Sometimes there is no right thing to do.
This hard truth comes to mind when considering the province’s recently-announced ban on “seclusion” rooms, where students with autism or similar conditions may be placed when they are acting up to a degree that they may harm themselves or others.
As you may know, Education Minister David Eggen opted to ban the use of seclusion rooms after a disturbing incident last fall.
Reportedly, an autistic boy in Sherwood Park was locked in a school’s seclusion room for 45 minutes, even though the parents did not approve the use of such rooms in his care.
The parents were even sent a picture of the boy, stripped of his clothes and covered in feces.
The shocking nature of this incident prompted a review of the use of seclusion rooms, though the resulting recommendations were roundly criticized by parents of special needs children.
The reaction from Eggen was to simply ban the use of seclusion rooms entirely. There will even be inspections done by the province this fall to ensure that such practices are no longer in use.
So a bad thing happened and now the province has taken steps to ensure that it never occurs again. Seems simple, right?
Except we still have the root problem: how do you deal with a special needs student whose behaviour is posing a risk to themselves or others?
It was initially a bit shocking to hear that Pembina Hills employed seclusion rooms in the case of several students. Nonetheless, it seems as though the division had sufficient safeguards to ensure that something like what happened in Sherwood Park wouldn’t be replicated.
Parents apparently had to sign off on the use of seclusion rooms as a calming tactic, and when their use was necessary, Pembina Hills administration would be notified, as would the parents.
Rob McGarva, director of student services, was apologetic about their use, fully acknowledging the possibly traumatizing impact of seclusion rooms on a child.
But what better option was there? Chemical restraints are unethical and potentially even more damaging, as are mechanical restraints (ie. actually strapping a child down).
So now we’re left with physically restraining a child — which itself seems like a disaster waiting to happen — or calling in outside help, like calling a parent.
That sounds good in theory but potentially difficult in practice. What if a parent can’t come to the school to help with their child’s outburst? Is the school going to call the RCMP?
Minister David Eggen was not wrong to ban the use of seclusion rooms, but neither were school divisions absolute villains for using them. Nor are these students to blame for acting up when they’re upset.
A situation like this defies easy answers.
