Legislation to prohibit dangerous restraint practices for dysregulated public school students moved one step closer to becoming law this week. On Feb. 25, the Senate Early Learning & K-12 Education Committee approved HB 1795.
If approved by the Legislature and signed into law, HB 1795 would:
- · Prohibit mechanical restraint, chemical restraint, and physical restraint or physical escort of a student that is life threatening.
- · Specify that isolation may not be used as a planned behavioral intervention in individualized education programs or 504 plans and allows restraint only under specified circumstances.
- · Prohibit the construction, repurposing, or otherwise establishing any new room or other enclosed area for the primary purpose of student isolation.
- · Apply student restraint and isolation requirements to all providers of public educational services, except for licensed or certified health professionals of an inpatient health care facility.
PSE testified as “other” — neither Pro nor Con — during the bill’s most recent public hearing in the Senate education committee. Our position was intentional. It recognized union members’ serious concerns about eliminating “last-resort” behavior interventions without first ensuring tested, reliable alternatives to isolation and restraint, increased staffing levels in school buildings, along with comprehensive professional development and clear technical guidance.
At the same time, PSE’s testimony acknowledged the meaningful progress reflected in this narrower, more targeted proposal.
Here is my complete testimony to the Senate committee on Feb. 19:
This is a narrow, focused bill. It is not the same comprehensive proposal this committee last considered in 2023. HB 1795 takes a more targeted approach, concentrating on clearly defined prohibitions and guardrails around restraint. That focus matters. It reflects lessons learned over the past three years and a shared desire to make steady, achievable progress.
Second, we need to acknowledge the reality in our schools. Paraeducators and teachers are facing increasingly complex student needs—academic, behavioral, and mental health. The K–12 system has not fully risen to meet those needs. Staffing shortages, limited access to behavioral health supports, and inconsistent training leave frontline staff responding to crises without the tools and backup they deserve.
Many paraeducators do not want to use restraint or isolation. They understand the trauma it can cause. But when a student is in crisis and there are not enough trained adults, not enough space, and not enough preventive supports, staff are often left with impossible choices. That is the context in which this policy currently operates.
Third, I want to emphasize how much PSE values the collaboration that has brought us here. We have worked closely with student and family advocates and individuals with lived experience. Together, we have explored our shared purposes and found meaningful alignment around reducing harm and trauma for students. That collaboration has been real, respectful, and productive.
HB 1795 reflects that work. It prohibits chemical and mechanical restraints and bans restraints that restrict breathing or blood flow. It sets clear boundaries while keeping the bill focused and workable.
We continue to have concerns about implementation—particularly around training, staffing, and safety—but we are committed to moving this bill forward this year. As you consider this bill, we respectfully ask that you weigh timelines, resources, and practical supports carefully so schools can transition successfully while keeping both students and staff safe.
Thank you for your time and your thoughtful work on this important issue.
The effort to reform isolation and restraint policy has taken several years. The original 2023 bill, HB 1479, was eight pages long but eventually grew to 32 pages as more provisions were added, increasing its complexity. As a result, HB 1479 and later versions of HB 1795 failed to pass in 2023, 2024, and 2025.
In late 2025, K–12 labor stakeholders (including PSE) and disability advocates worked together to reach agreement on key elements that could pass in a short, 60-day session. That collaboration produced a focused seven-page striking amendment to HB 1795, later amended by House and Senate committees. The current bill is now eight pages long, reflecting a more streamlined and workable approach.
HB 1795 now awaits a vote by the full Senate, expected in the coming days.
You can watch my committee testimony on TVW here.