Bill making it easier to restrain and seclude students passed by Maine lawmakers
Gardiner-area Superintendent Patricia Hopkins testifies at an education committee public hearing in favor of a bill that would ease restrictions on restraint and seclusion. (Photo by Eesha Pendharkar/ Maine Morning Star)
Both chambers of the Maine Legislature advanced a version of a bill that would make it easier for school staff to restrain and seclude students, weakening a law passed in 2021 restricting the use of practices that experts say cause lasting trauma.
Maine has historically led the country in its use of these practices, which include physically immobilizing students and placing them in small rooms, with educators predominantly using them on students with disabilities. Restraint and seclusion practices have been used more than 22,000 times in Maine in some years, and the real number is even higher, since many large districts do not submit their data to the state despite reporting being required by the 2021 law.
This year, citing increased issues with student behavior, some teachers and administrators pushed to relax the restrictions.
'It broke him, and it broke me': Parents, educators describe trauma from restraint and seclusion
Despite disability rights advocates sounding the alarm at the public hearing for the bill, lawmakers in both the Maine House of Representatives and the Senate voted to pass LD 1248.
'While most states are looking at bills this session that provide greater protections for students and more resources for educators, Maine is one of the few states that is looking to roll back protections for students,' said Ben Jones, director of legal and policy initiatives for Lives in the Balance, a Maine-based national nonprofit that offers training for schools on how to move away from restraint and seclusion.'It is a serious disappointment.'
Under Maine law, restraint and seclusion are only supposed to be used in case of emergencies, where the student's behavior poses 'imminent risk of serious physical injury' to themselves or others. The original proposal changed that to risk of injury after some educators said they interpreted the law to mean they couldn't use these practices to prevent a potentially dangerous situation unless a teacher could be injured severely enough to seek outside medical care.
'Staff are being hit, they're being bit, but it doesn't meet the threshold of serious imminent danger, because a 5-year-old isn't going to [cause] an injury that requires medical care,' said Gardiner-area Superintendent Patricia Hopkins during the April 23 public hearing.
The amended version of the bill defines 'serious physical injury' to mean 'any impairment of the physical condition of a person, whether self-inflicted or inflicted by someone else, that requires a medical practitioner, including, but not limited to, a school nurse, to evaluate or treat the person.' This definition was already included in Chapter 33, the Maine Department of Education rules governing restraint and seclusion.
Another aspect of the bill allows educators to move students without their consent without having to document the incident as a restraint.
Atlee Reilly of Disability Rights Maine told lawmakers at the work session for LD 1248 that if the bill passes, schools will no longer have to report these kinds of incidents where staff forcibly move students, which he explained will likely mean the number of documented restraints could decrease.
'What we're going to do is take a whole class of stuff — like the physical management of students that I think most people would look at and say, that child's being restrained — and say it's no longer restraint,' Reilly said.
He added, 'It doesn't mean that people are going to be putting their hands on kids less.'
Jones said these changes 'were conjured up by schools' lawyers who will surely use the new language as legal cover to protect schools, not kids.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
16 minutes ago
- The Hill
Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in an interview Friday brushed off Elon Musk's campaign spending threats in light of the tech billionaire's public fallout with President Trump, suggesting he isn't worried. The spat between Trump and Musk began with the latter's criticism of the president's legislative agenda making its way through Congress. Johnson said he built a closer relationship with the then-special government employee and that the tech mogul has been led astray regarding the 'big beautiful' spending package. 'Look, it doesn't concern me. We're going to win either way because we're going to win on our policies we're delivering for hardworking Americans and fulfilling those promises,' Johnson told Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime.' 'But look, I like Elon and respect him. I mean, we became friends in all this process,' he continued. 'I've been texting with him even this week … in trying to make sure that he has accurate information about the bill. I think he has been misled about it.' Musk, who contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to assist in Trump's win in the 2024 presidential election, was the biggest donor during the White House race. Amid his recent spat with Trump, which broke out in public as the two traded insults and threats, Musk argued that without his political expenditures, Trump would have lost to former Vice President Harris, Republicans would lose the majority in the House and the GOP would have failed to flip the majority in the Senate. Trump then threatened to have all federal contracts associated with the billionaire's companies to be cut off. As the fight between the two intensified, the tech executive floated the idea of forming a third party and accused the president of being named in the late Jeffrey Epstein's files. Trump has denied close ties to the disgraced financier. Musk's opposition to the GOP megabill — which he called a 'disgusting abomination' — is largely tied to deficit spending. The billionaire argued the legislation would balloon the national debt and fails to slash enough spending. The package faces an uphill battle in the Senate. While Musk, who recently left his position as the top adviser to Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), seemed open to repairing ties on Friday, the president appeared to be OK with moving on. Johnson in the interview Friday defended the spending bill and commended Trump for his handling of the squabble. 'We're going to make good on this… I like the president's attitude. You know, he is moving on. He has to,' he told the host. 'He's laser-focused on delivering for the people. And House and Senate Republicans are as well. So, we've got our hand at the wheel.' 'We're going to get this done just like we told the people,' the Speaker continued. 'And if you are a hardworking American that is struggling to take care of your family, you are going to love this legislation.' The Louisiana Republican added, 'I'm telling you, all boats are going to rise and everybody's going to be in a much better mood before we go into that midterm election in 2026.'
San Francisco Chronicle
19 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's big bill also seeks to undo the big bills of Biden and Obama
WASHINGTON (AP) — Chiseling away at President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act. Rolling back the green energy tax breaks from President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. At its core, the Republican 'big, beautiful bill' is more than just an extension of tax breaks approved during President Donald Trump's first term at the White House. The package is an attempt by Republicans to undo, little by little, the signature domestic achievements of the past two Democratic presidents. 'We're going to do what we said we were going to do,' Speaker Mike Johnson said after House passage last month. While the aim of the sprawling 1,000-page plus bill is to preserve an estimated $4.5 trillion in tax cuts that would otherwise expire at year's end if Congress fails to act — and add some new ones, including no taxes on tips — the spending cuts pointed at the Democratic-led programs are causing the most political turmoil. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that 10.9 million fewer people would have health insurance under the GOP bill, including 1.4 million immigrants in the U.S. without legal status who are in state-funded programs. At the same time, lawmakers are being hounded by businesses in states across the nation who rely on the green energy tax breaks for their projects. As the package moves from the House to the Senate, the simmering unrest over curbing the Obama and Biden policies shows just how politically difficult it can be to slash government programs once they become part of civic life. "When he asked me, what do you think the prospects are for passage in the Senate? I said, good — if we don't cut Medicaid," said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recounting his conversation last week with Trump. 'And he said, I'm 100% supportive of that.' Health care worries Not a single Republican in Congress voted for the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, in 2010, or Biden's inflation act in 2022. Both were approved using the same budget reconciliation process now being employed by Republicans to steamroll Trump's bill past the opposition. Even still, sizable coalitions of GOP lawmakers are forming to protect aspects of both of those programs as they ripple into the lives of millions of Americans. Hawley, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and others are wary of changes to Medicaid and other provisions in the bill that would result in fewer people being able to access health care programs. At the same time, crossover groupings of House and Senate Republicans have launched an aggressive campaign to preserve, at least for some time, the green energy tax breaks that business interests in their states are relying on to develop solar, wind and other types of energy production. Murkowski said one area she's "worried about' is the House bill's provision that any project not under construction within 60 days of the bill becoming law may no longer be eligible for those credits. 'These are some of the things we're working on,' she said. The concerns are running in sometimes opposite directions and complicating the work of GOP leaders who have almost no votes to spare in the House and Senate as they try to hoist the package over Democratic opposition and onto the president's desk by the Fourth of July. While some Republicans are working to preserve the programs from cuts, the budget hawks want steeper reductions to stem the nation's debt load. The CBO said the package would add $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. After a robust private meeting with Trump at the White House this week, Republican senators said they were working to keep the bill on track as they amend it for their own priorities. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the president 'made the pitch and the argument for why we need to get the bill done." The disconnect is reminiscent of Trump's first term, when Republicans promised to repeal and replace Obamacare, only to see their effort collapse in dramatic fashion when the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, voted thumbs down for the bill on the House floor. Battle over Medicaid In the 15 years since Obamacare became law, access to health care has grown substantially. Some 80 million people are now enrolled in Medicaid, and the Kaiser Family Foundation reports 41 states have opted to expand their coverage. The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid to all adults with incomes up to about $21,500 for an individual, or almost $29,000 for a two-person household. While Republicans no longer campaign on ending Obamacare, advocates warn that the changes proposed in the big bill will trim back at access to health care. The bill proposes new 80 hours of monthly work or community service requirements for able-bodied Medicaid recipients, age 18 to 64, with some exceptions. It also imposes twice-a-year eligibility verification checks and other changes. Republicans argue that they want to right-size Medicaid to root out waste, fraud and abuse and ensure it's there for those who need it most, often citing women and children. 'Medicaid was built to be a temporary safety net for people who genuinely need it — young, pregnant women, single mothers, the disabled, the elderly,' Johnson told The Associated Press. 'But when when they expanded under Obamacare, it not only thwarted the purpose of the program, it started draining resources.' Initially, the House bill proposed starting the work requirements in January 2029, as Trump's term in the White House would be coming to a close. But conservatives from the House Freedom Caucus negotiated for a quicker start date, in December 2026, to start the spending reductions sooner. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer has said the changes are an Obamacare rollback by another name. 'It decimates our health care system, decimates our clean energy system,' Schumer of New York said in an interview with the AP. The green energy tax breaks involve not only those used by buyers of electric vehicles, like Elon Musk's Tesla line, but also the production and investment tax credits for developers of renewables and other energy sources. The House bill had initially proposed a phaseout of those credits over the next several years. But again the conservative Freedom Caucus engineered the faster wind-down — within 60 days of the bill's passage. 'Not a single Republican voted for the Green New Scam subsidies,' wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, on social media. 'Not a single Republican should vote to keep them.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Newspaper seeks public release of Centennial Park feasibility study
Niagara Falls City Council Chairman Jim Perry has talked with Mayor Robert Restaino about the unreleased feasibility study for the proposed Centennial Park arena and events campus and said he's encouraged by what he's been told about it so far. In response to questions from the Niagara Gazette on Thursday, Perry did not say whether he would support releasing the study to the public in response to a Freedom of Information Law request filed by the newspaper. Instead, Perry said he spoke to city attorney Tom DeBoy who acknowledged receipt of the newspaper's formal request for the document and was assured that the city's legal department is working on it. 'I'm not part of that process, but (DeBoy) assured me it's being done,' Perry said on Thursday. Restaino confirmed in an interview with the members of the local press on May 13 that he received what he described as an incomplete version of the study, which was prepared by the private Florida-based consulting firm Sports Facilities Advisory, LLC at a cost of $140,000, plus expenses. While he has since indicated that the study results support the city building Centennial Park, he has declined to release the contents publicly. In an interview with the Gazette earlier this week, Restaino said he intends to do so by the end of the month after the results are shared with 'stakeholders,' namely representatives from New York's lead economy development agency Empire State Development Corp. and National Grid, the two entities that covered the city's cost for the study. 'One of the things we will do is meet with the stakeholders who paid for the study and show it to them,' Restaino told the Gazette in an interview earlier this week. 'And then we'll release it to the public. This month everything is going to be out in the open.' During an appearance on Monday on 'Your Community Accountability with Sam and Jon,' a Falls-based social media program aired on Facebook and YouTube, Perry said he has had a 'lot of discussions about it' and that it 'looks positive.' On Thursday, Perry told the newspaper he hadn't seen the study but had talked to the mayor about it. 'I can't share everything because this will be up to the mayor to unveil, but this project should be one of the more positive advancements to our local economy I've seen in my 70-plus years here in the city if everything falls into place,' Perry said. On Thursday, the newspaper filed a formal Freedom of Information request with the city's legal department and clerk's office, requesting a copy of the study from Restaino's administration. The newspaper's request cited two opinions from the New York State Committee on Open Government that indicate state law allows public agencies to release documents in their possession even in instances where they are considered to be drafts or incomplete. 'Draft records are subject to FOIL,' said Paul Wolf, a Williamsville attorney and founder of the government transparency group, the New York Coalition for Open Government. The city clerk's office acknowledged the newspaper's request on Thursday afternoon. Under state law, public agencies are allowed up to 20 business days to either grant or deny requests for information. In its initial response, the city clerk's office indicated that should 'circumstances arise' that prevent the delivery of a response within 20 business, the newspaper would be contacted with a 'new response date.' 'Examples of circumstances that may lead to extended response times include staff shortages, requests for a large volume of records and requests that require significant document redaction and/or seek documents that are not maintained electronically,' the response from the clerk's office notes. The results of the feasibility study are expected to more clearly define elements of the Centennial Park project and shed light on whether it would, as proposed, be viable in the Falls. A previous arena study, commissioned by Niagara County in 2017, concluded that the city lacked a sufficient number of hotel rooms needed to support such a project at that time. City officials, including Restaino and Perry, are seeking to acquire, using the city's power of eminent domain, 10 acres of land currently owned by the private firm Niagara Falls Redevelopment for the purposes of building Centennial Park. The courts have sided with the city's argument that it has the right to forcibly acquire the property — located off John B. Daly Boulevard at the intersection of 10th and Falls streets — for the purposes of developing the 'park.' The city is currently engaged in litigation, arguing that 5 of those 10 acres are actually still owned by the city as NFR failed, more than a decade ago, to properly obtain permission from the state to annex what was at the time public parkland formerly known as 10th Street park. NFR is disputing the city's position in court. The company also insists it intends to use the 10 acres for the first phase of a project of its own, a proposed $1.5 billion data center it says it intends to build in partnership with the Canadian firm, Urbacon. During his interview on Sam Archie's social media program on Monday, Perry backed the city's position that the city, not NFR, owns the 5 acres because it was formerly public parkland that was never properly acquired by the company. He said he agrees with the city's position based on maps and other documents that show the area in question was a public park dating back to the 1940s. 'A park is a park forever until you get that it is no longer parkland by permission from the state,' he said. 'When it was transferred over, those papers were never filed,' he added. 'You can argue all you want, that is still a park. Unless it's done legally, there is no claim to it.' As to NFR — a company owned by the Milstein family of real estate developers in New York City — Perry said the city has heard 30 years of promises and stories from the company with no tangible results. He also said there 'is no two solutions,' a reference to what some residents and officials have suggested could be a compromise that would allow both projects to happen. 'The convention center is real,' Perry said, referring to Centennial Park, 'and I know that because I've been working on issues and I've been talking to people. The data center, to me, is another pie in the sky.' 'If we gave this fight up tomorrow, (and said), 'OK, you guys can have the park, we'll do the paperwork and turn it over to you.' Let them have it, turn it over to NFR, all the stuff, you know what's going to happen? They are going to say, 'Well, you took so long Urbacon's not interested in it anymore' because that's the M.O.' Perry did concede in his interview with show host Sam Archie that, if the city is successful in its claim for the 5 acres, it may be required to reimburse NFR for taxes paid on the property in the past. 'I would assume that is correct,' Perry said.
