Q: What is KASSA?
KASSA, Keeping All Students Safe Act, is a proposed federal bill designed to restrict the use of these controversial seclusion and restraint practices in educational settings. First introduced in 2010, the bill and its subsequent iterations have sought to strengthen protections for students while addressing the need for training and support for educators.
Q: How Did KASSA Get Started?
The movement towards KASSA began in earnest as reports surfaced detailing the misuse of seclusion and restraint in schools across the nation. These practices, while sometimes used with the intention of protecting students and staff, have often been applied inappropriately. Following widespread advocacy from organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Disability Rights Network (NDRN), lawmakers began to recognize the urgent need for reform.
Q: Why is KASSA Important?
The bill is essential for creating a safe and supportive learning environment for all students, particularly those with disabilities or behavioral challenges who are disproportionately affected by seclusion and restraint. Critics of these practices highlight that they can lead to trauma, emotional distress, and physical harm, undermining students’ rights to a safe education. By imposing stricter regulations, KASSA aims to promote positive behavioral interventions and support systems, ensuring that students receive the guidance they need without resorting to harmful methods.
Q: Which groups support KASSA?
KASSA has garnered significant support from scores of educational, civil rights, and disability advocacy organizations, which argue that the bill is crucial for ensuring the safety and dignity of all students. These groups include:
- American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
- National Education Association (NEA)
- American Psychological Association (APA)
- Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN)
- National Disability Rights Network (NDRN)
- Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
- Children’s Defense Fund
- Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)
- National Association of School Psychologists (NASP)
- Council for Exceptional Children (CEC)
These organizations advocate for safer school environments and promote the mental health and well-being of all students, particularly those with disabilities.
Q: Why has KASSA not passed in 14 years?
The bill has not passed in part because it has faced opposition fro m some powerful educational institutions and associations including the National School Boards Association (NSBA); the American Federation of Teachers (AFT); the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPAA), School Psychologists Associations, as well as some state and Local Education Agencies (LEAs).
Opponents argue that KASSA would limit the ability of schools to respond flexibly to situations where seclusion or restraint might be necessary for the safety of students and staff, and contend that these measures can be crucial in crisis situations. These groups have expressed concerns about the logistical challenges and costs associated with implementing the proposed requirements and have suggested that the regulations could create an undue burden on schools, especially those with limited resources.
They also cite increased liability and are concerned that the bill could expose schools to greater legal liability if they are unable to intervene effectively in crisis situations. They also argue that the bill does not provide sufficient alternatives or resources to help schools manage behaviors that may lead to the need for seclusion or restraint.
These contrasting views highlight the ongoing debate about the balance between ensuring student safety and providing educators with the tools they need to manage challenging behaviors effectively.
Q: What are state efforts to reduce seclusion and restraint?
Several states have initiated their own reforms to limit the use of seclusion and restraint in schools. Some states, such as California and Virginia, have enacted laws that either strictly regulate or prohibit these practices altogether. Most of the time, state regulations do not prohibit these procedures, rather, they seek to impose guidelines on when and how seclusion and restraint can be used, often requiring that they only be employed in emergencies where there is an imminent risk of harm.
Some states mandate training for staff on alternative behavioral interventions before resorting to seclusion or restraint.
.