Probe into student’s death finds school violated rules

Updated: Nov 8, 2019

Sadly, another child death review that exemplifies the lack of preparation of staff in addressing unruly behaviour. The article mentions two important points:

Choosing when and how to address unruly and disruptive behaviours...child kicked a wall, was likely very frustrated...leading adults to intervene... limits only lead to power struggles that could easily end in physical restraints! That part belongs completely to the adults intervening...what options was the child offered prior to the restraint?

The adults thought the child was pretending to sleep, a technique the child would use to stop the physical restraint. When a child pretends or sleeps, the restriction should immediately stop! He no longer meets the criteria for physical control, at least not at the full immobilization level. He no longer meets the criteria for a physical restraint.

The prone position restraint is controversial as the position itself provokes respiratory problems. Face down on the ground creates pressure on the lungs and diaphragm that could impair breathing. It is often accompanied by staff willfully or unwilfully putting pressure on the child’s back thus further compressing the child’s chest into the ground.

I would be curious to know how frequently staff practiced such techniques in between times where they received formal training. This is by far the most significant variable in the misapplication of physical restraint!

Read the article:

© 2020 Steve Hall | Website by ValetSocial

Safety Education, Security audits &

Consulting in Ontario and across Canada.