Masking abuse as restraints and behaviour management in Segregated Education Settings

ALLFIE firmly opposes the use of force or restraint in any educational setting, whether deemed reasonable or not. We believe it necessary to raise public awareness about the findings of research commissioned by the Department of Education (DfE). This report, entitled “Reasonable force, restraint & restrictive practices in alternative provision and special schools”, aims to inform the review of DfE Guidance published in 2013 which allows the use of restraints and other so-called behaviour management techniques in special schools.

It is also worth noting that the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (Section 93) states that “members of staff” have the “power to use force” “on pupils either on school premises or elsewhere, provided they have lawful control or charge of the pupil.” This law permits the use of “reasonable force.” As evidence gathered over many years shows, many of these settings are misusing law and policy to justify abusive practices, as recently highlighted in ALLFIE’s End Torture campaign.

The latest findings reinforce our position that segregated settings are spaces ripe for the abuse of Disabled people’s human rights and should not be tolerated by society. The report aims to inform the review of DfE Guidance published back in 2013 which allows the use of restraints and other so-called behaviour management techniques in special schools. The research findings reinforce our position that segregated settings are spaces ripe for the abuse of Disabled people’s human rights and should not be tolerated by society.

In this year’s Spring edition of Inclusion Now we published articles and other information connected to our End torture of Disabled people campaign which demands an end to the abuses inflicted upon Disabled people in segregated educational settings and other institutions.

This new research demonstrates how subtle actions, or so-called behaviour management techniques and restraints, often lead to full blown abuse when allowed by law and policy guidelines. It also shows how these result in devastating consequences for Disabled people (see two recent examples here: Special school pupils ‘tortured’ in calming rooms, BBC investigation finds also revealed in another investigation Disabled Pupils mocked and put in headlocks by school staff.).

Background

The DfE commissioned research organisation, Revealing Reality, to carry out research to understand how Special and alternative provision schools in England currently use “reasonable force, including physical restraint and other restrictive practices” (Page 3), and to learn how  these schools can effectively minimise the need to use such methods. The report was commissioned to support the DfE’s plans to review and update the DfE Guidance 13 July 2013 (Use of reasonable force Advice for headteachers, staff and governing bodies). The guidance states it provides school staff with advice on how to ‘minimise the use of physical restraint’ and, in instances where it is ‘absolutely necessary and lawful to use reasonable force or restrictive practices’, to do so as safely as possible. However, this form of restraint constitutes violence and puts Disabled Children and Young people in the same category as suspected perpetrators of a crime in the disguise of so-called behavioural policies and techniques.

Our views about the research

Our overarching view was that the research was a public relations exercise for Special and alternative provision schools and seems to only centre views of the school/colleges and not children/Young people and their families. The voices of children/Young people and their families are missing, they were not interviewed or considered – their voices were erased!

Our comments and observations on the research “Reasonable force, restraint & restrictive practices in alternative provision and special schools Research report” are outlined below:

• Disabled children and Young people are still being subjected to traumatic practices in segregated educational settings masked as restraints and restrictions and these settings are legally allowed to supplement DfE’s “use of reasonable force” (page 4 of the research). The reason given was that the guidance was not detailed enough (page 16 of the research), and some schools welcomed the ambiguity or lack of details because they claimed it enabled them to tailor it to suit their individual settings. Our view is that lack of uniformity and standards can allow abuse and violence by empowering schools to make their own guidance. It is easy for a rogue leadership team to use the guidance as an excuse to harm Disabled children/Young people in their care.

Some school leaders felt the guidance should make it mandatory for schools to share details of incidents involving the use of reasonable force with parents/guardians, the local authority, the DfE or Ofsted. We agree with their observation and would also like a more standard definition of “what is reasonable” (Page 19 of the research). There are various practices and reporting mechanisms that schools use that are not standardised and thus subject to school leaders’ prerogatives.

• The use of language in some schools to mask the potentially harmful treatment of Disabled children and Young people is disturbing. In the report (page 11 of the research) some schools prefer terms like supportive holding instead of restraining. This does not stop the use of reasonable force or restraint and allows law enforcement culture to be mimicked in these schools. It is very concerning that the definition of the term “reasonable force and restraint” (page 4) is so broad that even Special school leaders cringe at its lack of detail. This can be used by some schools to perpetuate harm and use disproportionate restraint on pupils (page 15 of the research).
• There was a concern in the report that not all staff in the sampled schools were trained to “enforce” these practices (page 19 of the research). We ask what the ratio of trained staff to non-trained staff is and what happens if the trained staff are unavailable?
• We can also assume from the report that the training industry on the use of these methods is thriving. How else can you explain the fact, pointed out in the report, that training providers often roll out the same training programmes previously used with minor tweaks and charge exorbitant fees, thus reinforcing our long-held belief that so much money is being made off the backs of Disabled people. (page 22 of the research)
• When it came to recording data, the DfE guidance was very vague and allowed schools too much freedom in what they could record. (page 32 of the research)
• We also noted that the system of capturing data is not standard across the sector. While some schools have invested in technology (online systems) others are still using paper bound books to record data. Paper bound books to log data are not secure enough in our opinion.
• As we have always suspected, there is segregation even in Special schools as one case study on a Special school in Essex demonstrated (Annex 1 case study one page 35 of the research). In the case study it was observed that some Disabled children labelled as extra complex were not allowed in the same space as other Disabled children in the same segregated setting. ALLFIE has always maintained that segregation provisions do not prevent further discriminations and other harmful practices that some have argued do not exist in those places. In the case study it was observed that some Disabled children labelled as extra complex were not allowed in the same space as other Disabled children in the same segregated setting.

Final thoughts

We have gone to great lengths to outline our thoughts, reflections and observations on this research and again link the use of these so-called behaviour management techniques to our End Torture of Disabled People campaign, which highlighted abuse and torture happening in dual-registered residential special schools, care homes, and special schools funded by taxpayers.

Our Human rights

We believe a system that allows violence (and has never considered researching alternative methods of behaviour control and management) to be used on Disabled children and Young people in the guise of managing so called misbehaviours, lends itself to bestowing on a group of Disabled people a life cycle of abuse, torture and dehumanisation.

We are therefore calling on the DfE and relevant authorities for the removal of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (Section 93) and other such laws and policies, that give staff the power to “use reasonable force” on pupils in schools or elsewhere. Segregation and institutionalisation reinforce abuse. Masking these techniques by using lofty terminologies, or claiming that certain staff and personnel are adequately trained, does not stop the fact that Disabled people’s human rights are being breached and their access to education lost.

More…

• Read and sign ALLFIE’s Manifesto: ‘Inclusive Education for All’
• Alt text for the Crippen cartoon: Reasonable force