2021
DOI: 10.1177/01987429211063625
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Council for Exceptional Children, Division of Emotional and Behavioral Health’s Position Statement on Solitary Confinement

Abstract: This document, from the Council for Exceptional Children, Division of Emotional and Behavioral Health (DEBH), provides clear and compelling support for the abolishment of solitary confinement with incarcerated youth and young adults in juvenile and adult correctional facilities. This is the first position statement from DEBH on the topic, and the information includes (a) a definition of solitary confinement, (b) discussion of its use, (c) an explanation of the impacts of solitary confinement on youth, (d) iden… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 34 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(National Disability Rights Network, 2009, p. 22) The report's authors recommended banning seclusion and prone restraints in educational settings (i.e., a student being restrained face down on their stomach), in addition to only using restraint in situations where there was immediate harm to the student or staff. These solutions have been suggested by other scholars (Gagnon et al, 2021;Marx & Baker, 2017;Simonsen et al, 2014;Van Acker et al, 2021) but have yet to be included in federal law or are not consistently applied within many state and district policies and regulations.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(National Disability Rights Network, 2009, p. 22) The report's authors recommended banning seclusion and prone restraints in educational settings (i.e., a student being restrained face down on their stomach), in addition to only using restraint in situations where there was immediate harm to the student or staff. These solutions have been suggested by other scholars (Gagnon et al, 2021;Marx & Baker, 2017;Simonsen et al, 2014;Van Acker et al, 2021) but have yet to be included in federal law or are not consistently applied within many state and district policies and regulations.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%