"guide". In other words, staff are not even required to follow the policy. This has been the standard response by DET to other of its documents, making most publications from DET meaningless. The current Restraint Policy is completely inadequate, and given the nature of most of its contents, can be relied upon to give little or no assistance to staff. The Federation of Community Legal Centres’ Submission on the Draft Proposed National Framework for Reducing the Use of Restrictive Practices in the Disability Service Sector made the following points: “The recent DEECD Restraint Policy dated 2012 can be compared to the Office of the Senior Practitioner May 2011 guidelines on restrictive practices. The DEECD policy: Allows restraint to prevent the student from ‘inflicting harm’ on themselves or others. Such a phrase, not identifying the seriousness of that harm, allows a teacher to restrain in the event of a child simply hitting another child. There is no attempt to define ‘harm’, and therefore each staff person is able to interpret the phrase individually. Allows restraint when there is ‘no reasonable alternative’ that can be taken to avoid the danger. There is no guidance to staff on what ‘reasonable alternatives’ may be, and there is no definition of ‘danger’. Disallows restraint unless ‘alternative measures to avoid the danger have been exhausted’. There is no attempt to give guidance on what may be ‘alternative measures’. Gives no guidance on which restraint holds are acceptable and which are not. There is no warning that restraints have been known to cause death and injury, or which restraints are most likely to do so. States that it is ‘advisable’ that staff using restraint should be trained. It gives no guidance on that training, and in fact the DEECD openly admits to using martial arts instructors as trainers. Asks staff to ‘consider’ a number of factors such as ‘medical conditions’ and so on but gives no guidance as to how they should consider such factors, and how those factors will be impacted upon by the use of restraint. Does not require permission for restraint from any person within or outside the organisation that may have expertise in this area. There is no mention of Positive Behaviour Support, Functional Behaviour Assessment and Analysis, or the role of psychologists in the mitigation of challenging behaviours.”
Staff at Bendigo Special Developmental School report having received pressure point training from Mr Sumarac and have been observed to use that ‘technique’ on students with disabilities. Using masking tape around the wrists is documented as a strategy to stop a student removing his clothing in a Bendigo SDS behaviour plan. All behaviour strategies included in plans are signed off by the Principal. A parent at Marnebek School observed a child being rolled up in a blanket and dragged down a corridor in response to non-compliance. It difficult to know just how long the Martial Arts ‘Therapy’ ("MAT") Program has been running using MAT Support Officers ("MSOs") to work with children with moderate to severe challenging behaviours. It is important to understand that this is not describing a program that teaches students martial arts. MSO’s are trained in "safe restraint techniques". It is not clear whether martial arts experts are training these personnel, but given the name of the program, it is likely. Once again, this is a program being advertised by Eastern Metropolitan Region of DET in place of any formal training occurring in Behaviour Analysis. It was as recently as August 2014 that Anzuk, a recruiting agency, were advertising for the position of Martial Arts Therapy Aides to work "in a range of special needs and primary schools in Melbourne's eastern suburbs". As is consistent with the use of euphemisms by DET to distract parents from the real nature of such "supports", DET choose to put the word "therapy" after the words "Martial Arts" in order one assumes, to soften the description. A component for those who wished to apply, was working previously in a special need setting or school. This, one can infer, is because the focus is on using martial arts rather than having any expertise in educating children with disabilities. DET includes in the key selection criteria for such staff, "a caring and enthusiastic nature". Research and evidence seems to have passed DET by in relation to the fact that restraint causes injury, death, and trauma. This advertisement was withdrawn as soon as a story in The Age newspaper appeared discussing the advertisement. Reports continue to be made in relation to restrictive practices used against students with disabilities in schools. Every year that DET refuse to prohibit seclusion, one can only assume that it is being used. Indeed special schools continue to be built with such purpose-built rooms. The result of the failure by DET to use evidence based psychological behaviour interventions to respond to challenging behaviours