Twins born minutes apart to be separated by an entire school year

by Jennifer Jordan (Subscribe to Jennifer Jordan's posts) Sep 10th 2008 9:02AM

Categories: Newborns, Pregnancy & Birth, Siblings, Weird But True, Education

Being a twin always seemed really great to me. In a romantic notion, I pictured having a twin meant being able to share pretty much everything together. So it would seem to most people. For Lexus and Amber Conway, however, twins born one on each side of midnight, August 31st, they will be sharing everything except the same grade in school.

Timing is everything, as they say, and because the cute little gals were technically born two different days--albeit only 45 minutes apart--they will be in two different school years. Lexus will get to go to school when she is four, but sis Amber will have to wait until the ripe old age of five to hit the books. Their parents, of course, are dead set against this reasoning and plan on spending the next four years, if it takes that, to find a way for their daughters to attend school together.

If that doesn't happen, proud papa Ian Caldwell plans on homeschooling the tots or moving to Spain. (Hey--that's my answer for everything: When it doesn't go your way, move to Spain. Seriously, it's worth a thought--Spain is FABULOUS. ) Also on the twins' side is Keith Reed, who serves as chief executive at The Twins and Multiple Births Association, who agrees that this is a truly singular, unique situation where the rules ought to be bent.

Thoughts? Is it better for twins (or any multiples) to always be together, in class, especially? Or is there a silver lining in this case being missed by the parents who could spare their daughters some pressure, constant comparison and competition?

Source

Comments (29)

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

SKL 9-10-2008 @ 9:36AM

It depends on the children themselves, but I feel the option to keep them together should be available.

I have two girls who are three months apart in age. They will reach "school age" in the same year. Right now, they need to be together for reasons unique to them. When they are five, that may or may not be the case, but I don't think I'd allow them to be separated if I felt it best for them to be together.

Baron 9-10-2008 @ 9:45AM

That must be a state law (unless it was changed to be a federal law) as I know many people back home who were kept from starting by their parents b/c they would have been essentially a year younger than everyone else.

ninainindia 9-10-2008 @ 9:56AM

Is there any school that woudl insist on this? Seems very strange to me. You go to the school, discuss the enrollment and it shouldn't be an issue.

LEIGH 9-10-2008 @ 10:12AM

Just a thought, but why not just hold the first born girl back a year. Then they would be the oldest kids in the class rather than being the youngest. Not that being the youngest one in your class is an entirely bad thing but, it seems that this would solve the problem. Nobody has to move to Spain or do homeschooling.

SKL 9-10-2008 @ 11:16AM

I think it would be sad to be held back a year just for that reason. When the time comes, it may turn out to be the best thing for the child, but maybe not. I'm speaking as a person who started early at a high-standards school and still found the curriculum boring because the older kids couldn't keep up with me. Who knows how ready these twins will be five years from now?

Jenni 9-10-2008 @ 11:47AM

My thought exactly. Hold the one back a year if possible. I'm not necessarily partial one way or the other to keep twins together in the same class, I think it is different in each case. Some twins do well, other's don't.

However, I think that, developmentally, these twins will be at the same level at least (the exception being if one has a disability), that to send one to school and not the other really could have detrimental effects.

I am all for a cut-off day to start school and sticking to it; I think their best solution is to hold the one back a year. Put them both in preschool an extra year if the concern is getting the school experience.

Lauryn 9-10-2008 @ 10:27AM

Just come to New York. We set grades by the calendar year, Jan. 1st to Dec. 31st, like it should be.

Linda 9-10-2008 @ 11:02AM

It's not that complicated for heaven's sake. Either hold the first girl back (which is better anyway for an Aug 31 b-day) or go to a private school for a year or two. Then they can switch to the public school if they want and they'll be in the same grade.

SKL 9-10-2008 @ 11:19AM

Who's going to pay for all this extra / alternative schooling?

soupdiva1 9-10-2008 @ 12:53PM

I personally think that this is wrong. They are called twins-so why do they have to be seperated by a year? Just because it took a little longer for one of them to be born. It really sounds like a power play to me.

Kellan 9-10-2008 @ 12:39PM

I have 16 year old identical twin girls that are currently in high school. During all of elementary school, I insisted that my twins be kept together in the same classes and it was the best decision I ever made on their behalf. I recently wrote an article on one of my blogs (http://kellan-ontheflipside.blogspot.com/2008/08/school-separate-twins-or-not.html) on this very subject. This couple needs to fight to keep their twins together - if that is what they believe is best for THEIR twins. And, if they were to seriously find that the school would not allow their twins to stay together - one held back until the next year (that is CRAZY) - they should fight it all they way up to the courts if that is what it takes to make sure they are heard! I totally believe that my twins should have been kept together and I was right. I told the school that it was a "mistake" that - if the wrong decision - should be MY mistake - not theirs, to make. I was lucky that my girls' school was so willing to work with us and allowed for this request - but ... many schools are not so easy to deal with and it needs to change. We - as tax payers - pay their salaries and we should be heard when there are issues we need addressed or changed - regarding our children. I find it hard to believe that these parents won't be able to get the school to accomodate this special circumstance - I hope they do!

Kellan - On The Upside (http://www.ontheupside.info)

sendy quintanilla 9-18-2008 @ 3:14PM

hello my name is sendy quintanilla I live in Rio Grande and am having problems in school because I want my twins to be in the same class room but the principal saided that he had read on tamba that is not a good idea this is what tamba saided although twins triplets and more share a special bond it is now recognised that each child develops best when treated as an individual. This is of crucial importance both at home and at school

Jamie 9-10-2008 @ 12:47PM

I would do private school for one year. The parents would only have to do it for the child who was born past midnight for just one year. If they decide to home school their children (at least in Missouri) the child must be home for Kindergarden and first grade before entering into the school system. I would not separate them. I also would not resolve the issue by leaving the country.

I hope they get what they want.

Nicola 9-10-2008 @ 1:52PM

Doesn't work that way here in IL. My son goes private and the parents of another boy in his class decided to move their son to public school this year. The boy's birthday is in early September. He had already completed a full year of Kindergarten in private school, but still has to enter public school as a Kindergartner. Its all about dates. There is an option to test up a grade, but they were too late to take advantage of it this year. So, he's in Kindergarten again...

Jan Bay 9-10-2008 @ 1:29PM

The simplest thing that the parents could do might be to hold one back. The wisdom of the words "Swallow a camel, yet choke on a gnat" are ringing in my ears. Don't the schools have bigger fish to fry and more important battles to fight than this?

Jan from http://www.unique-baby-gear-ideas.com/

Sabrina 9-10-2008 @ 2:31PM

They're the same age....if it was one single child whose birthday was the day before the cutoff, I'd say suck it up and wait one more year. But that's ridiculous to make one twin wait an entire year. Don't they realize that people are going to tease her? Other kids are going to assume that she got held back a grade or something. And talk about confusing a 5 year old. Sister can go to school, but I can't, and we're the same age.

Becca 9-10-2008 @ 4:41PM

I think that the school will work with these parents when the time comes. If they won't I will agree with the others who have suggested that the older girl should just wait for her sister. It won't be a big deal at 4. If they are advanced they can skip a grade later.

I have a friend who has a similar situation with his children. He has 2 girls who are 10 months apart. Their birthday's fall in such a way that they would have been starting school the same year. The older one turned 5 after the cut off in September. Their school worked with them and let the older one start school 2 weeks before she turned 5 so that she didn't have to suffer the teasing of being in the same grade as her younger sister.

Schools are run by people, and usually (but not always) those people are compassionate and understanding, they often will go that extra step to help children get the best school experience they can get.

valreegrl 9-10-2008 @ 4:50PM

Is it just me or would the logical answer be to hold one back? Sometimes this is an even better decision for the child since many born "late" can be a little too immature to begin school anyway.

Another answer....private school for the first year? Most private schools have a later cut off date. And once a child has started kindergarten then can transfer to another school come first grade without dealing with the cut off.

It seems silly to me to move to Spain for that reason. Hopefully that was just a rib at the situation!

SKL 9-10-2008 @ 4:57PM

You folks would seriously keep your kids at home for an extra year whether they are ready for school or not? This trend makes me very uncomfortable. Personally I don't consider that a "simple solution" AT ALL. If they are (or want to be) a 2-income household, someone would have to pay for that extra year of pre-school, and everything in their life up to graduate school and their first job will be delayed. A year is a long time to spend playing with blocks when you're ready to learn to read and write.

Jenni 9-10-2008 @ 6:06PM

Believe it or not, it was brought to my attention that in some places, parents are actually purposefully holding back their child a year so that they can be the "head of the class". Basically, they know that their child will always be ahead by a year in age and will therefore be at the top, at least in some areas of development, giving them a distinct advantage.

Sad? yes. But people do it.

I'm all for sending a child to school when they are ready, but sometimes that cut off date is the best determinant of readiness. I know my step-son would have been better off staying out of school for another year; he missed that cut-off by one day. He was always behind the development in his class by at least 6 months. He would be that "difficult child" for every teacher the first half of the year and, miraculously, about halfway through they would see a turn around; because he was finally up to the teachers' expectations for that age.

| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments

How To Submit Photos:
If you'd like your children (any age will do!) featured on ParentDish, upload photos into the ParentDish Flickr Pool. Be sure to read our main Flickr page for more information.