot as well as playing! Then when we do move we can all get settled again in the village we are moving to, and everything goes as smoothly as possible for all involved.

As I say, you'll still have to get the bus I guess.

And it is quite plain to see why you are deferring her so all the stuff you said previously was a lie. You are doing it because you do not want the hassle of getting the bus.

I could almost find it ironic that you say this

In such schools wrapped around such dire housing estates the pupils change for even worse scumbag kids whose parents don't give a damn, I will NOT even allow my child to be anywhere near such scum.That's not open to discussion as far as I'm concerned.

When you actually do not want to send your child to school because it is 'an inconveneince'

Ouch. That fall has gotta hurt!! I am laughing way too much at the irony in your post :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

blue_monkey_2

And just in case anyone needs a reminder, the op is not deferring because of the education she get's, it is because he does not want to get up at 6.30

He also said this:

In such schools wrapped around such dire housing estates the pupils change for even worse scumbag kids whose parents don't give a damn, I will NOT even allow my child to be anywhere near such scum.That's not open to discussion as far as I'm concerned.

And then said this:

And the reasons she is being deferred are simple, we would have to get up at 6.30am where we live now and get her to school for 8.30am now combine that with getting our 2 year old up and ready at that time as well and having to take her with us on the bus at that time just makes no sense at all!

You are a hypocrite OP.

bestpud

blue_monkey wrote: »

And just in case anyone needs a reminder, the op is not deferring because of the education she get's, it is because he does not want to get up at 6.30

He also said this:

In such schools wrapped around such dire housing estates the pupils change for even worse scumbag kids whose parents don't give a damn, I will NOT even allow my child to be anywhere near such scum.That's not open to discussion as far as I'm concerned.

And then said this:

And the reasons she is being deferred are simple, we would have to get up at 6.30am where we live now and get her to school for 8.30am now combine that with getting our 2 year old up and ready at that time as well and having to take her with us on the bus at that time just makes no sense at all!

You are a hypocrite OP.

Is there something wrong with wanting to avoid such an early start for a four year old?

If the OP believes it is no disadvantage to start school at 5 (and I agree tbh), then surely the right thing to do is what's best for the child...?

Or do you think it is ok to be transporting a child around at that hour for no real benefit?

bestpud

picnmix wrote: »

Is 6.30am not a normal time on a school day to drag kids out of bed for many parents? In fact on many days in our house 6.30am would be a lie in!:rotfl:

Maybe, but would you do that through choice? If you had a perfectly viable alternative, would you still drag your children out of bed that early?

Torry_Quine

bestpud wrote: »

Is there something wrong with wanting to avoid such an early start for a four year old?

If the OP believes it is no disadvantage to start school at 5 (and I agree tbh), then surely the right thing to do is what's best for the child...?

Or do you think it is ok to be transporting a child around at that hour for no real benefit?

I have to agree with you on this. Here in Scotland she would not be going to school for another year anyway.

It does seem very early to have to get a very young child up for school.

blue_monkey_2

bestpud wrote: »

Is there something wrong with wanting to avoid such an early start for a four year old?

If the OP believes it is no disadvantage to start school at 5 (and I agree tbh), then surely the right thing to do is what's best for the child...?

Or do you think it is ok to be transporting a child around at that hour for no real benefit?

When we moved my 4 year old (and 2 months) son was out the door at 8.15 in the car for a 35 minute car journey to school. You do what you have to do, for your children. If this means you have an inconvenience so be it. My son was autistic, keeping him off school would have been FAR more damaging for him. We went to appeal and got a local school. However, we did not move because we wanted the school, we moved because we had no choice.

I'd be embarrassed now to be defending the OP's motives for this now. He lied to you. The OP is not starting his child there because he cannot be bothered with the journey and getting the baby up. And then had the cheek to critisise 'scummy council estate' parents who could not be bothered with their children.

I think the old saying about pots and kettles applies to the OP.

Also, what about when he moves in 3 months time and the child still has to go to Nursery where they currently live? Is the start time not going to be 8.30? Or will he just not bother to take her because it is too much effort?

Does it not bother you that he lied?

balletshoes

OP you maybe don't want to come back and discuss this further, and thats fine. But please check with your LA again, blue monkey has made a very valid point I think, if you only apply next June for a year 1 place for your daughter, won't that already be too late? For our LA, the latest date for applying for a primary school place is usually in mid-January, for starting in September that same year.

bestpud

blue_monkey wrote: »

When we moved my 4 year old (and 2 months) son was out the door at 8.15 in the car for a 35 minute car journey to school. You do what you have to do, for your children. If this means you have an inconvenience so be it. My son was autistic, keeping him off school would have been FAR more damaging for him. We went to appeal and got a local school. However, we did not move because we wanted the school, we moved because we had no choice.

I'd be embarrassed now to be defending the OP's motives for this. He lied to you. The OP is not starting his child there because he cannot be bothered with the journey and getting the baby up. He lied to you about why he was not doing it. And then had the cheek to critisise 'scummy council estate' parents who could not be bothered with their children.

I think the old saying about pots and kettles applies to the OP.

Also, what about when he moves in 3 months time and the child still has to go to Nursery where they currently live? Is the start time not going to be 8.30? Or will he just not bother to take her because it is too much effort?

Does it not bother you that he lied about what his intentions were?

The OP does not have to take her to school yet though!!

You believed it was best for your child, overall, but the OP is happy that their child will not suffer from a delayed start!

I agree the child will not suffer from the delayed start but they may well suffer from the long hours!

How has the OP lied exactly?

shirlgirl2004

blue_monkey wrote: »

When we moved my 4 year old (and 2 months) son was out the door at 8.15 in the car for a 35 minute car journey to school. You do what you have to do, for your children. If this means you have an inconvenience so be it. My son was autistic, keeping him off school would have been FAR more damaging for him. We went to appeal and got a local school. However, we did not move because we wanted the school, we moved because we had no choice.

I'd be embarrassed now to be defending the OP's motives for this. He lied to you. The OP is not starting his child there because he cannot be bothered with the journey and getting the baby up. He lied to you about why he was not doing it. And then had the cheek to critisise 'scummy council estate' parents who could not be bothered with their children.

I think the old saying about pots and kettles applies to the OP.

Also, what about when he moves in 3 months time and the child still has to go to Nursery where they currently live? Is the start time not going to be 8.30? Or will he just not bother to take her because it is too much effort?

Does it not bother you that he lied about what his intentions were?

The OP hasn't lied. He didn't want his child to go to a local school which is a parent's choice. He would like his child to go to a school which would mean leaving home (or was it getting up?) at 6.30am. The early start would not be required for the local school or has that point been missed? As it isn't compulsory and the OP feels it isn't beneficial then what is to be gained from getting the child out of bed early and doing a journey in the autumn cold weather on the bus not in a cosy car? Please let me know which bit is the lie.