Parents, advocates ask lawmakers to end restraint, seclusion in CT schools

Lawmakers heard testimony Wednesday about a proposal to limit restraint and seclusion in Connecticut schools, as parents, advocates and experts spoke out against the practices. "The use of restraint and seclusion in schools has been found to be not only counterproductive for students with disabilities, but harmful," Sarah Eagan, the state's child advocate, told the legislature's Education Committee. Wednesday's hearing included testimony on a range of education proposals, including Senate Bill 1200, which would replace seclusion with "time outs" in unlocked rooms and limit when restraint is allowed, among other measures. Eagan said she supports the bill, though she suggested adding a requirement for schools to track time outs the way they currently do seclusions. The proposals regarding restraint and seclusion followed, and were partly inspired by, a Hearst Newspapers investigation published last fall, which detailed the scope of the practices, as well as their consequences for students. Jennifer Reynolds, a mother from Fairfield County, testified Wednesday how in 2019 her daughter with Down syndrome, then in second grade, was restrained for 12 minutes as she lay on a classroom rug, with three adults pinning her arms behind her back. "Twelve minutes," Reynolds said through tears. "The amount of time my daughter was being told by the actions of adults she trusted that she was not valued and not safe at school." Reynolds said she sent a letter to school officials saying she didn't consent to her daughter being restrained but that staff continued to restrain her anyway, leading her daughter to curl up in a fetal position and beg not to be sent back to school. Ultimately, Reynolds pulled her out and placed her in a different school in the district, where she had a better experience. "They did not have the tools to support her and had given up on her by treating her like somebody who didn't belong," Reynolds said. "She didn't need to be restrained or secluded, she needed to be supported." According to state data, staff at schools in Connecticut have restrained and secluded special education students tens of thousands of time annually over the past decade, with Black students and those with autism particularly likely to have the interventions used against them. During the 2020-21 school year, the most recent year for which data is available, more than 500 Connecticut students were restrained and secluded more than 10 times, and 80 were restrained or secluded more than 50 times. In addition to live testimony Wednesday, several dozen people, including national experts, submitted written testimony in favor of the proposal to ban seclusion and reduce restraint. "This bill represents a major step in the right direction for the children of Connecticut and their caregivers," wrote Ross Greene, a psychologist author and prominent opponent of restraint and seclusion. "Restraint and seclusion are, for the most part, obsolete practices that are largely unnecessary." Some testimony specifically cited Hearst Newspapers' investigation, which revealed that special education students nationwide are restrained or secluded hundreds of thousands of times each year, resulting in thousands of injuries and dozens of deaths over the years. One of few pieces of testimony not fully supportive of the proposal to further limit restraint and seclusion came from Charlene Russell-Tucker, the state's education commissioner. In written remarks, Russell-Tucker raised potential side effects of banning seclusion. "If trained educators are not able to utilize the emergency use of seclusion without the proper training and supports in place it may have an adverse effect on the safety of students leading to an increase in restraints or student removals from the school building," she wrote. While most schools and educators say they seek to minimize the use of restraint and seclusion, some describe the interventions as necessary to manage difficult classrooms. Kate Dias, president of the Connecticut Education Association, said last week that she supports the intention behind the new legislation but worries about reducing options for educators. "When kids are really struggling and disregulated, we do need to have options for them, and we do need to have space for them to deescalate, to manage and assess their own feelings and responses, and to have conversations about developing better techniques and management skills," she said. Others pointed to examples of schools nationwide that have reduced restraint and seclusion through alternative models. One model, called Ukeru, has been found to greatly decrease the need for physical interventions through relatively simple tweaks to how educators approach special education students. Dr. Arthur Yee, a physician in Fairfield County, testified that physical restraint can be dangerous or even deadly for some students, particularly those with certain conditions or disabilities and urged schools to pursue other options. "It is never appropriate to intervene in a manner that exposes a child to a greater risk of death than doing nothing," Yee wrote. "Fortunately, there are safer alternatives in between these two extremes that are far more likely to result in de-escalation and promote the safety of everyone." alex.putterman@hearstmediact.com.

Recommended