AIBU to think holding children down for “educational” purposes is bad?

[MakingM2]

I watched “Don’t exclude me” last night and there were some interesting ideas but I’ll cut to the chase.

In one scene, if you haven’t seen it, the teacher is physically restraining a very young boy who clearly has additional needs. They are basically on the floor in the playground. She is holding him down. He is pulling her hair. It’s all fairly horrific. She claims this is “trauma informed practice”.

The deputy head said - it feels wrong when you do it and it feels wrong when someone else does it.

…and my thought is “Sir, that’s because it is wrong”. You are teaching this tiny child that a more powerful person can physically force them to submit to their will - and that this is something that is ok. You may as well get a cane out.

Having been a governor in two primaries and friends with teachers and teacher trainers, I personally can’t imagine many teachers would want to undertake this kind of “behaviour management” even if the children do become more compliant afterwards.

And it occurred to me, given we think that observing violence is bad for children, should we really be doing this type of thing?

So am I being unreasonable to think violence (of any kind, with any justification) has no place in an educational environment?

YABU - nah, this is fine, stop being so precious
YANBU - education should be violence free

*What would I suggest…

That children who are a danger to themselves and others might need more adjustments to receive an education that meets their needs than a mainstream environment can offer them?

I’m not sure that keeping all the children together in one kind of provision is desirable if physically restraining children, and other children seeing children physically restrained because they are a danger to them, is what it takes tbh

But I’m interested to hear what the general “online” feeling about it is.*

I mean, I agree with you, long term something about the child's provision has to change but that doesn't answer the question of what you would do in that moment?

I can't comment on the episode but what would you do if a child had your child by the hair and was punching and kicking them in the face?
Or threatening to jump over the bannisters with a two story drop.
Or throwing full sized tables directly at six year old children?

I actually train people in positive handling and the first 2/3 of the course involve stressing over and over again that positive handling is an absolutely last resort after everything else has been tried. It is never a punishment and should never be done by a person who feels angry, out of control or personally hurt by a situation.
It should be followed up by a detailed plan for how to stop it happening in future.

But at the end of the day, sadly, it does need to be done from time to time to keep everybody safe.
It's ok to look at a situation and judge it from the comfort of your armchair but until you have actually repeatedly faced situations where you have to choose between the rights and safety of a dysregulated child and the safety, mental well-being and rights of the rest of the class. Until you have had to make that decision alone in a split second.... I really don't think you can judge.

So making. A child is such distress who is about to run into a road, climb on a roof, put there arm through a glass window etc - you don't think they should be restrained - because it's violent?

What would you suggest at this point. It's clear at this point all other things have failed.

Absolutely there is always things happening in the background to improve outcomes for the child. But it's very short sighted to think they happen in the immediate a child puts the self in danger.

I’m claustrophobic, and the idea of being held down really distressed me. So doing it to someone else would bother me too.

@JanetandJohn500

I am trainer in physical handling for schools. It has to be proportionate, reasonable and necessary. The hold was not only unnecessary in this instance, it was dangerous because it put him at risk of positional asphyxia (he was bent forwards throughout the hold). I was disappointed they held it up as an example of effective practice and even more cross when the dep head commented about it being good to see someone else do it correctly 🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤦🏼‍♀️🤯🤯

Thank you. I was beginning to question my own sanity. The only reason why I asked the question here was because it felt wrong to me and the Deputy Head said it felt wrong to him. Though, as you say, he went along with it. She was very authoritative.

Sometimes we just have to trust our gut reaction and ask the question! I’m glad I did.

@itsgettingwierd

I've watched the programme.

I have a wealth of experience in this area and agree with quite a lot of her practice and find some of it quite cold.

With regards restraint it is necessary and actually you have a duty of care to safeguard a child.

The same way if your child was doing something very dangerous you'd restrain them.

I don't have an issue with the restraint being used but I do have a issue with how she was restraining. He was bent too far forward which increases risk and we wouldn't usually hold the legs as well in the situation unless the child could kick them above their own head and injure the person doing the restraint. You'd move out if the way so you don't get booted!

Use of restraint is always a very emotive topic. All the companies that provide training to schools are continuously reviewing holds and adapting them. It's a very carefully considered practice when it is used. There are laws governing its use and very specific paperwork that must be completed and filed and held for many years.

What was he doing that was 'very dangerous'?

Yet oddly there is no law to say parents must be told when their child has been restrained which naturally makes you question why? DfE guidance also only says schools should consider how to best record it. Some simply don't bother.

I would be interested know which law you refer to re how paperwork must be completed and filed.

The children in that programme clearly have undiagnosed conditions such as autism or ADHD so in that context it is cruel to be using physical restraint on a young child that has had a meltdown because their needs have not been recognised or supported adequately.

It should never reach the point of needing to physically restrain a child, there will be plenty of warning signs that the child is heading towards a meltdown and staff should be trained to recognise these and equipped with a range of options to help calm them before they are completely out of control of themselves.

I think many people agree that what was shown on tv may not have been a good example. It doesnt mean there are not situations where careful, trained restraint is the best or only way to keep everyone safe.

There are real alternatives that cost the same as (or in my daughters case, less than) the cost of mainstream schools. My daughters mainstream school recieves £28/day and they redirect this to a farm provision that costs £23/day.

What needs to happen is for all parents to push their mps/LA'S/schools to utilise these provisions, and quickly rather than waiting for an EHCP which takes too long.

SEN families need a larger collective voice, as all of our children disbenefit from not utilising what exists.

It was fairly common place in the oldie days of teaching, and it used to work well with somewhat wayward children who were naughty. It wasn't violence in any way, just restraining a child. Some children seemingly did not have any normal discipline at home, but came to school causing havoc to one and all, which cant be tolerated in a class, with other kids, and a teacher, trying to do their jobs.

[quote Stormsy]@godmum56 did you watch it? We saw the whole incident. It did not require restraint, not by a long stretch. And the person restraining was someone who has been popping into school to give advice. They were not a teacher and certainly wouldn't know the child well on the limited contact they'd had.[/quote]
no I didn't which is why my comments have been general.

You'd be more comfortable with removing from mainstream so that others don't have to wonder if x will be restrained today? do you think this isn't used as a tool in specialist schools?

Stormsy where I have said what he was doing was very dangerous I'm not sure what your getting at with your response? I said I agree restraint has its place but didn't like the position she restrained him in or the fact she asked someone to hold his legs.

@CaptainCallisto I have worked with many TAs in your position and you are all extremely poorly paid for the frankly dangerous work that you do.

As pp have said, the electorate have voted not to fund decent specialist provision and many children are going through school either without the support they need or having to watch extremely violent and frightening behaviour.

Yet oddly there is no law to say parents must be told when their child has been restrained which naturally makes you question why? DfE guidance also only says schools should consider how to best record it. Some simply don't bother.

Restrained must be recorded. It is recommended as good practice to inform parents but it's not law because for some children (for example those who have extreme behaviour due to homelife) can be placed at greater risk if their parents are informed. It's very unusual to not inform a parent.

It came across to me that they jumped into using restraint far too quickly. It should be a last resort and I don't think with context at that stage it was appropriate.

My child was restrained once and she's still petrified of the member of staff.

Eduction should be violence free but if it’s the child who is displaying violent behaviour what’s a teacher meant to do?
The child needs to be stopped from inflicting violence or unacceptable behaviour to other children.
Other than exclusion I’m not sure there is much else you can do if you have tried adjustments and none have worked.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0010cx8/dont-exclude-me-series-1-episode-2 26 mins in

I am 99.9% sure they have cut this before placing it on Iplayer. She was restraining the child before he started pulling her hair, which we no longer see here. It appears it's been edited out since airing so it now looks like she only starts restraining him after he starts pulling her hair. The fact they've edited it after people have starting questioning how necessary the restraint was speaks for itself

@itsgettingwierd

Yet oddly there is no law to say parents must be told when their child has been restrained which naturally makes you question why? DfE guidance also only says schools should consider how to best record it. Some simply don't bother.

Restrained must be recorded. It is recommended as good practice to inform parents but it's not law because for some children (for example those who have extreme behaviour due to homelife) can be placed at greater risk if their parents are informed. It's very unusual to not inform a parent.

So why aren't all schools recording it? If you think it's only used where necessary and done properly and always recorded, there are plenty of send parents who will tell you that unfortunately this is not always the case.

Which law says it must be recorded?

Totally agree with @JanetandJohn500's comments. Watching the programme, the restraint used looked very much like a basket hold which is simply not safe, especially when the person being held is so much smaller abs lighter than the adult. The little boy looked to be at risk of positional asphyxia as his head was pushed so far forward.

There aren't always " plenty of warning signs" that a meltdown is going to occur, a previous poster mentioned turning a page in a book and the child reacting immediately to a picture of a frog, we have a child who dislikes being looked at, if he thinks someone is looking at him he will lunge straight at the child in question or, if he can't get to them, throw a chair at the adult who intervenes, the TA I mentioned has commented that the boy she supports goes from zero to ten in 2 seconds flat with no foreseeable reason.

The dfe use of reasonable force in schools says it's up to schools to decide how they log serious incidents. It also says about deciding how to report.

It's no longer a requirement to use a bound and numbered book although I don't like this. I would like a national reporting online system for use of force personally. Most schools now use cpoms.

If you think a student has been restrained and it not reported then ask for the report. Ask for it redacted as they can't provide names of third parties.

I'm a send parent myself and I don't recognise any schools not recording incidents. I do know they've not been reported before and I don't always agree with this in some cases.

I went to a PRU between the ages of 13-16 and graded holds were a standard there. My school had pupils aged between 4-18 with all kinds of additional needs, health conditions and pregnant girls.

It was a shock to watch at first (I have a chronic illness which is why I was there so was never restrained) but they are often needed. Some kids need restraining not only for their own safety but the safety of others. I remember seeing a 15 year old boy being restrained by a teacher as he was flailing around and spitting in his face. It was horrible but he had a tendency for harming himself.

A knife went missing from the school kitchen once and three teachers had to restrain a boy whilst they prized it out of his pocket. Teachers are trained in these holds for a very good reason.

I was also referred to the PRU by CAMHS and I think my Mum had to sign something saying she understood that the teachers were trained in graded holds (meaning the type of restraint was graded on proportion to the action) and she accepted that.

Have seen the hold in question now and yeaaaaaah it wasn’t great and I can see why OP would be shocked by it. Wouldn’t be allowed in my school and I also don’t see why they went into it, no immediate risk to safety especially as he’s done the dangerous bit ie. slip on the tennis balls. I would like to see the rest of the programme but on that tiny snippet I wasn’t super impressed.

It’s at 26:00 mins in in episode two for those who want to find it.

It’s a terrible thing for everyone involved and of course it feels wrong but... once I was at an after school club chatting to other mums while waiting for DC to get changed and a boy, maybe about 5yrs old and definitely (on reflection) with additional needs, flew at my youngest DD (aged 18 months) from behind and began trying to bite her and pull her hair.. he dug his fingers into her face and was snarling like an animal! It was horrific and his mother was utterly useless - standing their asking and pleading him to stop while myself and thankfully two other amazing women there pried him off. It took me hours to stop shaking, it was like he wanted to kill her. Even after he’d been pulled off he kept trying to fling himself on her again and again. It’s a sad fact of life that there are disturbed or incapacitated children that other children need to be protected from. I never went to that group again but I heard on the grapevine the boy was later asked to leave due to other serious incidents. I hope he is getting the help he needs.