But Kalhuli has not said here (or elsewhere that I remember or can quickly find) that their particular DS does social interactions in a way typical of an older child, or seeks out older children, or anything. Posters on this thread seem to be assuming that. Maybe that's how it is - is it, Kalhuli? If, however, this is not so, then I think assuming it could be harmful, especially if it's reinforcing something that's actually an unexamined assumption on Kalhuli's part.
Interacting with adults is very different from interacting from children; it's perfectly possible for a child to be HG+, and to seem older than chronological age while conversing with adults and still be well placed socially with age peers. The danger that I see in placing a child with older children who doesn't actually have the same mode of interaction that they do is that the older children may do the lion's share of the social work, and the younger child may not get the chance to learn how to do play, negotiation etc. Given that an HG+ child is likely to land in situations where excellent social skills, with age peers as well as with intellectual peers, are extremely useful, it would be a pity to take decisions that don't foster those skills.
Note that I am not saying that with age peers is definitely the right place for this child: I just don't want to say that it isn't purely on the basis of the child in question being bright.
