Author Topic: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint  (Read 3617 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AuntieEm2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« on: May 19, 2009, 02:55:00 PM »
A hearing was held today before the US House Education and Labor Committee (Committee Chair is Rep. George Miller, D-CA) on the subject of the abusive use of seclusion and restraint in public and private schools. Several of the cases were at schools for troubled teens.  

Auntie Em

Video of the hearing on CSPAN:
http://http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/05/19/HP/A/18742/House+Education+and+Labor+Cmte+Hearing+on+Use+of+Restraint+in+Schools.aspx

The Government Accountability Office presented its report on the topic, and there was testimony from parents.
GAO Report PDF here: http://http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09719t.pdf

GAO Report Summary
GAO found no federal laws restricting the use of seclusion and restraints in public and private schools and widely divergent laws at the state level. Although GAO could not determine whether allegations were widespread, GAO did find hundreds of cases of alleged abuse and death related to the use of these methods on school children during the past two decades. Examples of these cases include a 7 year old purportedly dying after being held face down for hours by school staff, 5 year olds allegedly being tied to chairs with bungee cords and duct tape by their teacher and suffering broken arms and bloody noses, and a 13 year old reportedly hanging himself in a seclusion room after prolonged confinement. Although GAO continues to receive new allegations from parents and advocacy groups, GAO could not find a single Web site, federal agency, or other entity that collects information on the use of these methods or the extent of their alleged abuse. GAO also examined the details of 10 restraint and seclusion cases in which there was a criminal conviction, a finding of civil or administrative liability, or a large financial settlement. The cases share the following common themes: they involved children with disabilities who were restrained and secluded, often in cases where they were not physically aggressive and their parents did not give consent; restraints that block air to the lungs can be deadly; teachers and staff in the cases were often not trained on the use of seclusions and restraints; and teachers and staff from at least 5 of the 10 cases continue to be employed as educators.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Tough love is a hate group.
"I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson.

Offline blombrowski

  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #1 on: May 19, 2009, 05:53:51 PM »
Unfreakingbelieveable,

I hate to say it, but this almost validates The Who's comments about residential programs being no more unsafe than school settings.  Sadly, young people are safe nowhere.  Safer on average at home and in the community, but safe nowhere.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #2 on: May 19, 2009, 10:41:45 PM »
CAFETY's next promotional move will be what now?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline blombrowski

  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2009, 09:03:48 AM »
Don't anybody get the wrong idea.  I think I was reacting to the magnitude of the issue.  Seriously, 20 deaths in public and private schools.  33,000 reported incidents of restraint and seclusion in California alone in day schools  The same CYA mentality that pervades the residential treatment system pervades our day school system, with the same deadly results.  

No, this doesn't let residential providers off the hook, especially not those who use cult-like tactics or who profit off the suffering of youth.  If anything it provides us with the "if it can happen here, just imagine what's happening when kids can't tell their parents they're being abused" argument.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2009, 01:17:28 PM »
Quote from: "AuntieEm2"
Video of the hearing on CSPAN:
http://http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/05/19/HP/A/18742/House+Education+and+Labor+Cmte+Hearing+on+Use+of+Restraint+in+Schools.aspx

The Government Accountability Office presented its report on the topic, and there was testimony from parents.
GAO Report PDF here: http://http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09719t.pdf

FYI:
    Video on C-Span is 2 hr. Highly recommended.
    PDF download is 62 pages. Also highly recommended.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- • -------------- • --------------

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2009, 01:23:46 PM »
Some background material leading up to this investigation and subsequent report:

—•?|•?•0•?•|?•— —•?|•?•0•?•|?•— —•?|•?•0•?•|?•—

Chairman Miller Asks GAO to Investigate Cases of Abuse and Neglect of Schoolchildren
January 27, 2009 2:21 PM

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Rep. George Miller (D-CA), the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, today asked the U.S. Government Accountability Office to further investigate recent reports of seclusion and restraint of children in public and private schools across the country. Miller's committee plans to hold a hearing on these practices in the coming months.

Earlier this month, the National Disability Rights Network released a report detailing hundreds of cases where abusive uses of seclusion and restraint by school staff injured or traumatized schoolchildren, many with disabilities. The report revealed cases where students were abusively pinned to the floor, handcuffed, locked in closets, and subjected to other acts of violence. In some of the cases, children died.

As Miller noted in his letter to GAO today, a prior GAO investigation conducted at Miller's request uncovered thousands of similar cases of abuse at teen residential treatment facilities across the country. GAO's work laid the groundwork for legislation to address these abuses, the Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act of 2008 (H.R. 6358), which the House passed in June.  

"Unfortunately, vulnerable children and teens are being abused all too often in other contexts," Miller wrote. "To assist in the Committee's ongoing efforts to help protect our children, I specifically request that FSI investigate the use of restraint, seclusion, and harmful aversive handling of children and youth in private and public schools."

For more information on the report documenting these abuses, click here. For more information on H.R. 6358, click here.

The full text of Miller's letter to GAO is below.

 

***

January 27, 2009

Gene L. Dodaro
Acting Comptroller General
U.S. Government Accountability Office
441 G Street, N.W.
Washington, DC   20548

Dear Mr. Dodaro:

I write to request that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Forensic Audits and Special Investigations Unit (FSI) further investigate recent reports of neglect and abuse of children in our nation’s schools.

Over the last several years, GAO ably fulfilled my requests that it review and investigate the alarming number of deaths and incidences of abuse of youth enrolled in private residential treatment programs geared toward treating troubled teens. Among other things, the investigative work highlighted cases where staff at some programs employed unsafe restraint techniques that lead to death in some of those cases. In part because of these revelations, the House passed the Stop Child Abuse in Residential Programs for Teens Act of 2008, H.R. 6358 (110th Congr.) on June 25, 2008.

Unfortunately, vulnerable children and teens are being abused all too often in other contexts. Just this month, the National Disability Rights Network released a troubling report entitled School is Not Supposed to Hurt in which the authors described instances of death and abuse of children and youth in public and private schools across the United States. The report focused on seclusion and restraint techniques and detailed dozens of occurrences of students being abusively pinned to the floor, handcuffed, locked in closets, and subjected to other traumatizing acts of violence. In some of the cases, the abuse resulted in death.

To assist in the Committee's ongoing efforts to help protect our children, I specifically request that FSI investigate the use of restraint, seclusion, and harmful aversive handling of children and youth in private and public schools.

Sincerely,

George Miller
Chairman

cc:  Senior Republican Member Howard "Buck" McKeon


# # #
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- • -------------- • --------------

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2009, 05:13:46 PM »
Is there any way program survivors can be heard without going through CAFETY?  The only view reaching DC is CAFETY's, and their view is colored by their professional ambitions in mental health care.  Wouldn't it be better to hear from survivors who don't have a vested interest in keeping the "good" programs their friends work at open?  Survivors with no desire to self promote their careers by exploiting the issue while effectively suppressing the majority of program survivors.  

In other words, how do we bypass the mental health industry reps who are censoring survivors?  No one from here or any other group gets a voice in DC.  Another experiment in unity with other groups asking for a fair share of representation for those without connections to the TTI is worth an effort.  You don't have to agree with all of them 100%, but maybe we could agree 100% on the need for representation of survivors who aren't getting it from CAFETY.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2009, 06:26:23 PM »
The previously posed question is one I would like an informed answer to as well. Then perhaps someone could expand upon this subject.
Some of the following have been referenced in this forum: JCAHO, NATSAP, CAFETY…ISAC.  Could someone please outline the purposes/differences between these organizations, for those (like me) who are not in the know?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline blombrowski

  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2009, 01:21:50 AM »
Quote
Is there any way program survivors can be heard without going through CAFETY? The only view reaching DC is CAFETY's, and their view is colored by their professional ambitions in mental health care. Wouldn't it be better to hear from survivors who don't have a vested interest in keeping the "good" programs their friends work at open? Survivors with no desire to self promote their careers by exploiting the issue while effectively suppressing the majority of program survivors.

In other words, how do we bypass the mental health industry reps who are censoring survivors? No one from here or any other group gets a voice in DC. Another experiment in unity with other groups asking for a fair share of representation for those without connections to the TTI is worth an effort. You don't have to agree with all of them 100%, but maybe we could agree 100% on the need for representation of survivors who aren't getting it from CAFETY.

1.  Of course, program survivors unaffiliated with CAFETY can be heard in multiple ways.  Write your congressperson directly, stage a protest, connect with a media person in your local community.  CAFETY has no monopoly on the survivor voice.  If CAFETY's view is the only view reaching D.C. work harder to make sure that your point of view is getting across.  If nobody's listening, find an established organization you can work with to be your mouthpiece.  Taking a guess at what this unheard point of view is, you might want to try an organization like PsychRights, or SSDP, or NARPA or any other organization that takes a strictly rights-based approach to all "treatment".  There aren't many, and usually these organizations have to join coalitions to have a voice in policy debates.  

2.  As for the rest of this post you'll have to explain because I don't see where you're getting your info from.

a.  Programs our friends work at? - do tell what these programs are
b.  Suppressing the majority of program survivors - huh?  Could we even suppress or censor people's opinions if we tried?
c.  I know of some organized groups of survivors who do have different opinions than that of CAFETY, contact them and see if you can make something happen.
d.  Again who is doing the censoring?

I guess my general point in responding is stop complaining and just do it already.  Nobody's stopping you.  If there's something specific that's ongoing that serves as a barrier to you being able to have a voice, say what it is and maybe something can be done about it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2009, 08:04:09 AM »
Perhaps someone could expand upon this subject:
Some of the following have been referenced in this forum: JCAHO, NATSAP, CAFETY…ISAC.  Could someone please outline the purposes/differences between these organizations, for those (like me) who are not in the know?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline AuntieEm2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2009, 09:32:26 AM »
1. Info on speaking out is below.

2. In my experience, CAFETY has been active and sincere in helping survivors to be heard. Opinions may differ on some points, but we all share the same basic desire to see these programs shuttered forever, and put on a short leash until the day comes when they are out of business.

Speaking Out.
To voice your concerns directly to Congress and the GAO, you can use the contacts below. Please do! These folks work for you, so no need to be shy about making your voice heard. The GAO is still gathering information and comments, especially in the next 7 days or so, but this whole topic is of ongoing concern for Miller and the GAO. Do keep in mind that shorter letters or emails can generally be more effective than long ones. I also recommend you consider contacting your member of Congress, see info online at http://http://www.house.gov. If you call your representative's office, as to speak to the person in charge of education issues.

Government Accountability Office:
For more information, contact Gregory D. Kutz at (202) 512-6722 or kutzg@gao.gov.

House Committee on Education and Labor:
http://http://edlabor.house.gov/

Contact information for Representative George Miller, Chair of the House Committee on Education and Labor, and his staff:
http://http://georgemiller.house.gov/contactus/
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Tough love is a hate group.
"I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson.

Offline blombrowski

  • Posts: 135
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2009, 09:38:34 AM »
JCHAO - Joint Commission of Accreditation of Health Organizations - Basically, they come into your medical facility and make sure the bathrooms and bedrooms are clean and they give you a gold sticker for it.  Facilities use this to try to convince parents they're on the up and up.  JCAHO standards are so low as to practically useless.  But JCAHO has a reputation and they make money off of what they do.

NATSAP - National Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs - Trade organization of privately-run "therapeutic" programs designed for youth and young adults.  Programs sell NATSAP membership like they do JCHAO accreditation.  If anything, membership in NATSAP is a sign to stay away as confirmedly abusive programs (Peninsula Village, Family Foundation School, Mount Bachelor Academy, and Bechmark just to name a few) are highlighted members.

CAFETY - Community Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of Youth - A non-profit organization made up of survivors of residential treatment programs and allies.  Gets flak on this forum for being connected to mental health professionals and "insiders".  Participated in the Congressional Hearings last year, and has been featured in a couple of media articles.  Been around since 2006.

ISAC - International Survivors Action Committee -  One of the original, if not THE original advocacy websites fighting against the Troubled Teen Industry. Most trusted and respected source of information and advocacy work for Forni.  Basically a one person show.

I could go into much more detail, but this is the general gist.  I'm sure if anyone has any edits to make, they'll make it.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline AuntieEm2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2009, 09:42:36 AM »
Organizations and Acronyms
JCAHO: The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, a.k.a., "The Joint Commission." This is a nongovernmental organization that inspects, monitors and accredits hospitals and other healthcare organizations that pay hefty fees to be inspected, meet standards, and get a "good housekeeping seal of approval" in return. Programs boast about accreditation by JCAHO (pronounced JAY-co) and parents often believe it has something to do with quality of mental health care, when it does not. Usually it means things like the program checks two forms of ID before administering meds, and they keep medical equipment cleaned, etc. Online at http://http://www.jointcommission.org/. Search for information on an organization here: http://http://www.qualitycheck.org/consumer/searchQCR.aspx

NATSAP: The National Association of Therapeutic School and Programs. Um, we hate these guys. As the name suggests, they are total supporters of the troubled teen industry. Online at http://http://www.natsap.org, and it will make you angry. But you can search for program info and look at the propaganda fed to parents. Another situation where families may assume membership in NATSAP means something about the quality of the program when it doesn’t mean squat.

CAFETY: Community Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of Youth (pronounced KAFF-a-tee).  CAFETY is a “youth-driven advocacy organization seeking to increase awareness of the inhumane treatment of youth who are placed residential care when experiencing behavioral, emotional, and mental health challenges.” Program survivor Kat Whitehead leads this organization, and many survivors participate as members, volunteers, and advocates.  Good people, IMHO. Online at http://http://www.cafety.org.

ISAC: International Survivors Action Committee. They are a nonprofit whose mission is “to expose abuse, civil rights violations, and fraud perpetuated through privately-owned facilities for juveniles.” Founded by a survivor, they have an online Facilities Watch List that is an important resource, though I do not think it has been updated lately. Online at http://http://www.isaccorp.org.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
Tough love is a hate group.
"I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." -Thomas Jefferson.

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2009, 10:05:37 AM »
Quote from: "Inquiry"
Perhaps someone could expand upon this subject:
Some of the following have been referenced in this forum: JCAHO, NATSAP, CAFETY…ISAC.  Could someone please outline the purposes/differences between these organizations, for those (like me) who are not in the know?

Post-composition: Golleeee... am I s-l-o-w. I can see that a lot of my material has been stated more eruditely by those ahead of me. Oh well, one more voice to the bucket...

-:•0•:-

Briefly, and stated with the express caveat that my own knowledge and understanding is admittedly woefully incomplete:

    JCAHO is an accrediting organization, generally used for hospitals and other institutions in a health care setting. CARF is a similar organization, generally thought to have less stringent criteria.

    NATSAP is a marketing and PR umbrella for programs. Having a NATSAP logo on your website is supposed to convey a certain level of standards to parents and the like who might be interested. However, NATSAP is entirely composed of program operators; there is absolutely no independent oversight, not even a pretension of such.

    CAFETY is an organization devoted to fighting unsafe and abusive programs. Many of its personnel are drawn from the ranks of those who have suffered due to having once been enrolled in same during their youth. They run into some controversy on fornits from time to time given their alliances with other program-fighting organizations who believe there is such a thing as "safe" or "good" programs out there. You could say there are philosophical differences but, in general, there is a good deal of overlap.

    ISAC is also a program-fighting organization, one that attempts to be somewhat neutral by letting the facts speak for themselves. They are a respected repository of survivor statements and newspaper articles cataloging the trail of misery and damage that abusive programs have left in their wake.[/list]
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
    -------------- • -------------- • --------------

    Offline Anonymous

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 164653
    • Karma: +3/-4
      • View Profile
    Re: US House Hearing on Seclusion & Restraint
    « Reply #14 on: May 24, 2009, 02:01:57 PM »
    Quote from: "Inquiry"
    The previously posed question is one I would like an informed answer to as well. Then perhaps someone could expand upon this subject.
    Some of the following have been referenced in this forum: JCAHO, NATSAP, CAFETY…ISAC.  Could someone please outline the purposes/differences between these organizations, for those (like me) who are not in the know?

    Cafety is not a registered non profit. ISAC is a registered non profit. Isac only self promotes to keep their org up and running etc..
    From the looks of it cafety has other self promoting interests as well,
    NATSAP is a referral org, and i do think they get paid to refer.....I am not sure what JCAHO is.

    Do the research and decide for yourself. I would never give any money to cafety though, or natsap. On the other hand if I had any money i would donate to ISAC...they are honest and only about educating the public about abusive teen facilities.
    -Clara
    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »