CTCDD: Policy Meeting 8-13-08

Policy Meeting 8-13-08

 

Attending:  Nancy Taylor, Mary Eberle, Larry Carlson, Armand Legault and Mary Eberle,  DD Council Staff: Angela Spino

 

The meeting was chaired by Mr. Flanders. Minutes from the September 11 and October 23, 2007  Meetings were not available to approve. Next Ms. Eberle started the meeting with stating that the child who died in a Psychiatric Hospital in Portland, CT, was due to the fact that he was defiant. He was asked to get off of a dresser he climbed up on, not just for safety reasons, but the staff wanted him down. This was the “negative and/or inappropriate behavior” that led to his death. Ms.Eberle stated that the CT State Department of Education doesn’t have to wait and be driven by the statute.      

 

Ms.Eberle stated that the Use of Restraints & Seclusions in Schools is a Health & Safety issue in Education, and not just an Education issue. That the R&S is illegally targeting children with (IEP’s) Individualized Education Programs. We cannot have a law that severely penalizes children because of their disability.

 

Ms. Eberle stated that maybe we should approach the Health & Safety Committee, due to the fact that staff could be sued for Assault & Battery (or sue within the scope of your employment)It also violates the ADA (American’s with Disabilities Act) because it only refers to children with disabilities. The CT State Department of Education has specific rights to design the Special Education Program. The SDE can go beyond this since it affects all the students and staff that are witness to Restraint & Seclusion. (Refer to 10-76b of the General Statutes) The effects of Restraint & Seclusion are not only on the child, but it also effects Workman’s Compensation risks to teachers and staff.

 

Ms.Eberle stated that in order to Strengthen the R&S Bill (regulations): We need to request trainings and reporting. Make it very clear that these techniques are to be used as a “Last Resort” only. And that if it is used more than 1 or 2 times in a given day then there should be a Mandatory PPT with an immediate analysis, FBA and a BIP to look for immediate effort to look at the ABC sheets, and to see what other approaches could have been used. The CT State Department of Education’s concern needs to be for the child and staff in these circumstances.

 

References:

Abuse of restraint power violates 10-76b-5 to 10-76b-11 

 

Section 300.300b of the Regulations

 

Ms.Eberle stated that any child that is Restrained and/or put into Seclusion two times (per incident) a semester should have to see their pediatrician and that the pediatrician or the person who sees the child  should have to sign off on the Use of Restraints & Seclusion. This would be similar to the documents that parents have to sign when they take their children to the doctor for treatment or medication.

 

Punishment vs. Safety

 

  • Notify parents ASAP by phone and a copy of the documented incident to be sent home that day.
  • After the second Restraint and/or Seclusion a PPT needs to be called
  • If this is written in the child’s IEP every adult who works with this child must be trained.
  • If you are not going to require training for everyone in the building, then at least everyone who is part of the “Team” should be required to be trained.
  • How to avoid the need for it? Children die in Restraints by people who are not trained, and sometimes when they are trained.

 

 

How many children have died in Restraints in CT in the last 15 years?

 

Life Threatening: Anything that blocks the airway is considered to be.

 

 

The next meeting date has not been established. I will be in touch with everyone so we can set the next date in which to meet in the next couple of months.

 

Adjourned at 12:00.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Angela Spino

DD Council

 

 

 



Content Last Modified on 4/15/2010 2:19:48 PM