LETTER: State should ban seclusion, restraints for school students
June 2, 2022Editor’s Note: The following is a letter sent to Vermont lawmakers and shared with Waterbury Roundabout.
Vermont legislators,
I am writing to advocate for children in Vermont with disabilities who are restrained and secluded in our schools at disproportionate rates compared to children without disabilities. I ask that the Vermont Legislature introduce a bill that would mirror proposed federal legislation, the Keeping All Students Safe Act, that would ban seclusion, prone restraints, and supine restraints in schools.
As some of you are aware, I have been advocating at the local level to encourage the Harwood Unified Union School District to prohibit the use of face-down prone restraints and seclusion. HUUSD currently uses prone restraints and I have personally witnessed them being used on children in elementary grades.
According to the most recent data (2017) from the Office of Civil Rights, HUUSD used physical restraint 451 times. Brookside Primary School alone used physical restraint 281 times. Those numbers are more than double any other district in Vermont and indicate that restraints are likely being used in non-emergency situations.
Here are links to data from the Office of Civil Rights on the Harwood school district, Fayston Elementary School, and Thatcher Brook Primary School (prior to its renaming to Brookside in 2020)
Prone restraints are both more dangerous and more restrictive than other restraints. Vermont Agency of Education’s Rule 4500, section 4502.1.1, states that it should only be used when the child's size and severity of behavior warrant its use. I am concerned because an elementary student's physical size should not render less-restrictive restraints ineffective. Prone restraints are higher risk than other forms of restraint as they can restrict breathing when performed incorrectly. There is no reason that behavior interventionists working with students in a K-4 school cannot safely use less-restrictive interventions.
The following is a section about prone restraints from Vermont Rule 4500:
(4502.1.1) Prone and supine physical restraints are more restrictive than other forms of physical restraint and may be used only when the student's size and severity of behavior require such a restraint because a less restrictive restraint has failed or would be ineffective to prevent harm to the student or others.
This article on the U.S. Department of Education’s website regarding the use of restraint and seclusion in schools has this to say about prone restraints on page 16:
“7. Restraint or seclusion should never be used in a manner that restricts a child’s breathing or harms the child.
Prone (i.e., lying face down) restraints or other restraints that restrict breathing should never be used because they can cause serious injury or death. Breathing can also be restricted if loose clothing becomes entangled or tightened or if the child’s face is covered by a staff member’s body part (e.g., hand, arm, or torso) or through pressure to the abdomen or chest.” (U.S. Department of Education, Restraint and Seclusion: Resource Document, Washington, D.C., 2012.)
It is time for Vermont to follow the lead of other states that have laws or regulations prohibiting the use of prone restraints and seclusion.
Thank you for your consideration on this matter.
Sincerely,
Brian Dalla Mura
Duxbury
A former HUUSD School Board member, Brian Dalla Mura works in special education at Brookside Primary School.