Handcuffed Black students in Kent School spur bill

State legislators are considering a bill that would establish uniform statewide policies for the use of force and physical restraint on unruly or disruptive students. State Rep. Eric Pettigrew, the sponsor of House Bill 1792, said Tuesday his proposal would still allow school security officers or school staff to physically restrain students -- including the use of handcuffs -- when there is an imminent danger or threat of injury. Pettigrew said one of the goals of his measure, inspired by allegations of discrimination and mistreatment leveled at the Kent School District over the use of handcuffs and physical restraints by school security officers, is to prevent use of physical restraints on a disruptive student when there are other methods to deal with the behavior. If there is no immediate threat of harm, Pettigrew said, HB 1792 would require school security officers or staff to first try talking to the student or using other techniques to ``de-escalate'' the student's behavior. "If you've got a pouting kid or a yelling kid, it doesn't give you the right to tell him, `I don't like your attitude' and put them in a headlock or handcuffs,'' said Pettigrew, whose 37th state Legislative District includes areas of Renton, Skyway and south Seattle. "What I'm saying with this measure is that I want -- and everyone should want -- the adults who deal with our children and our neighbors' children to be held accountable for their actions,'' Pettigrew said. A public hearing is scheduled for today on the legislation. The Kent School Board last fall voted to continue to allow the use of handcuffs in limited situations, despite a $49 million claim for damages filed on behalf of 15 students and their families. Parents and NAACP officials claimed the students, all black, were targets of discrimination because of their race. They also claimed Kent security officers frequently overreacted by using handcuffs, twisting arms or pulling hair to control or discipline students who were being disruptive, but weren't threatening anybody. The lawsuit, which also claims the students' civil rights were violated, is scheduled for trial in U.S. District Court in Seattle in October 2006. [more]