CHERRY HILL, N.J. (CBS 3) ―
Nov 28, 2007
Outraged parents attended a school board meeting Tuesday evening to discuss the discovery of a padded 'quiet room' inside a Cherry Hill school last month.
Parents met with school officials to discuss the room during a public meeting at the Clara Barton School on Rhode Island Avenue in Cherry Hill.
The room was first disclosed during an October meeting where parents were apparently told the padded room may have been used for children with autism and behavioral problems.
Concerned parent Lisa Grams used her cell phone to snap photos of the small, windowless storage room which was lined with gym mats.
"It made me sick. It made me absolutely sick," said Grams.
Grams said she took photos and video of the room while visiting the school in October.
"I walked into the room and it stunk so bad; the air was just very old. The gym mat, it smelled like urine," Grams said.
She said special education students notified her that other students with autism and other behavioral issues may have been put in the 'quiet room' in order to calm down.
Grams' son, who is autistic, was never placed in the room, but it concerned for other students at the school.
"How dare this school system treat small children so disrespectful," an outraged parent said during Tuesday night's meeting.
Not all parents were outraged over the school's actions. A parent of a special needs student applauded the district's polices.
"This is a dedicated group of people here in our administration," the parent said.
A School District spokesperson told CBS 3 the room was only used once under supervision for a student in crisis and they had received prior parental consent.
The school also followed up with the family after the incident and received no complaints. School officials said the room has been dismantled and has not been used since.
The Special Education Alliance:
http://www.cherryhillsea.com/paddedroom.htm
View photos of padded closet w/description:
http://revpage.com/tips/cherry%20hill/russell_knight_school.htm
Showing posts with label November 2007. Show all posts
Showing posts with label November 2007. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Best Practices in Behavior Management
By Kathi Magee
Courier Post Online - Autism Blog
November 20, 2007
Reprinted with Permission
Many have emailed me personally about the Best Practice Guidelines from the Children's Welfare League of America (CWLA). Some inquired as to how they came about, others asked for the specific guidelines and why Cherry Hill does not follow them.
Let me begin by explaining how the CWLA came to their conclusions on what is considered "Best Practice." The CWLA was a participant in the Children's Health Act of 2000. They also wrote the Best Practice Guidelines for Behavior Management. Through their acquired experience they became all too familiar with the dangers associated with restraining special needs children, as many had incurred significant injuries and in some cases children actually died from the use of physical restraint. The CWLA was also familiar with the psychological impact that restraint and seclusion had on special needs children. These children became more anxious, and their behaviors worsened when secluded. After several years of writing and re-writing their guidelines on restraint and seclusion, the CWLA came to realize that the bigger problem was that restraint and seclusion could not possibly be part of any "Best Practice" approach. These techniques needed to be prevented and eliminated as much as possible. Restraint and seclusion serve no educational value and these practices injure and in some cases led to the death of special needs children.
The CWLA was also aware that training alone was not enough to reduce restraint and seclusion. Although staff training is a key aspect, many times the core leadership, needs to be changed in order to facilitate the culture change necessary to eliminate the need for restraint and seclusion.
"To truly reduce, if not eliminate these aversive techniques, it would require a change in leadership and a change in the organizational culture." (quote from the CWLA's report on preventing and reducing the use of restraint and seclusion.)
After numerous revisions of their Best Practice Guidelines, by September 2003 they changed the name of the grant to Best Practices in Behavior Support and Intervention: Preventing and Reducing the Use of Restraint and Seclusion.
The five goals for the Best Practices in Behavior Support and Intervention are:
1. Staff will use restraint and seclusion in emergency situations only when absolutely necessary to maintain the safety of themselves, [students], and others.
2. Eliminate the unnecessary use of restraint and seclusion.
3. Reduce the risk of deaths.
4. Reduce injuries among [children] and staff.
5. Reduce the duration of restraint and seclusion.
6. Increase debriefing with children, family members, and staff.
*Please note: As these goals were written to include children in residential facilities, I have substituted the word "resident" with the word "student" or "children" as necessary.
The CWLA strongly recommends the establishment of an Oversight Committee to monitor the reduction of such aversive techniques. The committee should include executive leadership (administrators), supervisors, staff members (teachers and aides), advocates and parents. The sole focus of the oversight committee is to monitor the campaign to reduce the use of restraint and seclusion.
Courier Post Online - Autism Blog
November 20, 2007
Reprinted with Permission
Many have emailed me personally about the Best Practice Guidelines from the Children's Welfare League of America (CWLA). Some inquired as to how they came about, others asked for the specific guidelines and why Cherry Hill does not follow them.
Let me begin by explaining how the CWLA came to their conclusions on what is considered "Best Practice." The CWLA was a participant in the Children's Health Act of 2000. They also wrote the Best Practice Guidelines for Behavior Management. Through their acquired experience they became all too familiar with the dangers associated with restraining special needs children, as many had incurred significant injuries and in some cases children actually died from the use of physical restraint. The CWLA was also familiar with the psychological impact that restraint and seclusion had on special needs children. These children became more anxious, and their behaviors worsened when secluded. After several years of writing and re-writing their guidelines on restraint and seclusion, the CWLA came to realize that the bigger problem was that restraint and seclusion could not possibly be part of any "Best Practice" approach. These techniques needed to be prevented and eliminated as much as possible. Restraint and seclusion serve no educational value and these practices injure and in some cases led to the death of special needs children.
The CWLA was also aware that training alone was not enough to reduce restraint and seclusion. Although staff training is a key aspect, many times the core leadership, needs to be changed in order to facilitate the culture change necessary to eliminate the need for restraint and seclusion.
"To truly reduce, if not eliminate these aversive techniques, it would require a change in leadership and a change in the organizational culture." (quote from the CWLA's report on preventing and reducing the use of restraint and seclusion.)
After numerous revisions of their Best Practice Guidelines, by September 2003 they changed the name of the grant to Best Practices in Behavior Support and Intervention: Preventing and Reducing the Use of Restraint and Seclusion.
The five goals for the Best Practices in Behavior Support and Intervention are:
1. Staff will use restraint and seclusion in emergency situations only when absolutely necessary to maintain the safety of themselves, [students], and others.
2. Eliminate the unnecessary use of restraint and seclusion.
3. Reduce the risk of deaths.
4. Reduce injuries among [children] and staff.
5. Reduce the duration of restraint and seclusion.
6. Increase debriefing with children, family members, and staff.
*Please note: As these goals were written to include children in residential facilities, I have substituted the word "resident" with the word "student" or "children" as necessary.
The CWLA strongly recommends the establishment of an Oversight Committee to monitor the reduction of such aversive techniques. The committee should include executive leadership (administrators), supervisors, staff members (teachers and aides), advocates and parents. The sole focus of the oversight committee is to monitor the campaign to reduce the use of restraint and seclusion.
- The committee must be empowered to implement changes (NETI, 2003).
- It should ensure that an executive team leader is on-call and that staff immediately report every incident of restraint and seclusion to him or her.
- The committee should carefully review every physical intervention incident, take responsibility for recommending any program or policy revisions based on incident review, and make sure that staff members are receiving the necessary resources to realize the committee's mission (Abrams, 2001).
The CWLA strongly believes that every time physical interventions become necessary it is an indication that the child's program has failed.
How can this help our special needs children in Cherry Hill?
First, we as a community must come to the realization that the Best Practice Guidelines must be adhered to in educating our special needs population. This will help both our special needs population as well as our typical students. It will also provide for training of our teachers and aides that are working with our children on a daily basis.
I think we can all agree that aversive techniques do not "teach" our children the skills to maintain themselves in a socially appropriate manner. Restraint and seclusion do not foster a child's development and do not serve any educational value.
Teaching the appropriate skills so that children can regulate their own behavior and focusing on the positive interventions for behavior modification should be the standard approach in our school district. It also happens to be the law. Any school administrator that does not comprehend this essential concept in behavior management should not be a school administrator.
Moving Forward:
Many parents have voiced their concerns about the use of physical restraint and seclusion as it applies to our special needs children. The blog that focused on this topic has continued to receive reader comments, which are now in excess of 130! While I am reasonably sure that the Board of Education continues to follow this blog, I think it may be important for parents to address the BOE about this topic during the next BOE meeting (Tuesday 11/27/07, 7:00 PM at Clara Barton Elementary School).
I think the BOE needs to hear from parents, as it pertains to the concerns regarding restraint and seclusion practices. Our BOE should also be made "officially" aware of the fact that parents have tried to follow the Chain of Command in resolving this critical issue. The fact that administrators, including our Superintendent, refused to address the matter with parents, does not mean that parents did not attempt to follow the Chain of Command. We have been given the usual runaround and parents need to advise the BOE of this.
If you are a parent that has tried to follow the Chain of Command, only to be referred back to the first link - it is important that you let the BOE know this. It is my understanding that our administrators position is that they have not received any complaints about this situation.It is highly possible that the BOE was given a watered down version of this padded closet and it's uses. It may be important for the BOE to hear the other side of this issue and learn more about this padded closet and the detrimental impact it could have on our children.
It has become apparent that many have lost faith in our current school administration. The fact that our administrator's even allowed this padded closet to be constructed, let alone defended its' use, is grounds for any parent to question the morals and integrity of our administrators. To add insult to injury, many were denied access to administrators when we had questions about this matter. Also, some of the comments that were left on the two prior blogs, presumably from administrators; have now led to a serious lack of confidence in the administration's ability or willfulness to provide a safe learning environment for our children. This too, needs to be brought to the attention of the BOE.
If we approach the BOE, during public comment, in a thoughtful and dignified manner, explaining our overall concerns, I believe we can make a great deal of progress and set forth measures to eliminate these aversive techniques in the future and hopefully foster an environment where parents, teachers and administrators can work together for the common good of our children.
There is some indication that our teachers support our position on this issue. We have had several teachers write in on the blog that have indicated the lack of training in regards to applying these positive interventions. Our teachers and aides have been requesting this critical training for some time. They are interested in applying these positive strategies to not only "teach" our children the necessary skills but also to reduce the incidents of restraint and seclusion. With all of the issues that our teaching staff is facing (working without a contract) I applaud them for taking the time to support parents on this issue.
Please join me at the next BOE meeting to stand up for the children in Cherry Hill that require positive behavioral supports. Mark your calendar for Tuesday, November 27, 2007 at 7:00 PM. This meeting is at Clara Barton Elementary School.
Since many have asked, and a few administrators have alluded to the fact that this padded closet did not exist, I am providing the pictures of the padded closet for anyone interested in viewing them. You will quickly realize why I do not like referring to this as a Quiet Room, as it was quite literally a padded closet! Click here to see the photos.
Please Note: I am not supplying these photos to "stir the pot" as an administrator accused me of recently. I want readers to see exactly what we are referring to and form their own conclusions.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Shackles Case Prompts Policy Change
Shackles case prompts policy change
Published: Thursday, November 15, 2007
By Nancy Remsen
Burlington Free Press Staff Writer
An investigation into the use of shackles, deputies and a police cruiser to move a 7-year-old boy with mental illness between two hospitals led this week to a change in transport policy at Rutland Regional Medical Center.
Jill Jesso-White, spokeswoman for the medical center said that from now on, Rutland psychiatric patients -- adults and children -- who are being involuntarily committed to another hospital will travel in an ambulance under the least restrictive circumstances possible.
A deputy sheriff might accompany emergency medical personnel and the patient, Jesso-White said. "We don't plan on it being in shackles."
The change in policy comes after Vermont Protection and Advocacy Inc. criticized the hospital for placing a child in a cruiser wearing metal handcuffs for the 75-mile trip to The Retreat in Brattleboro without medical personnel. The incident occurred a year ago.
The child's grandmother and guardian, who persuaded law enforcement to let her ride along, complained to Vermont Protection and Advocacy, an organization charged with investigating allegations of abuse and neglect of people with disabilities. The organization issued its report to the public Wednesday but had already provided it to officials at Rutland Regional Medical Center.
"We took the matter very seriously," Jesso-White said. "We took it as an opportunity to review our practices."
In its report, Vermont Protection and Advocacy detailed how the boy, who has a history of mental illness that includes bipolar disorder and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, ended up in the emergency department of Rutland Regional Medical Center on two consecutive days after being disruptive at school. The second time, a Rutland police officer brought him to the hospital after he ran out of the school building, found a pipe and swung it at staff chasing him.
His grandmother agreed reluctantly to send him to The Retreat in Brattleboro for evaluation, never realizing he would travel in shackles.
Vermont Protection and Advocacy questioned whether the child needed a secure form of transportation for the trip because hospital records showed he was quiet for several hours before the departure.
More significantly, said A.J Rubin, VP&A's supervising attorney, it was illegal for the child to be sent in shackles with police but without medical personnel.
Lawmakers and mental health advocates began raising concerns four years ago about the mode of transportation being used to move acutely ill psychiatric patients. In 2004 the Legislature passed a law that directed "all reasonable and appropriate efforts" be made to use the least restrictive means possible. In 2006, the Legislature strengthened the law, saying, "It is the policy of the state of Vermont that mechanical restraints are not routinely used."
Still, a significant number of psychiatric patients -- including children -- have continued to be moved between hospitals in restraints in police cruisers because the patients are deemed dangers to themselves or others. The Vermont Protection and Advocacy investigation cited state data showing that half the 60 children sent to The Retreat in Brattleboro between September 2005 and January 2006 traveled in cruisers.
Only Southwestern Vermont Medical Center in Bennington has made it a practice to use ambulances rather than cruisers to move psychiatric patients.
In June, the HowardCenter and Washington County Mental Health Services expanded the options for patients in northwestern and central Vermont when they announced they would buy vans. The two agencies have trained staff who accompany patients in the vans or in ambulances. The new vans are equipped with comfortable seats, a selection of music and videos to reduce patients' stress.
Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, helped write the legislation that put restrictions on patient transportation. She became aware of the case involving the 7-year-old boy only Wednesday.
"After the Legislature speaking so clearly, how could anyone with a 7-year-old even think of doing it?" she asked. The law was strengthened in 2006, she said, because of the outrage that a 10-year-old autistic boy had been transported in shackles.
Contact Nancy Remsen at 651-4888 or nremsenb@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com
Published: Thursday, November 15, 2007
By Nancy Remsen
Burlington Free Press Staff Writer
An investigation into the use of shackles, deputies and a police cruiser to move a 7-year-old boy with mental illness between two hospitals led this week to a change in transport policy at Rutland Regional Medical Center.
Jill Jesso-White, spokeswoman for the medical center said that from now on, Rutland psychiatric patients -- adults and children -- who are being involuntarily committed to another hospital will travel in an ambulance under the least restrictive circumstances possible.
A deputy sheriff might accompany emergency medical personnel and the patient, Jesso-White said. "We don't plan on it being in shackles."
The change in policy comes after Vermont Protection and Advocacy Inc. criticized the hospital for placing a child in a cruiser wearing metal handcuffs for the 75-mile trip to The Retreat in Brattleboro without medical personnel. The incident occurred a year ago.
The child's grandmother and guardian, who persuaded law enforcement to let her ride along, complained to Vermont Protection and Advocacy, an organization charged with investigating allegations of abuse and neglect of people with disabilities. The organization issued its report to the public Wednesday but had already provided it to officials at Rutland Regional Medical Center.
"We took the matter very seriously," Jesso-White said. "We took it as an opportunity to review our practices."
In its report, Vermont Protection and Advocacy detailed how the boy, who has a history of mental illness that includes bipolar disorder and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, ended up in the emergency department of Rutland Regional Medical Center on two consecutive days after being disruptive at school. The second time, a Rutland police officer brought him to the hospital after he ran out of the school building, found a pipe and swung it at staff chasing him.
His grandmother agreed reluctantly to send him to The Retreat in Brattleboro for evaluation, never realizing he would travel in shackles.
Vermont Protection and Advocacy questioned whether the child needed a secure form of transportation for the trip because hospital records showed he was quiet for several hours before the departure.
More significantly, said A.J Rubin, VP&A's supervising attorney, it was illegal for the child to be sent in shackles with police but without medical personnel.
Lawmakers and mental health advocates began raising concerns four years ago about the mode of transportation being used to move acutely ill psychiatric patients. In 2004 the Legislature passed a law that directed "all reasonable and appropriate efforts" be made to use the least restrictive means possible. In 2006, the Legislature strengthened the law, saying, "It is the policy of the state of Vermont that mechanical restraints are not routinely used."
Still, a significant number of psychiatric patients -- including children -- have continued to be moved between hospitals in restraints in police cruisers because the patients are deemed dangers to themselves or others. The Vermont Protection and Advocacy investigation cited state data showing that half the 60 children sent to The Retreat in Brattleboro between September 2005 and January 2006 traveled in cruisers.
Only Southwestern Vermont Medical Center in Bennington has made it a practice to use ambulances rather than cruisers to move psychiatric patients.
In June, the HowardCenter and Washington County Mental Health Services expanded the options for patients in northwestern and central Vermont when they announced they would buy vans. The two agencies have trained staff who accompany patients in the vans or in ambulances. The new vans are equipped with comfortable seats, a selection of music and videos to reduce patients' stress.
Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, helped write the legislation that put restrictions on patient transportation. She became aware of the case involving the 7-year-old boy only Wednesday.
"After the Legislature speaking so clearly, how could anyone with a 7-year-old even think of doing it?" she asked. The law was strengthened in 2006, she said, because of the outrage that a 10-year-old autistic boy had been transported in shackles.
Contact Nancy Remsen at 651-4888 or nremsenb@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com
Thursday, November 15, 2007
St. Lucie County bus aide accused of hitting student
PORT ST. LUCIE — An aide on a school bus primarily for special-needs children is facing a felony child abuse charge after allegedly hitting a 7-year-old boy, police said Friday.
Belinda "Gail" Daniels, 45, of the 1900 block of Avenue K in Fort Pierce, allegedly struck the special-needs child Sept. 12 on the ride to school, and police and school district officials ensured she "was no longer on a bus," Officer Cherie Lucas said.
PDF: Read the arrest report.
Lucas said video captured by cameras on the bus, which had about eight children on it at the time, played a key role in the case.
The victim, who was sitting down, reportedly dropped his bookbag and was bending down to reach it when Daniels picked it up from the seat behind him.
"Daniels yells at the victim, saying, 'Boy, what did you do? Get in that seat,' " Lucas wrote in a portion of a warrant application that summarizes the video. "
She then reaches into the seat where the victim was, and she 'swats' something in the seat, but you cannot actually see what her hand connects with."
Lucas said one witness reportedly saw Daniels' hand make contact with the victim.
"I believe in my mind that any reasonable person looking at that video would believe that the child was struck," Lucas said. "It substantiated everything that the original witness, the complainant, told me."
Daniels then yanked the victim up and "roughly" put him in the seat, Lucas said.
But Daniels told investigators she hit no one.
"I would never do anything to put my job in jeopardy," she is quoted as saying in a warrant application. "I am a Christian woman who reads my Bible and I listen to my gospel music."
St. Lucie County Schools Personnel Director Maurice Bonner said Daniels as of Friday is still a district employee. Bonner said the district is aware of the incident and is investigating the issue and won't comment until after the investigation is completed.
It took several days for police to determine the victim's identity, get statements from witnesses, question Daniels and consult with the state attorney's office. The victim wasn't injured and "had no knowledge of what happened," Lucas said.
Daniels was arrested in 1985 on a fraud charge and convicted, though an unemployment fraud charge brought against her in 1994 was dropped, according to Florida Department of Law Enforcement records.
Janice Karst, school district spokeswoman, said convicted felons aren't eligible for employment with the district, but those with misdemeanor convictions can be hired depending on what the misdemeanor was and if the applicant is forthcoming with the information. But if the charge relates to "moral turpitude" or is "anything that would negatively impact their being around students" or school operations, then they likely wouldn't be hired.
Daniels received generally high evaluations dating back to 2001, according to school district records.
A 2003 evaluation notes she's a "very compassionate and caring individual" and "goes above and beyond her duties to assist with difficult situations."
Daniels was released Friday afternoon from the St. Lucie County jail on $1,000 bail, a jail official said.
Staff writer Keona Gardner contributed to this report.
Belinda "Gail" Daniels, 45, of the 1900 block of Avenue K in Fort Pierce, allegedly struck the special-needs child Sept. 12 on the ride to school, and police and school district officials ensured she "was no longer on a bus," Officer Cherie Lucas said.
PDF: Read the arrest report.
Lucas said video captured by cameras on the bus, which had about eight children on it at the time, played a key role in the case.
The victim, who was sitting down, reportedly dropped his bookbag and was bending down to reach it when Daniels picked it up from the seat behind him.
"Daniels yells at the victim, saying, 'Boy, what did you do? Get in that seat,' " Lucas wrote in a portion of a warrant application that summarizes the video. "
She then reaches into the seat where the victim was, and she 'swats' something in the seat, but you cannot actually see what her hand connects with."
Lucas said one witness reportedly saw Daniels' hand make contact with the victim.
"I believe in my mind that any reasonable person looking at that video would believe that the child was struck," Lucas said. "It substantiated everything that the original witness, the complainant, told me."
Daniels then yanked the victim up and "roughly" put him in the seat, Lucas said.
But Daniels told investigators she hit no one.
"I would never do anything to put my job in jeopardy," she is quoted as saying in a warrant application. "I am a Christian woman who reads my Bible and I listen to my gospel music."
St. Lucie County Schools Personnel Director Maurice Bonner said Daniels as of Friday is still a district employee. Bonner said the district is aware of the incident and is investigating the issue and won't comment until after the investigation is completed.
It took several days for police to determine the victim's identity, get statements from witnesses, question Daniels and consult with the state attorney's office. The victim wasn't injured and "had no knowledge of what happened," Lucas said.
Daniels was arrested in 1985 on a fraud charge and convicted, though an unemployment fraud charge brought against her in 1994 was dropped, according to Florida Department of Law Enforcement records.
Janice Karst, school district spokeswoman, said convicted felons aren't eligible for employment with the district, but those with misdemeanor convictions can be hired depending on what the misdemeanor was and if the applicant is forthcoming with the information. But if the charge relates to "moral turpitude" or is "anything that would negatively impact their being around students" or school operations, then they likely wouldn't be hired.
Daniels received generally high evaluations dating back to 2001, according to school district records.
A 2003 evaluation notes she's a "very compassionate and caring individual" and "goes above and beyond her duties to assist with difficult situations."
Daniels was released Friday afternoon from the St. Lucie County jail on $1,000 bail, a jail official said.
Staff writer Keona Gardner contributed to this report.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)