An increasing number of children and youth have mental health disorders. To address this issue, federal and provincial mental health policymakers in Canada have recommended: (a) improving the coordination of services, and (b) increasing the role that schools play in providing supports. One way to operationalize these recommendations is to implement the wraparound approach in the context of a full-service community school. This qualitative, multiple-case study of three community schools in Manitoba, Canada, explores the experiences of stakeholders in community schools as they relate to support for children and youth with mental health disorders and their families. The findings indicate that community schools engage in practices that align with the 10 guiding principles of wraparound. Given the broad-based partnerships in community schools and their focus on collaborative action, they hold promise as sites with the potential to lead the implementation of the wraparound approach.

There is increasing concern that restraint and seclusion are being misused in schools, most often with students with disabilities. This issue is silent at the provincial level in Manitoba, with no regulation from the Ministry of Education. In order to examine the extent to which restraint and seclusion were being used in schools in Manitoba with children/youth with disabilities, an anonymous online survey involving a convenience sample of parents/guardians of children/ youth with disabilities was conducted. The 48-item questionnaire was disseminated through disability advocacy organizations in this province. Parents/guardians reported a high frequency of the use of restraint and seclusion, limited consent to the use of these practices, and an absence of written notification that they had occurred. Of great concern, some parents reported that their child was subjected to mechanical restraint and practices known to have a higher risk of causing death (e.g. supine and prone holds, being left in rooms that were locked from the outside etc.). A majority of parents reported their child had suffered trauma, and signs of physical injury also were noted. The results of this study indicate that restraint and seclusion are being misused as behaviour management techniques, especially with students with disabilities. These practices contravene Canada’s commitment to international standards regarding the rights of children and youth with disabilities, and change is required. The implementation of regulatory standards, legitimizing the voice of parents of children and youth with disabilities, and training for educators in positive behaviour interventions and supports are proposed.

The intended purpose of physical restraint, seclusion, and time-out rooms in schools is to intervene in a crisis when the behaviour of a student poses an immediate or imminent, and significant threat to physical safety. While the use of physical restraint, seclusion, and time-out rooms is intended to provide protection from immediate physical harm, there is increasing concern that these practices are being used more broadly and that individuals with disabilities are disproportionately subjected to their use. In spite of the importance of this issue, there is a dearth of research analyzing the policy landscape of physical restraint, seclusion, and time-out rooms in Canadian schools. In order to explore this issue, a comparative analysis of publicly available provincial and territorial education documents was conducted. The analysis revealed that in many Canadian provinces and territories, policies and accountability structures on the use of physical restraint, seclusion, and time-out rooms in schools are inconsistent or non-existent. Further, the terminology used to describe seclusion is variable and often conflated with time out, and the conditions under which such practices may be used in some instances are subjective, which may contribute to a broad interpretation of what is deemed acceptable practices in schools. This analysis draws attention to the need for the development of clearly articulated provincial and territorial standards for the use of physical restraint, seclusion, and time out, as well as the need for regulatory and enforcement mechanisms at the school, division, and ministry levels in order to ensure the emotional and physical well-being of all.

Rooted in the principles of social justice, inclusive societies afford all individuals and groups regardless of age, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, race, ability, religion, immigration status, and socioeconomic status access to and full participation in society. The movement toward inclusive societies is progressive, and continues to occur incrementally. Regrettably, there are deeply rooted belief systems and norms of exclusion, which continue to create barriers to the achievement of more inclusive societies. Some of the contemporary issues that stymie the development of inclusive societies include but are not limited to (a) the marginalization of Indigenous languages, (b) the denial of basic human rights, such as healthcare, to undocumented migrants, and (c) differential access to inclusive education for individuals with disabilities. Using a framework of analysis developed by Therborn, which describes the actualization of inclusive societies as a five-step incremental process—(1) visibility, (2) consideration, (3) access to social interactions, (4) rights, and (5) resources to fully participate in society and Social Role Valorization theory (SRV)—and posits the need for all individuals to hold valued social roles, continued progress toward the achievement of more inclusive societies might be attained.

In the province of Manitoba, Canada, there is a gap between the rhetoric of inclusive education and its practical implementation. In the absence of inclusive educational policies and guidelines, deficit-based approaches such as categorical labels for students who are deemed to have a severe emotional and behavioural disorder, segregated classrooms, and self-contained programs are prevalent and change is needed. This paper provides a critical perspective on how the paradigm of special education contributes to the social construction of disability; how, for Indigenous students, it too often positions behavioural difference as disability; and further, why this practice is systemically discriminatory. In our examination, we seek to expose the exclusion (Slee & Allen, 2001) that exists in nominally inclusive schools as a way to promote social change and redirect education toward truly inclusive practices. To that end, we suggest the following strategies that may reduce educational inequity for Indigenous students: (a) developing clearly articulated inclusive educational policies along with indicators of inclusivity; (b) reporting the number of Indigenous students who are identified as emotionally and behaviourally disordered, and segregated in self-contained settings; (c) establishing needs-based models of support at all levels (e.g., province, division, and school); (d) creating new narratives of assessment and pedagogy; and (e) reconceptualizing teachers’ training. We hope that by critically examining the structures and processes of special education that, in fact, disable Indigenous students from educational success, inclusion might encompass more than a provincial philosophy and include transformative educational change.