Posts: 52,189
Threads: 2,798
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
no covered individual may use physical restraint on a pupil at school unless he or she has received training in the use of physical restraint that includes all of the following components:
I'm pretty sure that means no using a choke hold in a kid, or even a carotid restraint, and not doing harm to either party.
But I doubt very much that means stand by and try to talk little Sarah or Johnny down from kicking another student.
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
C(-)ris wrote:
2011 WISCONSIN ACT 125
(6) Physical restraint; training. (a) Except as provided in par. ©, no covered individual may use physical restraint on a pupil at school unless he or she has received training in the use of physical restraint that includes all of the following components:
There is a lot more to it, but a normal classroom teacher cannot use restraint which would pretty much be the only way to stop a fight if verbal commands don't work. If there is no trained staff available the only option is to call the police if they won't stop.
You left out "par. ©" so I've quoted it below. I suspect it would cover a circumstance wherein 6 year old unexpectedly putting a dangerous, violent beatdown on another single-digit kid:
2011 WISCONSIN ACT 125 wrote:
© A covered individual who has not received training in the use of physical restraint under par. (a) may use physical restraint on a pupil at school only in an emergency and only if a covered individual who has received training in the use of physical restraint under par. (a) is not immediately available due to the unforeseen nature of the emergency.
Posts: 52,189
Threads: 2,798
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
Nope: (g) "Physical restraint" means a restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a pupil to freely move his or her torso, arms, legs, or head.
Yes, that was kind of a given.
The gist was to contradict your ridiculous premise that a normal classroom teacher cannot use restraint which would pretty much be the only way to stop a fight if verbal commands don't work
This bit is relevant as well: {i}A covered individual who has not received training...
"Halt or you'll be handcuffed!"
I suspect it would cover a circumstance wherein 6 year old unexpectedly putting a dangerous, violent beatdown on another single-digit kid...
Agreed.
Posts: 42,600
Threads: 545
Joined: Nov 2023
Reputation:
0
almost every law depends on whose lawyer is stronger, and who has the most money to spend.
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
C(-)ris wrote:
[quote=RAMd®d]
Nope: (g) "Physical restraint" means a restriction that immobilizes or reduces the ability of a pupil to freely move his or her torso, arms, legs, or head.
Yes, that was kind of a given.
The gist was to contradict your ridiculous premise that a normal classroom teacher cannot use restraint which would pretty much be the only way to stop a fight if verbal commands don't work
This bit is relevant as well: {i}A covered individual who has not received training...
"Halt or you'll be handcuffed!"
I suspect it would cover a circumstance wherein 6 year old unexpectedly putting a dangerous, violent beatdown on another single-digit kid...
Agreed.
You will have to go to court and find out if a 6 year old kicking another 6 year old constitutes a unforeseen emergency and also if trained staff was or was not available. How long do you wait to see if someone comes? Remember, you are going to be put on administrative leave first as soon as Johnny's parents file a complaint and then you can attempt to assert your innocence.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but this doesn't sound like a process in use at any public school system. I'm tempted to read the rest of the statute to investigate whether the determination of whether inter-student violence constitutes an unforeseen emergency actually requires a court appearance. I'm stunned by the claim - do you know it to be true?
