Thread by @catrubens

A short thread 🧵 about Samuel & Jacob's case, and the use of #restraint against children with autism, learning disabilities or #SEND.

The parents Annie & Mark aren't on Twitter but want to raise as much awareness as possible.

leighdaylaw.info/3tHEuoZ

1. We brought a civil & #HumanRightsAct case against Kent County Council for the use of mechanical restraint chairs against Samuel & Jacob while they were at a specialist primary school for autistic children, Five Acre Woods School.

2. Sam & Jacob were active, sensory seeking children who loved climbing, running around & being outside. They were non-verbal & struggled to communicate. Here they are out walking with their dad, Mark, at the time they attended the school (all photos used with permission).

3. They started at Five Acre Woods when they were 4 years old. Parents didn't go into classrooms. Annie & Mark were shocked to see the boys be wheeled out in mechanical restraint chairs at a school concert. They had no idea this had been happening.

4. This is one of the chairs used against Samuel, the Smirthwaite Hard Rock Chair.

This chair is still on the market: smirthwaite.co.uk/product/hardro…

5. Samuel & Jacob were restrained repeatedly in chairs like these in school. They were active, sensory seeking children who interpret the world, in part, through movement & touch. They needed to move around.

6. Neither of the boys had any postural or core stability issues. There was no physical need for the chairs.

Here's Jacob climbing a tree at home in the same time period, in school uniform:

7. The school gave various justifications: health & safety; "therapeutic purposes"; for the benefit of the boys' participation.

IMO the main reason was to control the boys' behaviour & make them sit in a learning environment that wasn't compatible with their autism & needs.

8. FYI the use of "reasonable force" against children with SEND is lawful at school under s.93 of the Education & Inspections Act, inc. for "the maintenance of good order & discipline". The school said the chairs were lawful & necessary.

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/…

9. A social worker visited the school in June 2012 and witnessed both twins being restrained in the chairs in class. She reported her concerns to the parents and her manager. An emergency care meeting was held.

10. Following the emergency care meeting, the parents state that they were assured that the chairs had been physically removed from the twins’ classrooms and would not be used without parental consent.

11. In October 2013, Samuel came home from school with unexplained bruising to his chest. The parents were worried it had been caused by restraint straps. They took him to A&E, then removed the boys from the school.

12. The parents pursued complaints against the local authority & asked for records. The School / KCC have never been able to produce full Occupational Therapy reports / assessments recommending the chairs for Samuel & Jacob.

13. Eventually, they instructed @LeighDay_Law to pursue claims under the #HumanRightsAct for Sam & Jacob.

We argued the school had breached Articles 3, 5 & 8, and that the boys had been unlawfully deprived of their liberty.

14. The school’s own restraint policy states (1/2):

“Such devices should never be provided for the purpose of preventing problem behaviour … A decision to use therapeutic devices to prevent problem behaviour (for example strapping someone in a wheelchair)...

15. contin'd:

"must be agreed by a multi-disciplinary team in consultation with service users, their families (and in the case of children, those with parental responsibility) and advocates, and recorded within an individual’s care plan…”

16. (Query how this type of restraint chair can ever be a "therapeutic device" for an autistic child with the sensory profile of Samuel or Jacob)

17. In the litigation, the School and KCC initially defended the use of the chairs, stated that all use of restraint was proportionate, and that the ‘ultimate purpose was to allow the claimants and their classmates to access the curriculum and to promote their education’

18. Eventually, after a lot of correspondence & legal arguments, & a highly critical education psychology expert report, the local authority admitted failings & agreed to pay Samuel & Jacob £40,000 compensation each.

19. The LA admitted:
- Failed to get parental consent.
- Breach of school's policy & national guidance
- Failure to consider less restrictive options
- Failure to keep records

In our view, the use of the chairs in this manner was unlawful & breached the twins' human rights.

20. We will never know how often Sam & Jacob were subjected to the chairs.

There is no legal duty on local authorities to record & collect data on the use of #restraint.

See @EHRC inquiry last year:

equalityhumanrights.com/en/inquiries-a…

21. As a reminder, this is how little the boys were when the chairs were used:

22. Their parents are now calling for urgent legal reform by @educationgovuk to stop this happening to any other families.

They're inspired by the work of @shakespeare_d in Northern Ireland (see her victory yesterday): bit.ly/3urBfRD

23. Restraint of children with SEND shouldn't be happening in the UK in the 21st century, but it is. @CBFdn & @PABSScot are trying to monitor it because the government is failing to do so.

24. On a final, happy note, Samuel & Jacob are thriving at home. Samuel loves castles, Jacob loves painting. Their parents are looking forward to a break from the litigation, but are spurred on for campaigning.

The family are grateful for all the interest in their case.

/ End

Here's Annie & Mark enjoying a very well deserved glass of wine after the Court hearing on Tuesday.

They never stopped fighting, but it shouldn't be this hard for parents of autistic children to get answers & acknowledgement.