General Interest > Tacitus' Realm
Maine schools: discipline, seclusion, restraint policies
Ursus:
From the above article, "Disability Rights Center challenges handling of restraint complaints":
The Disability Rights Center of Maine challenged the state Department of Education on Thursday to improve the makeshift way it handles complaints about the use of physical restraint and seclusion on schoolchildren.
The center's lawyers acted after Education Commissioner Angela Faherty informed them that two complaints, filed in June on behalf of two students in different school districts, lacked sufficient detail to determine whether investigations are warranted.
"If you still wish the department to consider this matter, kindly provide as much detail as possible," Faherty wrote in an Oct. 5 letter addressing one of the complaints.[/list][/size]
Here's that letter from Acting Education Commissioner Angela Faherty; some portions have been blocked out for confidentiality reasons:
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
October 5, 2010
Katrina Ringrose, Advocate
Disability Rights Center of Maine
24 Stone Street, P.O. Box 2007
Augusta, ME 04338-2007
XXXXXXX Request for Investigation
Dear Ms. Ringrose:
The following is in response to your letter date XXXXXXX, 2010, in which you allege that restraint and timeout have been used with regard to the above student in a way that violates Chapter 33 of the MDOE regulations. Unfortunately, your letter does not provide sufficient detail to enable the Department to determine what, if any, investigation into these allegations is warranted.
If you still wish the Department to consider this matter, kindly provide as much detail as possible regarding the nature of the restraint you allege constituted "prone restraint," and the circumstances under which the restraint was employed. Likewise, provide that detail (nature and circumstances) for those incidents of restraint for which there was allegedly inadequate documentation and about which allegedly no nurse was notified, if they are not all the same incidents. Also, with regard to the use of timeout, provide more information regarding the location and nature of the room (or rooms), and the manner in which that room (those rooms) have been used with the student.
Finally, provide the basis for your being "confident" that this student is not the only one on whom prone restraint has been practiced in the student's school.
Any documentation you can provide of the foregoing will also assist the Department in determining the appropriate response to these allegations.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
<signature>
Angela R. Faherty, Ph.D.
Commisioner of Education
Special Services Director
Ursus:
From the just above article, "Disability Rights Center challenges handling of restraint complaints":
The complaints in question contained enough information to prompt investigations, said Diane Smith, a lawyer for the center. The center's lawyers plan to turn over documents they have gathered from each district, but they say the department is setting the bar too high in what is supposed to be a parent-friendly process.
"What they're saying is, 'Until you do our work for us, we're not going to investigate this,'" Smith said. "If these families weren't represented by us, their complaints wouldn't be investigated. Meanwhile, these students are attending school in an environment that's unsafe. (State officials) should have contacted us months ago if they had questions about the complaints."
Smith wouldn't identify the students or their districts.
No formal complaint process exists in the department's rules on physical restraint and seclusion of students. Both are allowed when prescribed in individual special education plans, or in emergencies to control a disturbance or when students' safety is at risk.
The department established a temporary complaint process last year when the rules came under scrutiny in the Legislature. The Disability Rights Center of Maine filed several complaints last year that the department handled appropriately, Smith said. A recent staffing change and a lack of consistent protocols is likely to blame for the new approach to parents' concerns, she said.
The lack of a clear and consistent complaint process is one of several deficiencies identified by parents, advocates, lawmakers and others who are calling for improvements in the department's rules on restraint and seclusion. Department officials have said they plan to convene a panel of stakeholders later this year to review the rules. Smith expects to be one of them.
The Department of Education didn't respond to a request for comment on Smith's concerns, which she outlined in a letter e-mailed to Faherty on Thursday.
Faherty responded to Smith with this e-mail: "Thank you, Diane, for bringing these important issues and considerations to our attention. The work group is preparing to help improve the process and establish appropriate protocols as you indicated are truly needed."
The two complaints that Faherty found lacking clearly identified the students involved, their schools, their classrooms and their special education diagnoses, Smith said.
The complaints also said that each district poorly documented and failed to notify parents of multiple incidents of physical restraint or seclusion -- which is when a student is purposely separated from others, often in another room.
In one complaint, the use of physical restraint wasn't prescribed in the student's individual education plan, Smith said. Also, staff members failed to notify the school nurse when they held the student in a face-down or prone restraint.[/list][/size]
Here's that letter from disability rights lawyer Diane Smith:
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
October 14, 2010
Acting Commissioner Angela Faherty
Department of Education
23 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0023
Re: Chapter 33 Complaint Protocol
Via Electronic and U.S. Mail[/list]
Dear Acting Commissioner Faherty:
I am writing with regard to your recent letters in response to two of the Disability Rights Center's requests for investigation. These requests address possible violations of Maine Department of Education Rule Chapter 33, Use of Timeout Rooms, Therapeutic Restraints and Aversives in Public Schools and Approved Private Schools, and of Administrative Letters No. 3 and 8.[1]
We are pleased that the Department has recently created a complaint process regarding Chapter 33 violations and appreciate the difficulty inherent in creating a complaint system out of whole cloth. However, these most recent letters (both in October 2010) raise concerns about the process used for these complaints, and make it clear that a detailed, transparent, and consistent statewide protocol for these investigations is badly needed.
First, there are no timelines. At least one of the complaints was filed in June and in October the family received a request for additional information, with no communication from the Department in the interim. These cases involve children who have been restrained or secluded at school, and the allegation, by definition, involves the improper use of either restraint, seclusion or both. Time is of the essence for all involved parties.
Second, per the former Commissioner, this complaint process is intended to be "parent friendly," meaning that a parent should be able to file a complaint and request an investigation on his or her own, without a lawyer. As such, a parent should not be required to provide specific information such as the date and time of alleged incidents of restraint. Your recent letters appear to require that the parent provide sufficient information to support a violation of Chapter 33 before the Department will investigate the complaint.
We are concerned that a parent may not have access to the information needed to file a complaint that meets this standard because parents are not at school and, in our experience, restraint incidents are rarely reported to parents by schools at that level of detail.
The standard for Chapter 33 complaints is a higher evidentiary standard than currently exists for either special education individual or systemic complaints, and we believe will prevent many serious situations from being investigated.
We hope that these concerns will be addressed promptly and thoroughly by the workgroup assigned to review Chapter 33, and that a protocol will be developed this school year, with stakeholder input, that will allow families to raise legitimate concerns in a manner that ensures the protection of Maine's children.
Sincerely,
Diane Smith
Staff Attorney
Disability Rights Center
Ursus:
Comments left for the above article, "Disability Rights Center challenges handling of restraint complaints" (by Kelley Bouchard; Oct. 15, 2010; The Portland Press Herald):
XPortlander said... October 15, 2010 at 8:39 AM
Discipline your kids at home and make them behave...if not they may be subject to a restraint.....that is simple, clear and consistent.
Copyright ©2010 MaineToday Media, Inc.
DannyB II:
--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---From the just above article, "Disability Rights Center challenges handling of restraint complaints":
The complaints in question contained enough information to prompt investigations, said Diane Smith, a lawyer for the center. The center's lawyers plan to turn over documents they have gathered from each district, but they say the department is setting the bar too high in what is supposed to be a parent-friendly process.
"What they're saying is, 'Until you do our work for us, we're not going to investigate this,'" Smith said. "If these families weren't represented by us, their complaints wouldn't be investigated. Meanwhile, these students are attending school in an environment that's unsafe. (State officials) should have contacted us months ago if they had questions about the complaints."
Smith wouldn't identify the students or their districts.
No formal complaint process exists in the department's rules on physical restraint and seclusion of students. Both are allowed when prescribed in individual special education plans, or in emergencies to control a disturbance or when students' safety is at risk.
The department established a temporary complaint process last year when the rules came under scrutiny in the Legislature. The Disability Rights Center of Maine filed several complaints last year that the department handled appropriately, Smith said. A recent staffing change and a lack of consistent protocols is likely to blame for the new approach to parents' concerns, she said.
The lack of a clear and consistent complaint process is one of several deficiencies identified by parents, advocates, lawmakers and others who are calling for improvements in the department's rules on restraint and seclusion. Department officials have said they plan to convene a panel of stakeholders later this year to review the rules. Smith expects to be one of them.
The Department of Education didn't respond to a request for comment on Smith's concerns, which she outlined in a letter e-mailed to Faherty on Thursday.
Faherty responded to Smith with this e-mail: "Thank you, Diane, for bringing these important issues and considerations to our attention. The work group is preparing to help improve the process and establish appropriate protocols as you indicated are truly needed."
The two complaints that Faherty found lacking clearly identified the students involved, their schools, their classrooms and their special education diagnoses, Smith said.
The complaints also said that each district poorly documented and failed to notify parents of multiple incidents of physical restraint or seclusion -- which is when a student is purposely separated from others, often in another room.
In one complaint, the use of physical restraint wasn't prescribed in the student's individual education plan, Smith said. Also, staff members failed to notify the school nurse when they held the student in a face-down or prone restraint.[/list][/size]
Here's that letter from disability rights lawyer Diane Smith:
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
October 14, 2010
Acting Commissioner Angela Faherty
Department of Education
23 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0023
Re: Chapter 33 Complaint Protocol
Via Electronic and U.S. Mail[/list]
Dear Acting Commissioner Faherty:
I am writing with regard to your recent letters in response to two of the Disability Rights Center's requests for investigation. These requests address possible violations of Maine Department of Education Rule Chapter 33, Use of Timeout Rooms, Therapeutic Restraints and Aversives in Public Schools and Approved Private Schools, and of Administrative Letters No. 3 and 8.[1]
We are pleased that the Department has recently created a complaint process regarding Chapter 33 violations and appreciate the difficulty inherent in creating a complaint system out of whole cloth. However, these most recent letters (both in October 2010) raise concerns about the process used for these complaints, and make it clear that a detailed, transparent, and consistent statewide protocol for these investigations is badly needed.
First, there are no timelines. At least one of the complaints was filed in June and in October the family received a request for additional information, with no communication from the Department in the interim. These cases involve children who have been restrained or secluded at school, and the allegation, by definition, involves the improper use of either restraint, seclusion or both. Time is of the essence for all involved parties.
Second, per the former Commissioner, this complaint process is intended to be "parent friendly," meaning that a parent should be able to file a complaint and request an investigation on his or her own, without a lawyer. As such, a parent should not be required to provide specific information such as the date and time of alleged incidents of restraint. Your recent letters appear to require that the parent provide sufficient information to support a violation of Chapter 33 before the Department will investigate the complaint.
We are concerned that a parent may not have access to the information needed to file a complaint that meets this standard because parents are not at school and, in our experience, restraint incidents are rarely reported to parents by schools at that level of detail.
The standard for Chapter 33 complaints is a higher evidentiary standard than currently exists for either special education individual or systemic complaints, and we believe will prevent many serious situations from being investigated.
We hope that these concerns will be addressed promptly and thoroughly by the work group assigned to review Chapter 33, and that a protocol will be developed this school year, with stakeholder input, that will allow families to raise legitimate concerns in a manner that ensures the protection of Maine's children.
Sincerely,
Diane Smith
Staff Attorney
Disability Rights Center
--- End quote ---
Ursus, would you please copy and send this to all your buddies here on fornits that were screaming from the rooftops about how parents have proper due process, allegations of abuse are handled expeditiously and the child has rights at a public school.
Parents hardly have rights and they pay taxes for this privilege.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "DannyB II" ---Ursus, would you please copy and send this to all your buddies here on fornits that were screaming from the rooftops about how parents have proper due process, allegations of abuse are handled expeditiously and the child has rights at a public school.
Parents hardly have rights and they pay taxes for this privilege.
--- End quote ---
Well, I think you're right in that kids in public schools as well as in the TTI are being shafted by various abusive circumstances.
However, I think that the inculcation towards conformity in public schools, while still (to my mind) unacceptably high, is less pervasive (e.g., not experienced 24 hours per day). I also think that PS parents are generally more aware of the nature of said abuses committed, and have more options at their disposal, which the mere existence of the letter above from disability rights lawyer Diane Smith attests to. This is not to say that things are hunky dorry by any means, and I hasten to emphasize that abuses which still do occur are completely unacceptable by any barometer.
Parents of kids in program, on the other hand, are often indoctrinated into the program themselves, and/or often have little clue as to what really goes on there. Options for legal recourse are difficult to obtain. First, the kid has to convince his/her parents of the abuse, providing s/he even understands it themselves ... through the veneer of residual Koolaid. And that might take years, depending on whatever trust still remains in said relationship...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version