I went to three junior schools. At the first two we were taught to print letters. At the third school, we had to use a dip pen and ink and do cursive writing. I found it very difficult to adjust to at first and it held me up quite a bit.
I hadn't heard that cursive writing aids spelling, etc. If it does, then it seems sensible to get children to do it. If they're doing any sort of writing at all, though, that's probably OK, since much of the work seems to be done on computers now.
I'm not sure that it's right that if cursive writing isn't taught initially it has to be taught later. Surely the un-joined up style of writing gradually leads to a form of joined up writing without the twiddly bits?
There doesn't seem to be so much routine learning in schools now. I know it is frowned upon but I do think there is a place for it. In the mornings, we always did dictionary exercises - finding words to put in the blanks within sentences. And when we made spelling mistakes, we had to write them out four times underneath our work. I think this aids basic learning - and it still leaves room for less structured sessions. I think the vast majority of us had very good literacy skills, even the school was in a predominantly working class area in what was then in Greater London.