I am the OP of the "And so it begins" thread where my ASD/ ADHD kiddo was basically swarmed by strangers during a meltdown and pinned to the floor by the plant engineer.
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/750345.page
We had a great IEP meeting and are doing FBA to create a BIP and the staff is all going to be CPI trained. So it felt like we were in a good place.
However, the administration is balking at correcting the documentation prepared to report the use of restraint to the state. The narrative when read without any knowledge reads like my child stood up from his desk and started assaulting staff. They rather conveniently left out all of the pertinent details about what they didn't do (de-escalate through space/ words) and also what they did do (corner him/ pin him to the floor). Although the form is titled something like "documentation of use of restraint" there was no description of the use of restraint.
At first I thought it was just that a very inexperienced AP was completing it and there was just a little CYA going on. So I requested that the narrative be amended to include a description of the antecedents/ de-escalation actions that were taken along with the details of the restraint hold and how it was used. (this information is specifically requested on the form itself,. (I was just repeating the instructions on the form- whoever made the form did a really nice job.)
She returned it to me with the following phrase added to the end of the description:
Mother requests that we add information about de-escalation actions which were:
-told child to calm down
-dimmed lights
When child continued to be violent, we performed an assistive hold to stop him from assaulting staff.
Obviously this wasn't what I was looking for. So I responded by saying that I drafted a narrative including all of the previous notes, but adding the additional information that had been provided to me verbally in the debrief meeting. I added notes about what the team described happening and also added sections in from my child's point of view and a team debrief comments section that highlighted some alternative actions that could have been taken. There were still some open questions that hadn't been answered (like how long was my child restrained and also how was he released) and I requested the team review those and add that information and we could come together for a final review to be sure everyone was comfortable with the description before we finalized it.
So I just got a call from the PSL who said that the principal is declining to update the form, but he will include my notes along with the form. She noted several times that they are saying that the hold was assistive and they usually only do this form for level 3s. This is the same PSL who encourage me to bring the advocate in her off the record call. So I feel like that is an important detail.
So I am obviously going to appeal this decision and have an in person meeting with the principal about my concerns and desire to have this form be accurate.
Can someone who is CPI- trained explain to me the difference between an assistive hold and a level 3 hold?
In the hold they are describing, my DS was sitting on the floor when a man pinned his legs with his own legs, and then my child was lying on his back with this mans legs holding his down. The AP had her hands in between the mans legs and my son's legs to be sure there wasn't too much pressure.
Any advice/ information you can provide would be really helpful. I am honestly pretty upset again and need to gather myself for another difficult discussion. CPI doesn't share a lot of details because they sell their training, which is completely fair. But I am not finding anything via Google.