Department of Education Summary of State Laws, Regulations, Policies, Guidelines on Use of Restraint and Seclusion Techniques in Schools

Access the Department of Education summary of state laws, regulations, policies, guidelines on use of restraint and seclusion techniques in schools here.

U.S. Department of Education
Arne Duncan
Secretary

February 2010
This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Summary of Seclusion and Restraint Statutes, Regulations, Policies and Guidance, by State and Territory: Information as Reported to the Regional Comprehensive Centers and Gathered from Other Sources, Washington, D.C. 2010.

This report includes the descriptive information verified by each state and territory. Additional information can be found at the URLs provided in a specific state profile, or by contacting the state directly. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, enterprise or policy mentioned in this report, on a state’s Web site or other URL included in this
report is intended or should be inferred. All Web addresses consulted or listed within this report were operational as of December 2009, unless otherwise noted.
This report is available on the U.S. Department of Education’s Web site:
www.ed.gov/policy/seclusion/seclusion-state-summary.html.

On request, this document can be made available in accessible formats, such as Braille, large print and computer diskette. For more information, please contact the U.S. Department of Education’s Alternative Format Center at 202-260-0852 or 202-260-0818, or send an e-mail to frank.pacheco@ed.gov.

*****


Copy and paste URL: http://go.usa.gov/lpQ

Take Action Now: Missouri HB 1543 and Federal Legislation HR 4247 and SB 2860

February 10, 2010

**Please note, once I get the emails out, I will return to this post and try to improve the readability!**

Missouri HB 1543, a proposed state omnibus bill dealing in part to improve school safety, is continuing the use of corporal punishment in schools and adding the vague language “use of force to protect persons or property”. This bill is far from the minimal standards set forth by proposed federal legislation HR 4247 and SB 2860.

• HB 1543 (state): http://www.house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills101/bills/hb1543.htm
• HR 4247 (federal): http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/markup/FC/HR4247-PreventingHarmfulRestraintandSeclusioninSchoolsAct/MILLCA_171_xml.pdf


The proposed language in Missouri HB 1543 does not protect teachers or students in several ways:

• Does not define “use of force,” “to protect persons or property,” “reasonable,” or “certificated personnel”

• Does not require notification to parents if schools apply “use of force” or “spanking”

• Does allow any school personnel to apply “use of force” but only allows “certificated personnel” to apply “spanking” (certificated in what?)

• Does not require any follow up (such as a visit to school nurse) to ensure applying “use of force” or “spanking” was in fact “reasonable” nor any methods as to avoid future applying of “use of force” or “spanking”

• Does not ban proven deadly “use of force” (restraints) such as those that restrict breathing (e.g., prone restraint)

• Does not ban “spanking”. There was an amendment to ban spanking of special education students, but this has been withdrawn as of 2/10/2010

• Does not allow Children's services to conduct an investigation if abuse allegations are due to “spanking” or “use of force to protect persons or property”. (To understand more about the convoluted investigation process, go here http://dss.mo.gov/cd/pdf/guidelines_can_reports.pdf.)


Who determines what is “reasonable”?

We would like to believe that school districts and school personnel can determine, with good judgment, what constitutes what is “reasonable”, but even stories over the past month show this not to be the case (see below). Not all schools or teachers are bad and many, if not most, have good judgment and intent; however, this bill does not protect those students who are attending schools or who have teachers that are using poor judgment and are abusing corporal punishment and/or use of force nor does it protect students or personnel when personnel hasn’t had access to adequate training and support.

• Feb. 2, 2010: Queens girl Alexa Gonzalez hauled out of school in handcuffs after getting caught doodling on desk: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2010/02/05/2010-02-05_cuffed_for_doodling_on_a_desk.html

• Feb. 4, 2010: Two-inch LEGO gun gets 4th-grader in trouble: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35234742/ns/today-today_people/

• Feb. 8, 2010: Mom upset with corporal punishment at son’s New Mexico school (note pictures): http://bit.ly/dsuFWH

• Current and ongoing: Missouri mom’s testimony regarding extensive use of force on 6 year old with disability: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2010/01/young-boys-story.html


Corporal punishment/use of force

• According to The Center for Effective Discipline, Missouri is one of only 20 states that still allows corporal punishment (in Missouri’s case “spanking” is allowed) in schools: http://www.stophitting.com/index.php?page=statesbanning

• Corporal punishment and “use of force” is used much more often on poor children, minorities, children with disabilities, and boys: http://www.aclu.org/human-rights/impairing-education-html#toc19

• Schools are the only institutions in America in which striking another person is legally sanctioned. It is not allowed in prisons, in the military or in mental hospitals. Schools are also the only place where use of restraint and seclusion remains mostly unregulated: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09719t.pdf


Missouri model policy in progress

Experts in the state of Missouri (designated as such by DESE in agreement with Missouri statute) agree that the use of force such as restraint and seclusion should only be used in cases of imminent harm and that certain forms of restraint should not be used (e.g., prone restraint). Local, state, and national experts in the fields of education and behavior management agree that focus should be on de-escalation and positive methods of preventing behavior.

• Current statute in Missouri: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2009/11/current-statutes-in-missouri.html

• Official minutes of DESE meeting regarding restraint (use of force) and seclusion: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AcxWbMnTyx1iZGc1ZDh2ZGdfNWh0bXo5emY5&hl=en

• Crisis Prevention Institute, Inc. Presents to Missouri Department of Education: http://www.crisisprevention.com/whatsnew/ (3rd article down)


Federal legislation in progress

The federal government is currently working on legislation to avoid the misuse and abuse of seclusion and restraint (a type of “use of force”) in part because states and local school districts have failed to do so. The federal bills in progress (HR 4247 and SB 2860) are consistent with the Children’s Health Act of 2000 and federal protections already in place in other settings.

• Bill text: http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/markup/FC/HR4247-PreventingHarmfulRestraintandSeclusioninSchoolsAct/MILLCA_171_xml.pdf

• General information: http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/12/preventing-harmful-restraint-a.shtml

Take action: protect the teachers and the students

• Call your state representatives and senators and tell them that the provision regarding “spanking” and “use of force” in HB 1543 does not protect teachers, students, or school districts. At a minimum, Missouri should:

 Ban deadly “use of force” (i.e., restraints) such as those that restrict breathing (e.g., prone restraint)

 Define what is “reasonable”, for example in other areas as of HB 1543 “acts of violence” is used and in federal bill “imminent harm” is used

 Ban corporal punishment

 Require parent notification when “use of force” or “spanking” (if left in bill) is applied

 Require minimal training in positive interventions, de-escalation, and safe methods of “use of force”

• Call your federal representatives and tell them to support HR 4247 and SB 2860. We need a minimal federal baseline to keep students and school staff safe. It is clear that even with current information, states such as Missouri are missing the point!


Government contacts

• Missouri House Elementary and Secondary Education Committee (state): http://house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills101/commit/com455.htm
• Missouri Joint Committee on Education (state): http://www.senate.mo.gov/jced/index.htm
• Missouri Senate Education Committee (state): http://www.senate.mo.gov/10info/comm/educ.htm
• Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (state): http://governor.mo.gov/contact/
• Missouri congressional members (federal): http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-to-contact-congress.html

Ange Hemmer
Missouri: Families Against Seclusion and Restraint

Clarification, Answer Your Questions Regarding Misuse and Abuse of Restraint and Seclusion

February 8, 2010

There seems to be some confusion as to what is going on regarding state and federal law/policy as it applies to the misuse and abuse of seclusion and restraint. Maybe these links will help explain some of the misunderstandings.

STATE

Current statute in Missouri: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2009/11/current-statutes-in-missouri.html

Update on situation in Missouri: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2010/02/update-but-not-much-progress-at-state.html

Please read the minutes from the November 2009 DESE meeting and you will see that even in Missouri, representatives from SSD and Touchpoint agree with the definitions and reasons for restraint and seclusion, similar, yet somewhat more restrictive than what's in the currently proposed federal bill.

FEDERAL

HR 4247 w/ amendments: http://edlabor.house.gov/markups/2010/02/preventing-harmful-restraint-a.shtml

HR 4247 Basics: http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/12/preventing-harmful-restraint-a.shtml

Myths and facts: http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2010/02/myth-vs-fact-preventing-harmfu.shtml

Supporters: http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2010/01/supporters-of-the-preventing-h.shtml

NEW PUBLICATIONS

TASH: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2010/02/tash-releases-survey-results-on.html

NDRN: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2010/02/school-is-not-supposed-to-hurt-update.html

I encourage you all to voice your opinions and concerns to your legislators, but please research and understand the facts before you do so.

Ange Hemmer
Missouri: Families Against Seclusion and Restraint

Blog: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Missouri-Families-Against-Seclusion-and-Restraint/192579456768
Twitter: @nomoseclusion

Update but Not Much Progress at State Level

Missouri law states that DESE must develop a model policy regarding "comprehensively addresses the use of restrictive behavioral interventions as a form of discipline or behavior management technique." School districts must adopt a written policy as well, but they are not mandated to follow the guidelines set forth by DESE.

Last week, upon request, I was told that at this time there are no additional meetings scheduled regarding the DESE model policy in Missouri. It appears that the policy is still in the "formulation stage" with research being done on policies in other states. I hope that there is also research being done regarding the ineffectiveness of model policies (Kansas and Michigan for example) and also on the movement of the federal legislation recently passed through Committee.

It is "anticipated" that the first draft of the Missouri model policy will be put in writing sometime during the month of February. Please get your comments in soon. Local school boards are not mandated to adopt or follow this model policy. Please advocate at the local school board level as well.

Personal minutes: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AcxWbMnTyx1iZGc1ZDh2ZGdfNHRtajlia2du&hl=en

Official minutes: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AcxWbMnTyx1iZGc1ZDh2ZGdfNWh0bXo5emY5&hl=en

Ways to comment: MPACT and DESE (webreplyseclusionrestraint@dese.mo.gov).

If you want you comments to be made public or if you have any further information to share, please do so in the comments section.

School is Not Supposed to Hurt: Update on Progress in 2009 to Prevent and Reduce Restraint and Seclusion in Schools

February 2, 2010

Please read the NDRN report here (PDF).

A couple of clarifications

NDRN states that "Missouri allows the use of restraint and seclusion only to ensure the immediate physical safety of the student or others" (p. 4); however, the law only states that locking a student in a confined space is not allowed unless waiting for law enforcement in emergency situation. While this meets the current federal definition of seclusion, it does not prohibit blocking a door, holding a student into a confined space, or otherwise preventing a student from leaving a confined area. Restraint is not regulated at the state level at all, again left up to the school districts already failing in this area to define and regulate. Please note that if MO HB1543 passes with the vague "use of force to protect persons or property" language, things are about to get much worse for students in Missouri, so please contact your Representatives--especially if you have a story of misused restraint (force)--to prevent this language from staying in the bill.

The committee creating the model policy did somewhat agree to the above NDRN statement (see meeting minutes), but school districts are not mandated to adopt any or all of the model policy once it is developed.

The NDRN report also states that "The final version of the law, while not banning the use of restraint and seclusion rooms outright, does require restrictions on use and requires accountability" (p. 46). I am unaware of any accountability tied to this law, other than schools must have a policy or they are out of compliance. Especially since this law is tied to the Safe Schools Act, there's no recourse a family can take if their child is inappropriately restrained/secluded (unless the door is mechanically locked).

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://www.ndrn.org/sr/srjan10/Schoo-%20is-Not-Supposed-to-Hurt-(NDRN).pdf

Corporal Punishment and "Use of Force" in Missouri

HB 1543, an omnibus bill dealing in part to improve school safety, is currently moving its way through the Missouri House of Representatives. It is my understanding that this bill, which looks a lot like HB 96 from last year, was discussed in the Education Committee last Wednesday.

Among the amendments adopted was one that bans corporal punishment of special education (IEP) students. This is great news for those who have been identified as special educated students, but is Missouri going to continue to fight to keep corporal punishment legal in Missouri schools?

Besides that issue, there is the continuing problem where school districts are left to conduct their own investigations if there are abuse allegations after spanking or use of force to protect persons or property. Children's services would not be allowed to conduct an investigation unless the school district finds itself liable for abuse.

As in last year's bill, "use of force" and "property destruction" are not defined, and since Missouri does not ban prone restraint (or other harmful methods of "force"), a child can legally be held face down for property destruction as minor as ripping up paper. In other words, what is happening currently to this child will continue to be LEGAL.

(4) Adds the use of force to protect persons or property by
school district personnel to the provisions regarding spanking.
Neither act is to be considered as abuse that would be
investigated by the Children's Division within the Department of
Social Services as long as the spanking or use of force does not
give rise to an allegation of sexual misconduct and another
employee is present as a witness at a spanking;

Your help is urgently needed to push for real reform for the safety of children attending school.

Consider contacting the Missouri House Special Standing Committee on Children and Families :
http://house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills101/commit/com488.htm and Elementary and Secondary Education Committee: http://house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills101/commit/com455.htm

And the Missouri Senate Education Committee: http://www.senate.mo.gov/10info/comm/educ.htm and the Joint Committee on Education: http://www.senate.mo.gov/10info/comm/statutory/jced.htm

*****

Copy and paste URLs:

HB 1543: http://www.house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills101/bills/hb1543.htm
HB 96: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/search?q=HB%2096

Missouri Autism Summit 2010

Missouri, January 2010

The following is a good way to get updated on and advocate for legislation including autism and restraint and seclusion.

Missouri Autism Summit 2010
Interested in autism policy & advocacy?

Join us Jan 13 for the Missouri Autism Summit

Features updates/discussions of autism legislation, initiatives, and advocacy strategies. Visit with legislators at Capitol in the afternoon.

Cost:$10 per person covers lunch & printed materials (Cash at door, please!)

Respond by Jan 10 if you plan to attend.

Date:
January 13th, 2010, 9am
Location:
Jefferson City, Missouri
Address:
Truman Building
Room 490
301 W. High Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101

More information and RSVP here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://event.pingg.com/2010MOAutismSummit

Personal Minutes Regarding Missouri Restraint & Seclusion Model Policy Meeting

My personal minutes regarding the November 19, 2009 Missouri (DESE) restraint & seclusion model policy meeting are located here: http://bit.ly/705x7k. Please let me know if you want the original Word document as the Google document formatting is a little wonky.

Please note there was much discussion regaing Michigan's model policy at this meeting, but as posted before, there is now evidence coming forth that model policies are not working. Not that this is a surprise to anyone passionate about this issue, but it is something to include in your letters to your legislators so they see data on how leaving this issue up to local school districts has not worked and will not work to stop the misuse and abuse of seclusion and restraint. Legislation needs to be readressed at the state level as we continue to fight for legislation at the federal level.

I had an e-mail address from DESE for comments, but lost it in my piles of paperwork. For now, please send commments via MPACT or feel free to contact DESE at the general e-mail/address/number.

MPACT Giving Opportunity for Parent Input on DESE Policy

Section 160.263 provides that each school district's local board of education shall adopt a written policy that comprehensively addresses the use of restrictive behavioral interventions as a form of discipline or behavior management technique.

In response to the statute the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is developing a model policy on restraint and seclusion in schools. Recently the DESE held a meeting in which selected representatives of agencies, organizations and divisions of the DESE were given the opportunity to give input on the elements needed in the model policy.

Read more here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://bit.ly/7Dr9QS

Current Statutes in Missouri

Restraint and Seclusion:

Missouri Revised Statutes
Chapter 160
Schools--General Provisions
Section 160.263

August 28, 2009

Confinement of a student prohibited, when--policy on restrictive behavioral interventions required--model policy to be developed.

160.263.1. The school discipline policy under section 160.261 shall prohibit confining a student in an unattended, locked space except for an emergency situation while awaiting the arrival of law enforcement personnel.

2. By July 1, 2011, the local board of education of each school district shall adopt a written policy that comprehensively addresses the use of restrictive behavioral interventions as a form of discipline or behavior management technique. The policy shall be consistent with professionally accepted practices and standards of student discipline, behavior management, health and safety, including the safe schools act. The policy shall include but not be limited to:

(1) Definitions of restraint, seclusion, and time-out and any other terminology necessary to describe the continuum of restrictive behavioral interventions available for use or prohibited in the district;

(2) Description of circumstances under which a restrictive behavioral intervention is allowed and prohibited and any unique application requirements for specific groups of students such as differences based on age, disability, or environment in which the educational services are provided;

(3) Specific implementation requirements associated with a restrictive behavioral intervention such as time limits, facility specifications, training requirements or supervision requirements; and

(4) Documentation, notice and permission requirements associated with use of a restrictive behavioral intervention.

3. The department of elementary and secondary education shall, in cooperation with appropriate associations, organizations, agencies and individuals with specialized expertise in behavior management, develop a model policy that satisfies the requirements of subsection 2 of this section by July 1, 2010.

(L. 2009 S.B. 291)

Corporal Punishment:

10. Spanking, when administered by certificated personnel of a school district in a reasonable manner in accordance with the local board of education's written policy of discipline, is not abuse within the meaning of chapter 210, RSMo. The provisions of sections 210.110 to 210.165, RSMo, notwithstanding, the division of family services shall not have jurisdiction over or investigate any report of alleged child abuse arising out of or related to any spanking administered in a reasonable manner by any certificated school personnel pursuant to a written policy of discipline established by the board of education of the school district. Upon receipt of any reports of child abuse by the division of family services pursuant to sections 210.110 to 210.165, RSMo, which allegedly involves personnel of a school district, the division of family services shall notify the superintendent of schools of the district or, if the person named in the alleged incident is the superintendent of schools, the president of the school board of the school district where the alleged incident occurred. If, after an initial investigation, the superintendent of schools or the president of the school board finds that the report involves an alleged incident of child abuse other than the administration of a spanking by certificated school personnel pursuant to a written policy of discipline or a report made for the sole purpose of harassing a public school employee, the superintendent of schools or the president of the school board shall immediately refer the matter back to the division of family services and take no further action. In all matters referred back to the division of family services, the division of family services shall treat the report in the same manner as other reports of alleged child abuse received by the division. If the report pertains to an alleged incident which arose out of or is related to a spanking administered by certificated personnel of a school district pursuant to a written policy of discipline or a report made for the sole purpose of harassing a public school employee, a notification of the reported child abuse shall be sent by the superintendent of schools or the president of the school board to the juvenile officer of the county in which the alleged incident occurred. The report shall be jointly investigated by the juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the superintendent of schools or, if the subject of the report is the superintendent of schools, by the juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the president of the school board or such president's designee. The investigation shall begin no later than forty-eight hours after notification from the division of family services is received, and shall consist of, but need not be limited to, interviewing and recording statements of the child and the child's parents or guardian within two working days after the start of the investigation, of the school district personnel allegedly involved in the report, and of any witnesses to the alleged incident. The juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the investigating school district personnel shall issue separate reports of their findings and recommendations after the conclusion of the investigation to the school board of the school district within seven days after receiving notice from the division of family services. The reports shall contain a statement of conclusion as to whether the report of alleged child abuse is substantiated or is unsubstantiated. The school board shall consider the separate reports and shall issue its findings and conclusions and the action to be taken, if any, within seven days after receiving the last of the two reports. The findings and conclusions shall be made in substantially the following form:

(1) The report of the alleged child abuse is unsubstantiated. The juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the investigating school board personnel agree that the evidence shows that no abuse occurred;

(2) The report of the alleged child abuse is substantiated. The juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the investigating school district personnel agree that the evidence is sufficient to support a finding that the alleged incident of child abuse did occur;

(3) The issue involved in the alleged incident of child abuse is unresolved. The juvenile officer or a law enforcement officer designated by the juvenile officer and the investigating school personnel are unable to agree on their findings and conclusions on the alleged incident.

*****

Copy and Paste URLs:

Restraint and Seclusion: http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c100-199/1600000263.htm
Corporal Punishment: http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c100-199/1600000261.htm

CPI Presents to Missouri Department of Education

November, 2009

CPI Presents to Missouri Department of Education
On November 19, 2009, CPI’s Executive Director of Research and Development, Dr. Randy Boardman made a presentation to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Model Policy Committee on Restraint and Seclusion, Senate Bill 291, Section 160.263 – Restrictive Behavioral Intervention. The law requires that the Department “…work with appropriate associations, organizations, agencies and individuals with expertise in behavior management.”

Dr. Boardman’s presentation provided the Committee with CPI resources – Terms Commonly Defined with Policy and Regulatory Guidance, Outline of Common Policy and Guidance Topics, and a listing of Additional Considerations. These considerations included:

When faced with a crisis situation, absent of proper training, staff will often react based on the emotions of the moment. Students and staff are safer when staff response is based on training.

Training staff to respond to and safely intervene in such moments of crisis cannot be a one-time event. Training must be a continual, ongoing process to become a matter of daily practice.

When a restraint technique involves the floor, the dangers of injury to staff and students increase. Also, the use of floor restraints significantly increases the risks for restraint-related positional asphyxia.

Restraints should be used as a last resort, only when the person’s behavior is more dangerous than the danger of using restraints.

The only safe physical restraint is the one staff did not have to use because they were able to de-escalate the situation in a less restrictive manner without a restraint.

While the Department of Education is not prepared to endorse a single training provider for state-wide use, they were appreciative of CPI’s willingness to provide our experience and expertise, and meet with them about our programs and supporting services. The Department of Education hopes to create a model policy on restraint and seclusion for local school districts across Missouri within the year. Dr. Boardman will continue to work with the Committee as they continue their work.

Originally posted here.

DESE Meeting Regarding Seclusion and Restraint Model Policy

November 18, 2009
E-mail

Hello,

First, let me apologize for being quiet on the issues of restraint and seclusion over the past several months...homeschooling my two boys does not allow for much time or energy elsewhere!

I wanted to alert you that it appears as if the legislation passed last session regarding restraint and seclusion (http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/c100-199/1600000263.htm) was written and is being interpreted as applying to all students, not just special education students. In the June SEAP meeting minutes (http://dese.mo.gov/divspeced/Administration/AdvisoryPanel/94142mainpage.html), it is noted that "The policy will not be specific to students with disabilities....If the panel would like to share input or make recommendations to DESE specific to students with disabilities, they are welcome to do so or if there is a draft policy, they may want to review and make recommendations at that time."

The statute also allows these procedures to be used as discipline or behavior management, and not just in case of "imminent harm" or in an emergency. Granted it says being “locked” in a room unsupervised isn't allowed, but I believe this will be interpreted as 'mechanical lock' and that egress can still be blocked and/or doors can still be held shut while someone ‘supervises’ intermittently through a tiny window.

I contacted one of the co-chairs Tom Quinn Assistant Commissioner Career Education (Cynthia Quetsch, Legal Counsel, Division of Special Education, is the other co-chair) and was informed that the first meeting regarding the restraint and seclusion model policy had not yet occurred and would be this Thursday, November 19, 2009. I was told this was an open meeting, where observers were allowed to attend. I was unable to confirm who the other attendees will be, but noticed on the agenda that someone from CPI (http://www.crisisprevention.com/) will be presenting and the agenda doesn’t appear to discuss PREVENTION (see attachments). Invitees were also sent position statements from The Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders, which do go into detail about the need for prevention.

I have two major concerns (outside of the fact that districts do not have to implement this model policy or that there are not any repercussions for abusing restraint and seclusion):

1) If the model policy only addresses WHY, WHEN, and HOW to restrain or seclude, we are once again setting our children up to fail. Behaviors should not be addressed only when they reach crisis levels. Where does prevention, support, accommodation, modification, etc. fit into this?

2) Will districts use language such as “unless instructed/allowed otherwise in a students IEP” that forbids certain practices unless they are specified in a student’s IEP. Restraint and seclusion (I am not referring to limited time out or self-directed isolation) should not be allowed as discipline or treatment, and an (unbalanced) IEP team (that often does not enlist a behavioral therapist or other expert in this area) should not be able to off-handedly make these a part of a student plan. In other words, a parent should not have to go to due process to keep these practices (as discipline or treatment) from being used on their children or feel coerced or misled into believing it is the ‘only option’.

Were you invited to participate or observe in the model policy meeting on THIS THURSDAY November 19? If so, please let me know. Even if you weren’t “invited”, please join me as an observer (I invited myself!) to make our presence known. We need to make sure children in special education aren't ignored since they are the population most at risk. Since special education students have been the population abused and mistreated by restraint and seclusion, I want to make sure we stay involved.

Meeting is from 9 AM to 4PM in the State Board Room at the Jefferson building. Apparently observers sit in a different area than participants (I’ve never done this before). I hope to see you there. If not, I will publish my notes at: http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/

Ange Hemmer
Missouri: Families Against Seclusion and Restraint
http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/
nomoseclusion@gmail.com

Seclusion Rooms Restricted in Missouri Bill Signed into Law this Week

Missouri, July 14, 2009

School boards in Missouri are now required to define in a written policy its district’s use of seclusion rooms and restraint methods for students with behavioral problems.

The requirement is one part of an education bill Gov. Jay Nixon signed into law on Monday. School districts must complete policies within two years. The law also says the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education must develop within one year a model policy that draws on advice from organizations for students with disabilities and experts in behavior management.

Read more here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/chas-beat/uncategorized/2009/07/seclusion-rooms-restricted-in-missouri-bill-signed-into-law-this-week/

Districts Must Set Policies on Seclusion Rooms

Missouri, June 13, 2009

Missouri school districts have two years to adopt written policies governing the use of seclusion rooms.

The Legislature last month approved a law prohibiting schools from confining students in locked, unattended rooms, except in emergencies while awaiting police.

Read the rest of the story here.

*****

Copy and paste URL:
http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/articles/2009/06/13/stcharles/education/0614stc-rooms0.txt

Seclusion Rooms In Schools, Even In Missouri, Get National Attention

Missouri, May 21, 2009

Testimony is taking place this week in Washington, D.C., regarding the use of seclusion rooms for students with disabilities - not only in Missouri, but across the country. Ange Hemmer has been vocal about the issue ever since her son was sent to a seclusion room numerous times in kindergarten in the Francis Howell School District.

From the passage of legislation in Missouri this year to the Congressional hearings, Hemmer says she's pleased the debate is creating awareness, but more needs to be done. For example, she urges teachers to get the training and support they need to help students with disabilities before they fail.

Read the rest of the story here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/8955-2

Education Bill Containing Seclusion Language Passes

Missouri, May 14, 2009

A comprehensive education bill that contains language regarding the use of seclusion rooms has passed. This bill moved extremely fast.

Unfortunately this language is not what we would like to see. We recommend legislation that includes all the provisions recommended by the NDRN report and will continue to advocate for such.

House Committee Substitute No. 2 for Senate substitute for Senate Bill No. 291

Section dealing with seclusion:

160.263.
1. The school discipline policy under section 160.261 shall prohibit
2 confining a student in an unattended, locked space except for an emergency situation while
3 awaiting the arrival of law enforcement personnel.
4 2. By July 1, 2011, the local board of education of each school district shall adopt
5 a written policy that comprehensively addresses the use of restrictive behavioral
6 interventions as a form of discipline or behavior management technique. The policy shall
7 be consistent with professionally accepted practices and standards of student discipline,
8 behavior management, health and safety, including the Safe Schools Act. The policy shall
9 include but not be limited to:
10 (1) Definitions of "restraint", "seclusion", and "time-out" and any other
11 terminology necessary to describe the continuum of restrictive behavioral interventions
12 available for use or prohibited in the district;
13 (2) Description of circumstances under which a restrictive behavioral intervention
14 is allowed and prohibited and any unique application requirements for specific groups of
15 students such as differences based on age, disability, or environment in which the
16 educational services are provided;
17 (3) Specific implementation requirements associated with a restrictive behavioral
18 intervention such as time limits, facility specifications, training requirements or
19 supervision requirements; and
20 (4) Documentation, notice and permission requirements associated with use of a
21 restrictive behavioral intervention.
H.C.S.#2 S.S. S.B. 291 73. The department of elementary
22 and secondary education shall, in cooperation
23 with appropriate associations, organizations, agencies and individuals with specialized
24 expertise in behavior management, develop a model policy that satisfies the requirements
25 of subsection 2 of this section by July 1, 2010.

Summary:

USE OF SECLUSION ROOMS: This act requires school district discipline policies to prohibit confining a student in an unattended, locked space except for an emergency situation while awaiting the arrival of law enforcement personnel. By July 1, 2011, each school district must adopt a written policy that addresses the use of restrictive behavioral interventions as a form of discipline or behavior management technique, as described in the act. The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education must develop a model policy by July 1, 2010 in cooperation with associations, organizations, agencies, and individuals with specialized expertise in behavior management.

This provision identical to a provision contained in HCS/SB 79 {passed senate as well as house education committee, currently in house rules committee} and is similar to SB 445 {2nd read and referred to committee – no hearing was ever scheduled}. (Section 160.263)

Missouri Disability Legislative Update: Issue 16

Missouri, May 1, 2009

GOVERNOR’S COUNCIL ON DISABILITY
Legislative Update: Issue 16

*****

Copy and paste URL:
http://www.disabilityinfo.mo.gov/gcd/legislation/2009/050209issue16.pdf

Senate to Consider Bill on Use of Schools’ ‘Seclusion Rooms’

Missouri, March 12, 2009

Following complaints last month by two parents who said their children were harmed after repeatedly being placed in “seclusion rooms” while attending school in the Francis Howell School District State Sen. Scott Rupp has introduced a state bill that would regulate use of seclusion rooms for children with disabilities in area schools.


Rupp had first proposed banning seclusion rooms, but after Superintendent Renee Schuster and other district officials showed him a 27-square-foot seclusion room in Francis Howell North High School and a 45-square-foot room in Henderson Elementary School, he lightened the bill.

Read the rest of the story here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://www.midriversnewsmagazine.com/news02.html

Senator Tours Seclusion Rooms

Missouri, March 3, 2009

Instead of banning seclusion rooms, proposed state legislation will probably try to regulate their use.

State Sen. Scott Rupp, R-2nd District, who proposed a ban two weeks ago, on Monday said he would write a substitute bill geared toward establishing guidelines for when and how schools can use the rooms.

Read the rest of the story here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/articles/2009/03/03/stcharles/news/0304stc-rupp0.txt

Rupp: Putting an End to the Use of School Seclusion Rooms

Missouri, March 2, 2009

Recent disturbing reports across the country — and in our own state — of alleged incidents of improper restraint and seclusion being used as school disciplinary measures for students receiving special education services prompted me to file Senate Bill 445, which would ban seclusion rooms and begin our state’s efforts to begin addressing this troubling national issue.

The use of seclusion rooms, usually small rooms with padding on the walls, first came to my attention when I chaired the Blue Ribbon Panel on Autism. Senate Bill 445 would prevent special education students from being confined in locked areas or rooms as a behavior management technique or discipline management practice. There would be exemptions in certain situations when confinement is necessary to prevent bodily harm to the student or another person. The bill does not exclude the use of appropriate limited time-outs in order for students to regain self-control.

Read more here.

*****

Copy and paste URL: http://www.senate.mo.gov/09info/members/newsrel/d02/w030309.pdf