# data[].attributes.body
Once I complete my Masters of Education in Guidance and Counseling I hope to become an Elementary School Counselor. Upon completion of my degree, I plan to teach for a few more years before completing the state certification process to become a School Counselor.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 2- Issues According to the American School Counselor Association

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 2- Issues According to the American School Counselor Association

# data[].attributes.body
The American School Counselor Association outlines School Counselor Competencies, as well as Ethical Standards for School Counselors to follow. Their website provides in depth information about the Legal and Ethical issues that school counselors face in their work. While exploring their website I identified the issue of child abuse reporting. Each state has their own laws regarding mandated reporters of child abuse, so it is critical that counselors know whether or not they are required by law to report suspected abuse. School Counselors also face issues with confidentiality in their practice. It becomes a challenge to understand when to disclose certain information discovered in counseling to a student's parents. More information about this legal and ethical issue of Confidentiality can be found in the ASCA's Ethical Standards for School Counselors (ASCA, 2016).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Not-Found - American School Counselor Association (ASCA)

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 2- Issues According to the National School Boards Association 

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 2- Issues According to the National School Boards Association 

# data[].attributes.body
The National School Boards Association (NSBA) advocates for schools and outlines the legal issues that affect schools. The NSBA is currently opposing the Department of Homeland Securities new policy "Public Charge" (NSBA, 2018). This new regulation could affect the immigration status and well being of students who receive Title 1 benefits. In order to receive certain benefits such as Free and Reduced Lunch, families must disclose their income and any other government benefits they receive. If they do this, these families' immigration status could be stalled (NSBA, 2018). This legal issue could greatly affect the role of school counselors in these students' lives.
The NSBA also describes Bullying as a legal and ethical issue faced by schools. The NSBA outlines the responsibilities of school boards when it comes to bullying in their State Anti-Bullying Statutes document. This document describes what conduct is considered bullying, whether online bullying is a responsibility of the school, and the responsibility of the school board when bullying occurs off campus (NSBA, 2012). These state statutes are critical for School Counselors to know for their specific state in order to understand what specific responsibilities they have when it comes to bullying.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Advocacy | National School Boards Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
School Law Issues The resources, news, and court decisions you need on a range of legal issues for public schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 3- Education Week on Restraint and Seclusion Practices for Special Needs Students 

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 3- Education Week on Restraint and Seclusion Practices for Special Needs Students 

# data[].attributes.body
The Keeping All Students Safe Act is being drafted to protect the rights of special needs students in schools. This Act would ban isolation of students in seclusion rooms, limit when teachers can use physical restraint with students, and require schools to notify parents of any use of physical restraint of their child (Ujifusa, 2018). This notification would also require that schools document and publish data regarding the frequency of physical restraint practices used in their school. If this Act is put in place, teachers of special needs students would be required to be fully certified and trained in order to use physical restraint (Ujifusa, 2018). This article outlines the details of the Act, and discusses the motions that Democrats in legislation are making in order to see this Act into action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Democrats on Capitol Hill are seeking to ban the practice of isolating students in special rooms or otherwise secluding them in schools that receive federal funds, as well as to limit when students can be physically restrained.

The Keeping All Students Safe Act would also require schools to notify parents within 24 hours when their child has been physically restrained and require states to collect and publish data on restraint and seclusion, including reports of injuries or death.

Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia, the top Democrat on the House education committee who is poised to become the panel's chairman next year, and Rep. Don Beyer, another Virginia Democrat, are the authors of the bill. Democratic Sens. Patty Murray of Washington state and Chris Murphy of Connecticut are slated to introduce a companion bill in the Senate. (Murray is the top Democrat on the Senate education committee.)

Restraint and seclusion is a particularly big issue in the special education community, although a House Democratic aide indicated the lawmakers' ongoing concern about the issue extends beyond students with disabilities. Advocates say that the official statistics about the restraint and seclusion of students almost certainly underestimate the true number of such incidents, and that many of the practices lead to long-term trauma as well as physical injuries. Educators say it's a difficult issue for them, because they must sometimes balance the need for safe and secure classrooms with the health and welfare of some of their most vulnerable students.

An Education Week analysis found that close to 70,000 special education students, or one out of 100, were restrained or secluded in public schools in the 2013-14 school year, or about one 1 of every 100 of those students. That analysis was based on the federal Civil Rights Data Collection from the 2013-14 school year that's based on district-reported information.

Chance for Headway

The bill, introduced Nov. 14, isn't the first education legislation Democrats are introducing as the party in control of the House-that turnover won't happen until January, when this Congress leaves office. And it doesn't have a great chance of passing by any stretch in this lame-duck period of Congress. But the Democrats plan to reintroduce the bill when the next Congress starts in January, and clearly, it's an issue on which they think they can make at least some political headway.

About 30 states now have policies designed to limit the use of restraint and seclusion, a number that's been growing in recent years.

"Every school should be a safe and welcoming place where all students can get a quality education. Unfortunately, thousands of students are still subjected to dangerous seclusion and restraint practices, which research shows make schools less safe," Scott said in a statement. "While it is encouraging that some states have begun to prohibit or limit the use of seclusion and restraint, it is important that Congress pass the Keeping All Students Safe Act, which would establish a nationwide minimum safety standard. Moreover, this legislation would provide states and teachers the support they need to improve their schools' culture by using "evidence-based interventions."

The Every Student Succeeds Act also requires states to show how they plan to reduce "aversive behavioral interventions."

Continued Push

A version of this proposal was first introduced by Democrats in 2009, and lawmakers have proposed it in subsequent years without success-legislation came close to passing in 2010. Democrats' concerns also are rooted in racial disparities: A 2009 Government Accountability Office report that led to the original bill found that restraint and seclusion practices were used disproportionately on students of color. Congress has asked for an update to that GAO report.

In addition, the Keeping All Students Safe Act would:

* Prohibit the use of physical restraints, except to protect other students and staff;

* Ban the use of chemical and mechanical restraints, and physical restraints that affect breathing;

* Outlaw the use of physical restraint as a planned intervention; and

* Require staff members to be certified before they use physical restraint under minimum standards.

Published in Print: November 28, 2018, as Democratic Bill Aims to Put Brakes on Restraint and Seclusion Practices

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Back to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Democratic Bill Aims to Put Brakes on Restraint and Seclusion Practices

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Democrats on Capitol Hill are seeking to ban the practice of isolating students in special rooms or otherwise secluding them in schools that receive federal funds, as well as to limit when students can be physically restrained.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploration Option 3- Education Dive on Arming Teachers After Parkland School Shooting

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploration Option 3- Education Dive on Arming Teachers After Parkland School Shooting

# data[].attributes.body
After the shooting that occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida last year it has been recommended that teachers be armed and schools increase mental health funding in order to prevent further shootings. Investigators found that the school's security program did not prevent this tragedy from happening, therefore schools are being encouraged to revisit their security plans (Campisi, 2019). This article discusses the various opinions of parents and teachers on the possibility of school teachers being armed with weapons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dive Brief:

A 15-member commission investigating last year's school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, has recommended arming teachers and increasing spending on mental health resources, according to a report released last week. The panel also said multiple security breaches and protocol issues within the school system and local law enforcement were partially to blame for the massacre.

The Broward County Public Schools security program didn't keep the shooter from entering the building, the report said, and there was no clear plan in place for locking down classrooms. As a result, the findings urge schools to adopt stronger emergency plans and lock doors when they're not being used, and that state law should be changed to allow properly trained teachers to carry guns.

"We can do more and we can do a better job of ensuring the safety of students and staff on K-12 school campuses," the report says. "Safety and security accountability is lacking in schools, and that accountability is paramount for effective change if we expect a different result in the future than what occurred at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (MSDHS) on February 14, 2018."

Dive Insight:

Since President Donald Trump introduced the possibility of arming teachers about a week after the Parkland shooting, educators have come forward to share their thoughts on the proposed policy. Some teach at schools that already do arm them with weapons, and they say this is a step forward in protecting students against threats. Others, however, say it's a bad idea and that they'd prefer other tools - including more funding and mental health resources - in attempting to make their schools safer.

And many parents and students agree: A March survey found that most Americans - including teens - think arming teachers will make schools more dangerous.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), which has some 1.7 million members, spoke out in a letter to the president, writing that the "proposal to arm teachers not only would make our children's classrooms less safe, but also is not what educators and students want."

She added: "Schools need to be safe sanctuaries, not armed fortresses."

The reluctance some teachers have about being armed stems from several issues. For one, many teachers say their jobs are to teach, not to be security guards. On top of that, even with properly trained teachers, there's always a chance that the weapon could be misused, whether by an educator or by a student who somehow gets access.

And, as the commission found in the case of Parkland, a school system might not have a sustainable and protective school security plan to begin with, potentially leading to an even more chaotic and confusing situation with guns added to the mix.

There's also increasing concern about whether schools are becoming too "hard." School security companies and gun advocates say hardening schools will do good in protecting students and staff members, but critics say that tramples an important aspect of a school - its nurturing environment.

Striking a balance between building a safe school and a building that promotes learning and creativity is a difficult task, but schools nationwide - including Sandy Hook Elementary, which was also rocked by a school shooting in 2012 - have taken on the challenge and proven that safety and innovation aren't mutually exclusive. And, in most of these cases, these redesigns didn't include guns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Parkland shooting commission recommends arming teachers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A 15-member commission investigating last year's school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, has recommended arming teachers and increasing spending on mental health resources, according to a report released last week. The panel also said multiple security breaches and protocol issues within the school system and local law enforcement were partially to blame for the massacre.

# data[].attributes.headline
Child Abuse Reporting by School Counselors

# data[].attributes.subject
Child Abuse Reporting by School Counselors

# data[].attributes.body
While examining Educational Periodicals regarding legal and ethical issues of Education, I identified the issue of Child Abuse Reporting by School Counselors on the American School Counselors' Association website. Counselors are legally required to report any suspicions of abuse, and ethically required to protect the safety of the students whom they serve. I chose this topic because the safety of my students is critical to me and I want to understand more about the legality of child abuse reporting.

# data[].attributes.headline
School Counselors and Child Abuse Reporting: A National Survey

# data[].attributes.subject
School Counselors and Child Abuse Reporting: A National Survey

# data[].attributes.body
In all states School Counselors are mandated reporters of Child Abuse, therefore it is critical that we understand the patterns of abuse reporting and the factors that influence counselors to report abuse. In 2009 the American School Counselor Association completed a study to identify the likelihood of School Counselors to report suspected cases of child abuse. Overall, counselors reported the majority of the cases they found to be suspicious. Elementary school counselors suspected abuse more often in a school year than middle school or high school counselors (Bryant, 2009).

# data[].attributes.body
The article linked presents a scenario in which a School Counselor reports a case of suspected abuse, and is then approached by the parents of the child as well as the principal of the school about his/her report. Through an interview process, a School Counselor explains the laws regarding mandated reporting of suspected child abuse, confidentiality practices, and the laws protecting school counselors once a report is made (Stone, 2016). This interview explains the process of child abuse reporting very well and gives the reader an idea of the confidentiality laws that protect the reporter of child abuse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You had to make a report to child protective services (CPS) regarding one of your students. Shortly thereafter, you are summoned to the principal's office, where he sits with this child's parents, the alleged perpetrators. The principal explains to you that the parents know it was you who called in the report, and they are there to find out what their child said to you and why you felt justified in calling CPS. You are stunned but have the presence of mind to ask the principal for a private word. You explain you don't want to meet with the parents as you think you can better protect the confidentiality of your student and yourself if you aren't forced to answer their questions. The principal still requires you to meet with these high-profile, high-powered parents. Did the principal break any laws in this scenario?

Educators play a critical role in reporting child abuse, and federal and state laws are written to protect the educator's role in reporting. Although every state has its own unique statute for child abuse reporting, all states have two important commonalities: 1) all states require school counselors to report child abuse; and, 2) all states provide educators immunity from criminal and civil liability in good-faith reporting. Why do our lawmakers go to such lengths to protect school counselors? According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families (DHHS) and federal legislation Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), educators have more access to students than most other professionals, and educators are the reporters of more than half the child abuse complaints. Legislators recognize the vital role educators play in intervention and prevention of child abuse, and therefore, logically even if not legally, educators should not have to face the alleged perpetrator. Let's unpack this case to see if legal as well as logic can prevail in supporting this school counselor.

What do the laws say when a report is made in good faith and the reporter finds the school district is requiring them to face the alleged perpetrator?
A typical state statute says a child abuse report is confidential, the reporter is to remain confidential, the reporter is not to be held criminally or civilly liable for good-faith reporting, an employer cannot hinder the employee reporting, and the reporter's employer cannot discriminate or retaliate against the reporter. State statutes vary, so check to see if your state's statute has all of these elements.
Here is an example of state protection for reporters: No employer shall discharge, discriminate or retaliate against a mandated reporter who, in good faith, files a report, testifies or is about to testify in any proceeding involving child abuse or neglect. Any employer who discharges, discriminates or retaliates against that mandated reporter shall be liable to the mandated reporter for treble damages, costs and attorney's fees.

What if the principal explained the parent meeting is not retaliation against the school counselor but rather an attempt to support a stronger relationship with the family.
The meeting may well be the principal's attempt to repair some relationship damage with the parents or assuage the anger of these high-profile parents. Regardless of the motive for the meeting, the principal has stepped on the spirit if not the actual word of confidentiality for mandated reporters, who are to be protected and not subjected to having to justify their report or breach the victim's confidence.
Even if the parents correctly guessed the school counselor was the one who called CPS wasn't her employer wrong in affirming their suspicions?

When the principal agreed with the parents' demand to meet with the school counselor, he essentially affirmed to them that she was the reporter. Whether the parents guessed correctly or not, it should never be affirmed that they are correct. It is better to leave the answer ambiguous so the parents never really know conclusively who called.

CPS caseworkers are legally prohibited from revealing the name of the referral source. Confidentiality clauses for mandated reporters usually read something like the following: The identity of the reporting party and the contents of the child abuse report are confidential and may only be disclosed to specified persons and agencies.

When the parents came to question the person reporting the alleged child abuse, the principal should have directed them to the school or district's one point of contact for such issues.

Administrators shouldn't express or imply to the abuse reporter that a meeting with parents accused of child abuse is expected or even desired. Any coaxing or coercion for such a meeting offends the logic of confidentiality laws. The school counselor may use the opportunity to try to help parents/guardians develop better approaches in working with their children, but it should be the school counselor's decision as to whether he or she feels positive gains can come from such a meeting.

What if the child abuse case is still an open investigation?
If a case is still open and the school counselor or administrator talks to the parents, it could be considered interfering with an investigation. According to DHHS, "It is critical to remember that the educator should not reveal any information pertinent to the report made to CPS or law enforcement."
What about the child's confidentiality? The school counselor is being asked to tell the alleged perpetrator what the child said that triggered the report.

The school counselor was correct in telling the principal she wants to protect her student's confidentiality, and a meeting with the parents would likely derail this effort. If the meeting cannot be avoided and parents want to know what was said, as politically as possible the school counselor can remind everyone that she is not at liberty to "reveal any information pertinent to the report made to CPS or law enforcement." Hopefully this would be enough to support confidentiality. If parents shift to asking for information outside the report, it is difficult to refuse; the best course of action is not to be in the meeting at all. If forced to meet, the school counselor could use the opportunity to try and deflect blame off the child.

What if the investigation reveals the case to be unfounded or unsupported?
Good-faith reporting only requires reasonable suspicion not certainty. School counselors are never to wait until they have conclusive evidence but are asked to exercise judgment. If the report was made in good faith and is not frivolous, the principal's support should be the same whether the school counselor was right or wrong in her suspicions.

What if your principal wants to meet prior to a CPS report, especially when it involves high-powered, high-profile parents?
Read your state statute to see if there is something similar to the DHHS statement. "No supervisor or administrator may impede or inhibit a report or subject the reporting person to any sanction. Administrators who refuse to report or who make it difficult to report cause several problems for other adults on their staff. Not only does the educator feel unsupported and even undermined but educators whose administrators do not report may be held liable for the unreported maltreatment. Thus, the educator is put in a position of being vulnerable to legal sanction or having to bypass the administrator."

In 2012 there was a case involving this point. A school counselor told her principal a student had tried to hang herself, and the student's friend reported the reason was the student's stepfather sexually abused her. School system records obtained under the Georgia Records Act indicated the school counselor did not call in the abuse, and the principal notified CPS past the mandated reporting period. Both the principal and school counselor were arrested. The principal spent the night in jail, and they both lost their jobs. The principal admitted an error in judgment, and ironically, the school counselor may have saved both their jobs if she has reported to CPS instead of just her principal.

Is there a way to check the facts if the parents tell me CPS found the abuse was unfounded?
Many states have laws similar to this one: Within 30 days of receiving a report from a mandated reporter, the department shall notify the mandated reporter, in writing, of its determination of the nature, extent and cause or causes of the injuries to the child and the services the department intends to provide to the child or the child's family. However, not all states allow for feedback to the reporter. Check your state statute.

Who do I contact to help me if I find myself in a situation as described in this case?
Your local or state CPS administrators are a good resource and can provide school district administrators with clarification if they are engaging in practices counter to the spirit of the law regarding reporter confidentiality. The fallout when reporters' confidentiality is trampled is to risk reticence in reporting. It stands to reason that an educator might think twice if past experience meant having to face parents and justify one's actions, breach a child's confidence, cause more trauma for the child and be viewed as an adversary rather than an advocate. It is completely counter to the spirit of the law to require the reporter to face the alleged perpetrator, especially when the reporter is asking that this not happen.

What if the parents tell me I am never to talk to their child again for any reason? Do I have to honor this demand?
Just as the math teacher and English teacher can do their jobs without parental permission, generally speaking, so can school counselors. However, since counseling involves the social/emotional arena, it is considered best practice to have parental permission for individual counseling. When parents/guardians expressly state they don't want counseling for their child, it is best not to dismiss their wishes. If you believe a child is in danger and the parents/guardians are trying to hide their behavior by keeping your from their child, enlist help, and alert everyone to keep a keen eye out for signs of abuse. The fallout and strain of insisting on working with the child might do more harm than good for the child, who is caught between in the middle between parents and educators. If a child needs individual counseling, parents might agree to another school counselor or an outside agency.

It is always best practice to approach administrators with political acumen rather than confidentiality as a weapon. It never makes sense to enter into a power struggle with our administrators but rather to work through issues with facts and legal muscle whenever possible. If you know your state's statute on child abuse and have it handy you can advocate through the words of legislators and federal agencies in charge of child abuse. Help your administrators understand that even if parents have guessed you're the one who called CPS, administrators should cite reporter confidentiality, refuse to affirm who called and educate parents about how mandated reporters are protected. Encourage the principal to identify one educator as the point person for all reports. If the district has a written policy it can be presented to parents before a meeting ever begins and set the tone for a more productive line of discussion.

Administrators should support school counselors who report in good faith regardless of the case's final disposition. Working together school counselors and administrators can be powerful allies in the prevention and intervention of child maltreatment.

Carolyn Stone, Ed.D., is professor, University of North Florida and chair of ASCA's Ethics Committee. She can be reached at cstone@unf.edu.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Counselor Questioned by Student's Parents After Child Abuse Report | American School Counselor Association (ASCA)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You had to make a report to child protective services (CPS) regarding one of your students. Shortly thereafter, you are summoned to the principal's office, where he sits with this child's parents, the alleged perpetrators.

# data[].attributes.headline
Child Abuse Reporting by School Counselors

# data[].attributes.subject
Child Abuse Reporting by School Counselors

# data[].attributes.body
The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act was formed to protect children from child abuse and protect the professionals and educators who report cases of child abuse. This Act states that educators have the most access to students; therefore they play a major role in the prevention of child abuse (Stone, 2016). The laws regarding the reporting of child abuse vary state by state, but all states require school counselors and other educators to report suspected cases of abuse, and all states protect the confidentiality of these reporters (Stone, 2016). When a school employee makes a report of suspected child abuse, their employer cannot retaliate against them, or require that they face the alleged perpetrator. Confidentiality is maintained within Child Protective Services (CPS), so the names of the reporters are protected. School counselors who report suspected abuse must not speak with the parents of the child about the investigation because according to CPS it could be seen as tampering with an investigation (Stone, 2016). School counselors are mandated reporters of any suspected abuse; therefore the state laws should protect them. The article written by Carolyn Stone (2016) on the American School Counselor Association website outlines the critical information for school counselors to have regarding the mandated reporting of child abuse.

In 2009 the American School Counselor Association conducted a study to investigate the behaviors and perceptions of school counselors regarding the child abuse reporting process (Bryant, 2009). This study discusses the frequency of child abuse cases and the likelihood of school counselors to report them. It is estimated that there are three million reports of child abuse made each year in the United States, and the rates of actual child abuse are three times greater than this (Bryant, 2009). Because these rates are so high it is crucial to understand the reporting procedures. The study completed by the ASCA found that School Counselors each report approximately five cases of suspected abuse within each 12-month period. Most often, these cases involved suspected physical abuse, possibly due to the visibility of the symptoms with physical injuries (Bryant, 2009). Schools wit higher percentages of free and reduced lunch qualifying students accounted for more cases of child abuse reported by school counselors. When asked why they report suspected abuse, counselors most often stated that they wanted to comply with the laws and protect the safety of their students (Bryant, 2009). The main factor preventing School Counselors from reporting certain suspicions was a lack of evidence (Bryant, 2009).

The topic of Child Abuse is important to educators because they have the most access to students; therefore they are most often the reporters of abuse. Educators and school counselors should be aware of the laws in their respective states that relate to child abuse reporting procedures. All states require that educators report any cases of suspected abuse in good faith, and if it is proven that they fail to do so they can be prosecuted. In order to protect the children they serve, and their careers, educators must report cases of suspected abuse. It is important that I understand this legal and ethical issue as I further my career as a school counselor. Students often share aspects of their home life with School Counselors that they may not share with other adults, so I must be prepared to identify suspicions of abuse and report them. In my future role I will need to understand the signs of all types of abuse, because students will not always disclose information verbally. Child Abuse is a very important legal and ethical issue that all Educators must be prepared to deal with.

# data[].attributes.body
American School Counselors Association. (2016). ASCA ethical standards for
school counselors. American School Counselors Association. Retrieved from
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-members/legal-ethical

Bryant, K. (2009). School counselors and child abuse reporting: A national survey.
Professional School Counseling, 12(5), p. 333-342. Retrieved from
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.easydb.angelo.edu/eds/detail/detail?
vid=1&sid=7a805fd1-29b0-44eb-afa0-29d542791519%40sdc-v-
sessmgr05&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#AN=EJ880390&db=eric

Campisi, J. (2019, January 7). Parkland shooting commission recommends
arming teachers. Education Dive. Retrieved from
https://www.educationdive.com/news/parkland-shooting-commission-
recommends-arming-teachers/545328/

NSBA. (2012). State anti-bullying statutes april 2012. National School Boards
Association. Retrieved from https://cdn-files.nsba.org/s3fs-
public/reports/State_Anti-Bullying_Statutes_table_04_2012.pdf?
qMaTVWnhRUU04uY8_nzRAoBfriSeNJWp

NSBA. (2018). NSBA comments on proposed public charge regulation. National
School Boards Association. Retrieved from https://cdn-files.nsba.org/s3fs-     public/NSBA%20Comments%20on%20Proposed%20Public%20Charge%20Regulation.pdf

Stone, C. (2016). School counselor questioned by student's parents after child
abuse report. American School Counselor Association. Retrieved from
https://www.schoolcounselor.org/magazine/blogs/march-april-2016/school-
counselor-questioned-by-student-s-parents-a

Ujifusa, A. (2018, November 27). Democratic bill aims to put brakes on restraint
and seclusion practices. Education Week, 38(14), p. 18. Retrieved from
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/11/28/democratic-bill-aims-to-put-
brakes-on.html