Debate contribution: Restrictive Practices in Education Settings

Debate contribution by Mr Pat Sheehan on .

MLA
Mr Pat Sheehan
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
30 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Committee Business
Heading
Restrictive Practices in Education Settings
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5043899

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

Ba mhaith liom labhairt inniu go láidir ar son an rúin, nó tá an-imní orm faoi chearta, sábháilteacht, agus dínit na bpáistí inár gcóras oideachais. Bhí an dearcadh ag ár bpáirtí riamh gur gá caitheamh go cúramach, daonnach le páistí agus, thar aon rud eile, meas a bheith againn ar na cearta atá acu. Dá bhrí sin, chuir ar cuala muid sa Choiste Oideachais le linn ár bhfiosrúcháin faoi pháistí á srianadh agus á gcur ar leithlis, chuir sin ár sáith imní orainn. Ná bíodh aon amhras ann: nuair a chluinimid fianaise gur ceanglaíodh páiste de chathaoir lena mhála scoile féin nó gur ceanglaíodh páiste eile de sconsa, caithfimid ceist a chur orainn féin: cén cineál córais a ligeann dá leithéid tarlú? Cén teachtaireacht atá á tabhairt againn do na daoine is leochailí faoinár gcúram?

Many Members have talked tonight about restrictive practices, but not many, apart from Cara, went into the detail of what we are talking about. People listening in may not be acutely aware of what sometimes happens in our schools. One example is of a young autistic boy who was stimming in class. Stimming is what autistic children do sometimes, when they feel anxious or under stress. They make rapid movements of their hands or rock in their chair, stuff like that. That child had his hands tied to a chair with the straps of his school bag, on the basis that it was for the good order and discipline of the rest of the class. The Education Committee learned of another case, that of a young boy who was tethered to a fence. That boy's parents knew nothing about it — nothing at all — until the school sent the yearbook home. Lo and behold, there was a photo in the yearbook of the young child tethered to a fence. We know the story of Harry Shakespeare and how he was strapped into a chair, because we have heard his mother tell it many times. His parents were not aware of that at the start. That is why I asked the Minister how he knows that that is not the norm. In most cases, the parents do not know about it.

I was heavily involved after the scandal at Muckamore, where restrictive practices — I am not talking about the physical abuse — such as seclusion were used on a regular basis, even though they were supposed to be used only as a last resort. On some occasions — we are talking about some of the most vulnerable people in society, with some of the most severe learning disabilities — people were placed in seclusion 70, 80 or 90 times a month. That was not done in secret. The Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority was carrying out inspections and was able to see the records and did not raise a red flag. Here is the learning from that: behaviour like that becomes normalised. That is why someone thought that it was OK to tie a child's hands to a chair with the straps of his school bag. When Cara Hunter says that that is corporal punishment by other means, she is absolutely right. That is what happens: normalised behaviour. A child tethered to a fence — a child tied to a fence.

554 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.93).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.99).
  • Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.05No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.93Yes
Overall judgement0.05At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.99
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.01
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits1.00
No identity-related subject0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:07 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification