Bibliography for ‘Shouldn’t School Be Safe?’ a TASH webinar

February 17, 2012

This bibliography is a companion piece to the presentation ‘Shouldn’t School Be Safe?’ a TASH webinar shared by  by Pat Amos during the Autism Safety and Crisis Prevention webinar. The presentation contains a link to the TASH publication of the same name, which is available for free download on the TASH website. This link will take you to the section of the TASH website where we have archived free resources on preventing restraint and seclusion:

This bibliography also contains basic research and information that will allow parents to become familiar with the evidence base surrounding the dangers and the inappropriateness of using restraint, seclusion, and other aversive interventions as part of a child’s education or behavior support plan.  Since federal education law requires schools to implement evidence-based practices, parents may wish to use this information in developing their child’s IEP.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY for : Shouldn’t School Be Safe? What every parent and advocate should know NOW  (compiled by Pat Amos);

  • Alliance to Prevent Restraint, Aversive Interventions, and Seclusion (APRAIS) (2005).  In the Name of Treatment.  Available online.
  • Alliance to Prevent Restraint, Aversive Interventions, and Seclusion (APRAIS) (2011). Use of Restraint, Seclusion, and Aversive Procedures with Students with Disabilities .
  • Bogdan, R., and Taylor, S.J. (1989). “Relationships with Severely Disabled People: The Social Construction of Humanness,” in Social Problems 36,2:135-148.
  • Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA) (2009).  Unsafe in the Schoolhouse.  Available online.
  • Hardenstine, B. (2001).  Leading the Way Toward a Seclusion and Restraint-Free Environment.  Commonwealth of Pennsylvania: Department of Public Welfare.
  • Harris, S. L., Handleman, J.S., Gill, M. J. & Fong, P. L. (1991). Does Punishment Hurt?  The Impact of Aversives on the Clinician.  Research in Developmental Disabilities, 12, 17-24.
  • Helmstetter, E., Peck, C. A., & Giangreco, M. F. (1994). “Outcomes of interactions with peers with moderate or severe disabilities: A statewide survey of high school students,” in JASH, Vol. 19, 263-276.
  • Herman, J .L. (1992). Trauma and Recovery.  NY: Basic Books.
  • Huckshorn, K. A.(2007).  Six Core Strategies for Reducing Seclusion and Restraint Use.  Available online.
  • Hunt, P., Staub, D., Alwell, M., & Goetz, L. (1994). “Achievement by all students within the context of cooperative learning groups,” in JASH, Vol. 19, pp. 290-301.
  • Hyman, I. A. (1995). Corporal punishment, psychological maltreatment, violence, and punitiveness in America. Research, advocacy, and public policy. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 4, 113-130.
  • Hyman, I. A. (1996). Corporal punishment. In T. Fagan, & P. Wardon (Eds.), Historical Encyclopedia of School Psychology (pp. 92-93). Westport, CT: Greenwood
  • Kennedy, S. S. (2005). Using Restraint: The Legal Context of High Risk Interventions.  Presentation at “Examining the Safety of High-Risk Interventions,” Cornell University, June 1-4.
  • Kennedy, S. S. and Mohr, W. K. (2001).  A Prolegomena on Restraint of Children: Implicating constitutional rights.  American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 71(1), 26-37.
  • Kipnis, D. (1987).  Psychology and Behavioral Technology. American Psychologist, 42(1), 30-36.
  • Kishi, G. S., & Meyer, L. H. (1994). “What children report and remember: A six-year follow-up of the effects of social contact between peers with and without severe disabilities, “ in JASH, Vol. 19, pp. 277-289
  • LeBel, J., and Goldstein, R. (2005). The Economic Cost of Using Restraint and the Value Added by Restraint Reduction or Elimination,” by Psychiatric Services, 56:1109-1114.  Available online.
  • Marquis, J., Horner, R., et al. (2000).  A Meta-Analysis of Positive Behavior Support. In Contemporary Special Education Research: Syntheses of the Knowledge Base on Critical Instructional Issues ed. Russell Gersten, Ellen P. Schiller, and Sharon Vaughn Mahwah, New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Miller, D. C., George, M. and Fogt, J.B. (2005). “Establishing and Sustaining Research-Based Practices at Centennial School:  A descriptive case study of systemic change,” Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 42(5).  Available online.
  • Miller, D. E. (1986). The management of misbehavior by seclusion. Residential Treatment for Children and Youth, 4, 63-73.
  • Mohr W. K., and Anderson, J. A. (2001). Faulty assumptions associated with the use of restraints with children. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 14, 141- 151.
  • Mohr, W. K., Petti, T. A., Mohr, B. D. (2003). Adverse Effects Associated with Physical Restraint.  The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48, 330-337.
  • National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors. (1999). Reducing the Use of Seclusion and Restraint: Findings, strategies and recommendations. Alexandria, VA. Available online.
  • National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) (2009). School is not supposed to hurt.  Available online.
  • National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) (2010). School is not supposed to hurt: update on progress in 2009 to prevent and reduce restraint and seclusion in schools .  Available online.
  • National Technical Assistance Center for State Mental Health Planning (2002).  Eliminating the Use of Seclusion and Restraint: Special Edition of NTAC Networks.  Alexandria, VA.  Available online.
  • Perry, B.D. (1997). Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental factors in the “cycle of violence.” In J. Osofsky (Ed.),  Children in a Violent Society, 124-149. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Perry, B. D., Pollard, R. A., Blakley, T. L., Baker, W. L., and Vigilante, D. (1995). Childhood Trauma, the Neurobiology of Adaptation and Use-dependent Development of the Brain: How states become traits.  Infant Mental Health Journal, 16, 271-289.
  • Pflueger, W. (2002).  “Consumer View: Restraint is Not Therapeutic.”  In Violence and Coercion in Mental Health Settings: Eliminating the Use of Seclusion and Restraint,” a Special Edition of NTAC Networks, Summer-Fall.  Alexandria, VA:  National Technical Assistance Center for State Mental Health Planning.  Available online.
  • Scotti, Joseph, Evans, Ian, Meyer, Luanna, and Walker, Pamela (1991). A Meta-Analysis of Intervention Research with Problem Behavior: Treatment Validity and Standards of Practice. American Journal on Mental Retardation, Vol. 96, No. 3, pp. 233-256.
  • Steel, E. (1999). Seclusion and Restraint Practice Standards: A Review and Analysis.  National Mental Health Association Technical Assistance Center (NTAC). Available online.
  • Stefan, S. (2006).  Lessons from the Successful Reduction and Elimination of Restraint and Seclusion in Psychiatric Settings.  Presented at TASH Annual Conference 11/8/06, Baltimore, MD.
  • TASH (2011).  Shouldn’t School Be Safe?   Available online: http://tash.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/TASH_Shouldnt-School-Be-Safe1.pdf
  • TASH (2011). The Cost of Waiting: Use of restraints, seclusion, and aversive procedures with students with disabilities.  Available online.
  • Turnbull, H. R., Wilcox, B. L., Stowe, M., Raper, C., Hedges, L. P. (2000).  Public Policy Foundations for Positive Behavioral Interventions, Strategies, and Supports.  Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 2 (4).
  • Turnbull, H. R., Wilcox, B. L., Turnbull, A. P., Sailor, W., Wickham, D. (2001).  The IDEA, Positive Behavioral Supports, and School Safety.  Journal of Law and Education, 30(3).
  • U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) (1999).  Improper Restraint or Seclusion Use Places People At Risk. (GAO publication HEH-99-176).  Washington, D.C.: USGAO.  Available online.
  • U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) (2007). Residential Treatment Programs: Concerns Regarding Abuse and Death in Certain Programs for Troubled Youth.  (GAO-08-146T). Washington, D.C.: USGAO.  Available online.
  • United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) (2008). Residential Programs: Selected Cases of Death, Abuse, and Deceptive Marketing, GAO-08-713T Washington, D.C.: USGAO.  Available online.
  • United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) (2009).  Seclusions and Restraints:  Selected Cases of Deaths and Abuse at Public and Private Schools and Treatment Centers. (GAO-09-719T). Washington, D.C.: USGAO.  Available online.
  • Witte, L. (2008). “Reducing the use of seclusion and restraint: A Michigan provider reduced its use of seclusion and restraint by 93% in one year on its child and adolescent unit,” Behavioral Healthcare, April 2008.  Available online.

Preventing and Eliminating the Use of Restraints and Seclusion in Schools

February 13, 2012

Successful reforms have taken place in health care settings, in nursing homes, and in programs treating mental illness, but currently there is no federal law that prohibits in public and private school the use of face down restraints, aversive interventions, restraints that restrict breathing, and locked seclusion.  These practices can result in serious injury, psychological trauma, and even death.

What can we do about this? the first step is to get informed. On Saturday, February 18, 10:00 – 11:30 am PST (1:00 pm – 2:30 pm EST) Pat Amos M.A.,  will be presenting on:  Preventing and Eliminating the Use of Restraints and Seclusion To register for free, go here.

This webinar is part of a series of on-line conference webinars on Autism Safety and Crisis Prevention offerred for free by Autism College in partnership with the National Autism Association (NAA), and sponsored in part by The Social Express.

Description of Presentation Topic:  Preventing and Eliminating the Use of Restraints and Seclusion

The rising tide of Positive Behavior Supports has not lifted all boats, and many students with autism and related disabilities continue to be subjected to the use of restraint, seclusion, and other aversives as part of their education and behavior intervention plans. Successful reforms have taken place in health care settings, in nursing homes, and in programs treating mental illness, but many of our schools have not yet “gotten the word” that these techniques are inherently unsafe and can result in serious injury, psychological trauma, and even death. Evidence clearly shows that restraint and seclusion are not education; they are the failure of education. This webinar will help parents, advocates, and teachers understand how to work together to eliminate these highly dangerous and counterproductive techniques.

Presenter: Pat Amos, M.A., has been an advocate for people with disabilities and their families for over 25 years. She is a founder of Autism Support and Advocacy in Pennsylvania and the Family Alliance to Stop Abuse and Neglect, past president of the Greater Philadelphia Autism Society, a founder and past president of the Autism National Committee, has served as a member of Pennsylvania’s Developmental Disabilities Council, and is a Board member of international TASH.  She currently works as an Inclusion Specialist with the Youth Advocate Program’s Autism Institute.   Her involvement in the movement to prevent restraint and seclusion is longstanding, and she has worked with the national Alliance for the Prevention of Restraint, Aversive Interventions, and Seclusion (APRAIS) since participating in its founding in 2004.

Register here for the conference.