you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It was strange to me the article had nothing about why the girl needed to be physically restrained.

It clearly says why, whether or not you agree it was necessary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Stating she wasn't allowed to leave is not a reason, why she wasn't allowed to leave would be the reason.
    But trying to leave a house is not basis at all for restraining a person, even if you are told not to.
    Sounds like a power-trip to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    If it’s a school for troubled kids, it could very well be to protect the student during the hours they’re supposed to be there, and to protect people outside from them. Letting a raging and troubled person out into the world does not seem healthy or safe. Seems logical to me. They were doing their jobs: protecting the students and other people from the students.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment