A move away from restraining children in schools must continue as part of an ‘evolution’, the children’s watchdog says after expressing concern over under-reporting of restraints at special schools
Physical restraints on children from “highly traumatised and volatile” backgrounds should not be necessary in schools, Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft says.
Becroft and other experts have expressed concern about the use of restraints in special schools and an under-reporting of the figures.
On Thursday, Newsroom revealed a “misunderstanding” between the Ministry of Education and two residential specialist schools led to a breach of legal requirements for reporting the use of physical restraint on students.
The use of restraints in residences was left out of the reporting by Halswell Residential College in Christchurch and Westbridge Residential School in Auckland, an error only identified following an Official Information Act request by Newsroom.
Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft told Newsroom the under-reporting of physical restraints at the schools was a significant concern, and the elimination of restraints on children needed to remain the ultimate goal.
“We need to say there are generally better ways of managing children from highly traumatised and volatile and violent backgrounds, and physical restraints shouldn’t be necessary.
“If we understand the background trauma, if we know what the stress points are that are triggers for behaviour, if there are good plans in place and care plans for every child, particularly those in special schools, it ought not to be necessary.”
Becroft said “an evolution and thinking in practice” was already well underway, with the use of restraint rooms in primary schools swiftly abolished after he received a complaint early in his stint as Children’s Commissioner.
One special school had effectively abandoned the use of physical restraints, showing elimination was possible, but the wider education community still had to finish that work.
“Think back to the 70s, and the outcry when caning and corporal punishment was abolished for schools: at the time, there was a significant number of teachers who said … schools will disintegrate into a Lord of the Flies type environment. Well that never happened and we’ve grown past that.”
Becroft said he had sympathy for the schools, which were “standing in the gap” to provide the best specialist services possible to children in need, and would sometimes have to deal with “almost volcanic eruptions” which could overwhelm them.
While there would still be crisis situations at schools where staff could intervene with reasonable force to prevent a genuine risk to a student or teacher, they could rely on statutory protections under the Crimes Act rather than any special permissions.
“Think back to the 70s, and the outcry when caning and corporal punishment was abolished for schools: at the time, there was a significant number of teachers who said, education as we know it will now be impossible … schools will disintegrate into a Lord of the Flies type environment.
“Well that never happened and we’ve grown past that, and some of those same principals would now say, we can’t believe we advocated for that.”
The issue was a difficult one for teachers on the frontline, but a trauma-informed approach was the best way forward, Becroft said.
“We do something wrong if we don’t expect from them [teachers] the absolute highest standards because the children deserve not just a good life, they deserve the best life possible and we’ve got to give it to them.”
Disability Rights Commissioner Paula Tesoriero told Newsroom she was also concerned about the frequency and transparency of physical restraint reporting in specialist schools, saying: “Transparent information is vital to ensure appropriate monitoring of the wellbeing and safety of disabled students at all times under the care of the state.”
Tesoriero said disabled children were known to be more likely to experience restraint, which could damage their learning and wellbeing and might breach their human rights.
While reporting of physical restraint was important, a focus on its eventual elimination was also needed which required teacher training and support for inclusive practices and strengthening positive de-escalation approaches.
“We know segregated environments can create additional risk of abuse as evidenced through the work of the Abuse in Care Inquiry. This highlights why inclusive practice and transparent reporting is so critical in specialist school settings.
“Force sends the wrong signal to our children and society. It is never an appropriate option for de-escalation,” Tesoriero said.
Auckland University professor of disability studies and inclusive education Missy Morton said it was hard to understand how the reporting of in-residence restraints “fell off the list”, when a like-for-like comparison with day schools did not make sense.
“What that misses out is that those students in those schools are there all the time, and the boards of trustees do sign an assurance and are approved to be able to have a residential part of the school … so it would certainly be reasonable to want to know the whole of the child’s experience at a school.”
“Every one of these restraints causes trauma for the person who’s receiving it, and to think otherwise is incorrect: you talk to people who’ve experienced being restrained or held, whether it’s as a psychiatric patient or the students in a residential school or in any site, and these are traumatic experiences.”
Morton said the number of restraints used at the schools was particularly concerning given the small rolls, with the Education Review Office showing just eight students currently at Halswell and four at Westbridge.
While the students at schools did have complex needs, there were a number of de-escalation methods that could be used short of physical restraint.
“I think there’s a real danger of a rhetoric being set up that somehow these kids are quote unquote, the worst of their kind in New Zealand, and I think that’s a really unfair representation.
“Students who end up there in those settings, it’s a complex mix of things that are going on, not all of which reside as a problem within a student. There might be issues about what support’s available in the local school, there might be issues about what supports are available for the family in their community and what other issues there might be going on.”
Morton said any remaining ambiguity about the reporting of restraints needed to be removed, while there could be a better public understanding of the damage caused by such holds.
“Every one of these restraints causes trauma for the person who’s receiving it, and to think otherwise is incorrect: you talk to people who’ve experienced being restrained or held, whether it’s as a psychiatric patient or the students in a residential school or in any site, and these are traumatic experiences.”
