A former pupil who was repeatedly restrained and once confined for almost five hours at a special school has been awarded £18,900 in damages.
The student’s father, who is now 25 and cannot be named for legal reasons, filed the claim against Mulberry Bush School in Standlake, Oxfordshire, on behalf of his son, who was a student there until 2009.
On 8 November, a High Court judge found that the boy had been restrained three times by staff and that others had placed a towel around the door of his room to prevent him from leaving the room.
Judge Margaret Obi ruled that the restraints amounted to battery and being prevented from leaving her room constituted unlawful imprisonment.
He also paid enhanced damages due to the school’s “failure to appreciate the significance and seriousness of a member of staff using a face-down restraint” even though senior staff members knew it had occurred.
Staff continued to use towels to restrict pupils’ movements despite being warned against it by a social worker.
The OB found the school not guilty of negligence, on the basis that the action was taken “as a last resort in the context of a well-managed school environment”.
Emma Jones, partner at the Leigh Day law firm, said the experts involved in the case were clear that face-down restraints should almost never be used for children because of the risk to life, except in hospitals and psychiatric units.
He said the decision underlined how schools which were rated outstanding by Ofsted can allow poor working practices to occur, and fail to ensure that “staff follow their policies”. Are being”.
The man’s father, who cannot be named, felt the school was not a good fit for his son but fought to get him transferred due to the lack of SEND. [special educational needs and disabilities] Location in local area. She said the school had questioned her son’s autism diagnosis, and suggested he had emotional and behavioral difficulties, which was reflected in her expertise.
“From my perspective they weren’t providing the right support, and everything went downhill from there. As a parent I felt that when I raised my issue, I was not listened to, they were adamant on doing things their way,” he said.
She said her son was “extremely scared and very distressed” at the time, especially when he was found lying face down on the bed and having trouble breathing. “Unfortunately the way he was treated made his behavior worse over time,” he said.
He felt concerned that the staff members involved were still “working with vulnerable people in the community”.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the school said: “Mulberry Bush School is naturally disappointed by the outcome of this case and is in the process of considering available options, including potentially permission to appeal.”
He said there were parts of the decision that were “inconsistent” with the findings of an earlier Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal, which had ruled in favor of the school.
“We have been working with children and families affected by complex emotional needs for 75 years and always strive to do what is right and best for each child. This work is never done alone and we always work closely with everyone involved in the child’s care,” he said.
Mark Kerr, chief executive of the Children’s Home Association, said he supported the school because he believed the decision was “not only unjust, but it will have an impact on the wider sector because it suggests that dangerous behaviors are being encouraged in a residential childcare setting.” Necessary measures can be taken to manage it.” will not be given a fair interpretation by the law”.
She said: “Sadly, through no fault of their own, traumatized children and those with the most complex needs sometimes behave extremely violently, putting themselves, the staff caring for them and others around them at risk. There is a risk of injury.”