Restrictive interventions, including use of reasonable force, in schools: Key points and possible actions for schools.

The long awaited new guidance on restrictive interventions and the use of reasonable force was issued just before Christmas. However it does not come into force until April 2026, so schools have time to get their minds round it.

This new guidance packs a lot into 21 pages. In many ways, it is two pieces of guidance in one. Page 14 onwards is statutory guidance focusing on the recording and reporting of the use of restrictive practices, including reasonable force and seclusion. The first part is non-statutory guidance explaining the different forms of restrictive practice and when it may be appropriate to use them. The guidance recognises the impact of restrictive interventions on children, staff and parents leading to a focus on minimising their use and implementation of de-escalation strategies. However, there is an acceptance that at times the use of a restrictive intervention will be lawful and necessary to ensure the safety of individuals and the wider school community.

As with KCSIE, the guidance is divided into ‘shoulds’ and ‘musts’. It applies to all schools who need to be aware of both the statutory and non-statutory elements. The non-statutory ‘shoulds’ need to be followed, unless there is good reason not to.

The guidance refers to pupils, rather than children, throughout. Presumably because the cut-off point for the recording and reporting duties is the age of 20. It is not clear why 20 has been chosen given the SEN Code of practice applies to the age of 25.

The guidance starts (on page 5) with clear and helpful definitions of the terminology around restrictive practices.

Key themes

Safety 

The guidance is clear that schools should not have a ‘no contact’ policy as there are times when physical contact between an adult in school and a child is appropriate. They include some examples (page 7) which include comforting a distressed child, praising a child, demonstrating techniques in PE and music lessons and guiding or escorting pupils. For each of these the adult need to consider the school’s safeguarding policy, the specific circumstances and the child’s age and material facts, such as any SEND and/ or other vulnerabilities.

The guidance recognises the legality of reasonable force in certain circumstances, but in these cases, it should be the minimum force possible for the minimum time. It is clearly stated that restraints that affect breathing, airways or circulation must not be used. Also no child should be restrained on the ground.

Further any use of restraint should be within clear legal procedures. This means that there should be risk assessments to ensure that staff, who regularly work alongside pupils where the use of reasonable force and/or other restrictive interventions may be required, can do so as safely as possible. Underlying all these is a focus on prevention, de-escalation strategies and behaviour plans. These should be part of school policy and reflect a mixture of whole school measures and individual approaches.

The message is that the best way to use restrictive interventions is not to use them. This is summarised: ‘For any form of restraint, including seated and standing, there is a risk of physical and psychological harm, and it should be avoided where possible’ (page 7). Force should only be used in exceptional circumstances. As well as being lawful, any use of restrictive practices needs to be necessary, proportionate and consider pupil welfare. They should not be an everyday occurrence.

Not punishment

Underlying, but not explicitly mentioned in this guidance is the fact corporal punishment was finally completely banned in all schools in all parts of the UK in 2003. So the use of force as a punishment in schools is illegal. However, all members of school staff have a legal power to use reasonable force in certain circumstances. To prevent or stop a pupil from:

1.  causing injury to themselves or others

2.  committing a criminal offence

3.  damaging property

4.  causing disorder among pupils at the school, whether during a teaching session or otherwise.

But staff should never use more force than is necessary or use force as a punishment. This should be clear but is subject to interpretation. Hopefully, no-one would argue that restraint in response to damage to a pencil would be proportionate or in line with the guidance, but where the line should be drawn could be debated.

The guidance is explicit that seclusion should be a safety measure and not a punishment. It should be ‘a non-disciplinary intervention, involving keeping a pupil confined to a place away from others and prevented from leaving- should only be used as a safety measure to protect others from harm when a pupil is experiencing high levels of emotional or behavioural dysregulation  In such circumstances, the pupil is not acting with intent.’ (Page 8). The child should only be placed somewhere that feels safe and non-threatening to them with supervision. As soon as the risk of harm has reduced the child should be allowed to leave.

Seclusion should not be used as a response to deliberate or wilful misbehaviour (page 8). There is a concern that understanding and interpreting such behaviour can be difficult and, in some cases, controversial. Those supporting a ‘zero tolerance’ approach to behaviour would argue that all behaviour is wilful and deliberate. Interestingly, under this guidance they would therefore be prohibited from using seclusion as a behaviour management response as it should only be used when the pupil is acting without intent.Removal from the classroom is different from seclusion and covered under the DfE’s behaviour guidance.

This element of the guidance leaves considerable scope for interpretation and may not provide the clarity that many in schools had hoped for.

Transparency and accountability.

The statutory requirements for recording and reporting aim at increasing transparency and accountability ensuring that schools are clear and open in their actions. Any significant incident in which a member of staff uses force on a pupil must be recorded and reported to the child’s parents and shared with governors. It is the statutory responsibility of the governors to ensure that there is a procedure in place to do this and the reporting takes place, in writing, as soon as practicable after the event and no later than the same day. These reporting responsibilities remain even if restrictive interventions are included as part of a child’s behaviour plan or risk assessment.

This statutory part of the guidance carries with it, the understanding that those with SEND are disproportionately subjected to restrictive interventions. On page 11, the guidance is clear about the need to understand underlying triggers, create proactive support and create an inclusive environment. This should include de-escalation strategies and the guidance give some examples. Less explicitly stated is the additional impact and use of restrictive interventions on pupils with protective characteristics. There is no discussion or explicit consideration of the issues of adultification or racial bias or prejudice in staff responses to children’s behaviour.

The guidance also lays out that the governors should review and analyse the data about the use of force, seclusion and restraint with a particular focus on understanding patterns and triggers and their use for children with SEND or protected characteristics. The idea is that lessons should be learnt and practice improved.

What is not included.

·       Training- The guidance is clear that ‘Staff who are likely to need to use reasonable force and/or other restrictive interventions should be adequately trained in its safe and lawful use and in preventative strategies’ (page 6). But the details of this training are not explicit. Indeed, the guidance states: ‘We trust school leaders to make decisions on training based on their school’s individual contexts and needs. When deciding what formal staff training is required, school leaders should ensure that the chosen training reflects the principles of this guidance (page 6)’. This is not necessarily helpful to schools.

·       Details of de-escalation strategies- Page 11 suggests some strategies but these are very much at a basic level and lack detail. This guidance is clear that de-escalation is essential but as with the training leaves it to schools to work out what this means.

·       Details of what the recording and reporting should actually look like- Page 14 states that schools record the following as minimum:

o   names of pupil and staff directly involved.

o   any relevant needs or circumstances of the pupil, including whether the pupil involved has an identified special educational need or disability and their SEN status code.

o   time, date, location and approximate duration of the intervention.

o   brief account of the incident, including what led up to the incident, identified or potential triggers if known, any preventative or de-escalation strategies used, and (where relevant) what type of reasonable force was applied, the degree of force, and details of any physical injuries sustained.

o   brief account of why the use of force was assessed as necessary in that instance.

o   any post-incident support, such as details of any medical treatment for injuries or other adverse impacts

 They should also report the following to parents:

o   time, date, location and approximate duration of the intervention.

o   brief account of why the intervention was assessed as necessary in that instance.

o   brief account of what type of force was applied, and the degree of force.

o   details of any physical injuries sustained, if applicable

But there is no reporting proforma or further information, other than the reporting should be in writing and as soon as practicably possible.

•       What is a significant incident? – Underlying the guidance is an implication of a clear understanding of what is and is not a ‘significant incident’. This is defined on page 5 as ‘Any incident where the use of force goes beyond appropriate physical contact between pupils and staff … This includes when physical force is used to implement a non-physical restrictive intervention.’ However, this remains open to interpretation.

Possible actions for schools

• Review your current policies and procedures and check how they fit with the new guidance and update as needed. Schools need a restrictive interventions and reasonable force policy. This can be standalone or embedded within your behaviour policy. It should also be referred to within your safeguarding and behaviour policies.

• Ensure that the terminology used in school in practice, policies, procedures, staff training and communication with parents and governors reflects the definitions included on page 5 of the guidance. This might be a useful starting point for staff training and development of a shared understanding of what is and is not a ‘significant incident’ which must be recorded and reported.

• Identify any children who are at risk of requiring a physical intervention to support their regulation or behaviour. Then put a risk assessment and behaviour plan in place to support them and the staff who work with them.

• Provide training for all staff on de-escalation strategies and consider how these are or can be embedded in whole school practice.

• Identify any staff who may be involved in physical intervention, identify and implement appropriate training for them.

• Find or develop an appropriate proforma to record any significant incidents. This will include decisions about

o   Where this information will be stored.

o   How it will be shared with parents

o   How it will be shared and evaluated with governors (and senior staff)

• Consider how and when governors will review the data on the use of restrictive interventions and how this will be translated into whole school learning.