We are fine with that solution as long as NDRN, COPAA, P&A and others can ensure that anytime a student is going to harm him/herself or another that they can be talked down, redirected or otherwise managed by means other than physical intervention before they hurt themselves or someone else. If you cannot make that assurance 100% of the time, then calling for 100% elimination of physical intervention is neither a practical nor a legal solution.

Recently there was an incident involving a student going to school with homemade bombs and a chain saw. The teachers restrained the student on the floor face down and were called heroes. Under NDRN’s solution, the teachers would have had to simply hope that they would be able to manage the student before blew up the school, murdered someone or activated the chain saw.

So how many lives were saved by the use of restraint in the above instance?

See, http://blog.taragana.com/n/prosecutors-charge-former-student-with-attempted-murder-in-california-school-bomb-attack-150524/

SAN MATEO, Calif. — A 17-year-old boy accused of detonating two pipe bombs at a Northern California high school while armed with a chain saw, sword and explosives was charged Wednesday with attempting to murder two faculty members.

See also, Heroes who stopped Hillsdale High bomber attack honored
http://www.insidebayarea.com/sanmateocountytimes/localnews/ci_13395976. Student was placed in a face down restraint and teachers were called heroes.

This story just goes to show that level of intervention allowed needs to be calibrated to the level of threat and harm presented. A one size fits all approach does not work. If a student can be managed without physical intervention — by all means. If a student can be managed standing or seated — by all means. If a student cannot be safely managed without physical interventin or standing or seated, then floor restraint i.e. in the case of the chainsaw bomber should remain an option.

A few other examples:

How about Schoolboy beaten to death as teachers look on

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/2009/08/schoolboy-beaten-to-death-as-teachers.html

Teen stabbed in fight at high school football scrimmage
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-mi-teenparentaid,0,509529.story

Two juveniles sentenced for their violent escape – left one youth officer brain damaged (before they get to juvenile hall, the youth go to school)
http://www.fox28.com/Global/story.asp?S=11202269

Teen girl dug grave anticipating murder,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-19-nov19,0,6027124.column

See also Attacking Our Educators http://www.stoppingschoolviolence.com/bookstore_ssv.html

As to your statement, “it would appear that several disabled children – perhaps as many as 15 – are killed each year by school staff using restraints and/or seclusion.” Really, we’re not seeing that number and neither did the GAO. Further, you cannot look at restraint and seclusion in isolation. You have to look at the use of restraint and seclusion in relation to what the alternative is. In the case of the school bomber, restraint saved lives.

You have to see how many injuries, fatalities, uncontrolled school environments, the effect on education, the effect on the perception of safety and the effect on actual safety that would occur if restraint and seclusion are banned. In otherwords, you have to look at each incident and determine when restraint and/or seclusion was appropriate or inappropriate.

We understand that there is a lot of frustration because this oversight is not being conducted, and parents are worried about the treatment and safety of their children while in school. We agree that there should be oversight and accountability. We do not agree that banning the use of seclusion and restraint is the answer as the educator will simply shift their obligation to law enforcement.

That there are 33,000 instances of restraint and seclusion in Texas and California, has no meaning unless you state how many instances were restraint and seclusion were warranted i.e. for the safety, treatment and best interests of the child versus how many were not.

In NY you had over 7,500 disruptive and violent incidents in 17 high schools. There are over 30,000 high schools nationwide and over 130,000 k-12 schools. Reports show over 1 million violent incidents a year in schools and the Department of Justice estimates that only 1 out of every 2 to 5 incidents is actually reported. So between the two numbers you are conservatively looking at approximately 2 -5 million violent incidents a year. Therefore if you had 200,000 incidents of restraint and seclusion per year from all schools it would at most represent 10% of all violent incidents occuring in schools.

The few states that have gone to an unduly restrictive and inflexible policy have experienced a vast increase in the use of law enforcement and law enforcement tactics to manage situations that in the past were handled by teachers. Groups that were instrumental in effecting this change are now complaining that law enforcement is being used too frequently and students as young as 5 are being placed in handcuffs and students as young as 10 being subject to tasers. (See ACLU report http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice/aclu-white-paper-says-guidelines-needed-police-schools) However if you unduly limit the interventions teachers can use, handcuffs, law enforcement, increased prescriptions and use of psychotropic (we note that some of the advocacy groups have conflict of interests regarding funding obtained from these drug companies) and other medications (see http://www.ssristor ies.com/index. php )are what you are left with.

You cannot expect teachers to intervene when the tools given to them are ineffective and not up to the task.

We invite you to try and manage a child older than 8 who is head banging, kicking, hitting, hair pulling, throwing things and biting. If you would not want to be subject to this kind of assault, why would you make others or the child his/herself subject to this type of assault and injury.

The practical reality is that despite best efforts to manage behavior using only positive behavioral supports, children and teenagers can and do physically prey upon and bully other children in school and they can and do injure themselves and others during emotional tirades caused by the entire spectrum of disorders found in school age children.

The use of physical intervention should NEVER be punitive or misused to coerce compliance or for the purpose of modifying or altering behavior by teaching a child a lesson. Physical intervention is appropriate when used to provide for the child’s safety. Indeed most parents would expect that if it were their son or daughter inflicting self harm or being assaulted, that the school and its staff would take appropriate measures to protect their child from harm.

LadyJane66 also fails to mention the deaths described in the GAO report. Unfortunately, injuries and deaths of disabled children in schools due to adults’ use of restraints and seclusion are not required to be reported nationally: thus we have no idea how many injured or dead children there are.

The education and speducation industries have fought mightily to stop laws from being passed which would require such reporting. It is thus statistically inappropriate and highly misleading to cite the few cases NDRN identified – which were culled only from the cases NDRN P&As took on; not all the parental complaints they received – and pretend that these represent the entire universe of injuries and deaths. Au contraire.

I follow media reports on this issue. From what I’ve been able to ascertain so far, it would appear that several disabled children – perhaps as many as 15 – are killed each year by school staff using restraints and/or seclusion. And since research shows that restraints and seclusion are used more frequently on children than on adults; more frequently on younger children than on older ones, and more frequently on persons of color than on whites … we need mandatory reporting laws, at the national level, immediately, to see who is really being hurt, who is dying, and why. The GAO report described cases where children had died for “violent” acts such as chewing on shirt cuffs and playing with their own loose teeth. Not exactly acts threatening to teachers’ safety.