School restraint policies: Why unlawful restraint of a child is a moral crime

 There are rumors about the fact that my mother works in a "high restraint zone". Blake, our feigned leader, claims to be an autism rights activist. There are many different shades of strength of autism rights support, and as you go out, the more toxic the autism rights beliefs are. My page is aligned as autism awareness/acceptance. One of the basic tenets of autism advocacy is one that I believe as a child advocate - minimal force in correcting students in school.

"We can't put a hand on them" is not the case in all schools. Where my mother teaches, in the Reading School District, this is the case. She might have students with physically aggressive behaviors - I haven't asked, and it's none of my business - but restraining a child, in most cases, apart from immediate risk of death or severe bodily injury, illegal, and can be considered a form of harassment as well. Usually, the school just gets fined from Department of Special Education Services in Harrisburg. Some schools, however, don't react this way. This is a red state/blue state thing, as many states either have districts that still paddle and/or have seclusion rooms for all students (think "the chokey" in The Handmaids Tale).

Is restraining students appropriate. The Greek root word denoting entitlement is πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to the attitude of "I am the teacher, and I have the right to control my classroom" leading to controlling, punitive, or demanding attitudes towards children. It says in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to legal damages imposed upon students, namely the slightest of personal slights, stemming from entitled intent to control or manipulate a situation. Simply moving a child is a violation of this commandment, unless they consent to being moved. Picking up a child when they want down is also prohibited, except if the child can be expected to run to an area where they would be at risk of death or serious bodily injury. Force used in such parenting must be done out of strong concern, not anger, and must meet the minimal force necessary to guide the child away from harm. This should never include corporal punishment or any form of punishment, such as false imprisonment or larceny of tokens, as this is "worry" narcissism, meaning if you feel the need to strike a child, there must be some entitlement behind your motives.

Anything a child perceives to be abusive viscerally then is such objectively, as the victims perceptions are always objective, and children are the ultimate victims of abuse. Every single adult is collectively individually culpable for their existence as a member of a group that has abused and oppressed children throughout human history. Adults are inherently evil and depraved in their nature towards children, and must center their aggressive parent impulses, either physical or sexual in expression.

Many teachers and educators complain about "children's rights people telling us what to do". A common complaint would be "how do I control my students". Build a rapport with them, meaning focus on the relationship with each individual student, and refer to them as friends as well as students. In Pennsylvania, the law is sort of countercultural, meaning here teachers are still conditioned by our culture to see themselves as above children. It is a myth that schoolteachers tend to be anti-spanking. I polled them as a child, so I would know. Some want the paddle to be brought back. Most progressive individuals who support our movement are in the health fields, meaning ask any doctor if they spank their child, and they likely will endorse our parenting instead, or at least some variant of it. Psychologists and psychiatrists are also anti-spanking, on average. Same with many college professors and lecturers. Children and Youth Services caseworkers are the highest level supporters of positive parenting approaches, with CYS here in Berks County opposing physical punishment in a stated policy on their website. But, teacher's unions, despite their straight Democratic support, are for the right of teachers to use force to control their classrooms.

You can thank our movement for getting the pro-social rumor going that spanking, but also overzealous restraint in schools, is a bad thing, and is abuse. It is already banned under Divine Law, but the civil law here in Pennsylvania has not caught up yet, completely. Pennsylvania, however, has some of the strictest laws opposing restraint and seclusion, and they match up with moral legal law on this subject.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke their children to anger will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them BURN in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!