What is Reasonable, Proportionate & Necessary?
By Dean Cotton, Managing Director, Behaviour Smart Ltd
As a Team Teach Principal Team Teach Tutor and the Restraint Reduction Network Lead, I am often asked to explain what is meant by the terms "reasonable," "proportionate," and "necessary". Obviously we have all had different experiences so what one person thinks is reasonable, another person might not. The terms "reasonable," "proportionate," and "necessary" are often used in the context of legal and ethical discussions surrounding physical interventions. The terms are designed to help establish criteria for determining the appropriateness of actions, particularly when considering the use of force or physical interventions in various situations.
With this in mind I ask you to consider if it would be reasonable to rugby tackle a small child down to the floor?
You may think not but if the child is in the middle of a road and is just about to get run over by a bus, then maybe rugby tackling them down to the floor would be a reasonable thing to do. Of course, if a child was tapping a pen on a table or staring at you then rugby tackling him down to the floor would almost certainly not be reasonable, so where do we draw the line? How do know when physical intervention is needed, and how do we work out if what we are doing is proportionate and necessary?
To start with here's what each term generally implies:
Reasonable
An action is considered reasonable if it is justifiable, fair, and sensible in the given circumstances.
The decision or behaviour should be based on logical and sound judgment, taking into account the facts and context of the situation.
The use of force or physical intervention should align with common sense and not be excessive or extreme.
Staff should consider the risk in using physical intervention compared with the risk of not using physical intervention.
Proportionate:
Proportionality refers to the idea that the level of force or physical intervention should be in line with the threat or situation.
It suggests that the response should not be excessive or disproportionate to the perceived risk or harm.
In other words, the force used should be proportional to the severity of the threat or the necessity of the intervention.
Necessary
The use of force or physical intervention is considered necessary if there is no reasonable alternative to address the situation.
It implies that the action is required to achieve a legitimate purpose, such as self-defence or the protection of others.
The intervention should be a last resort and less intrusive means should be exhausted or deemed impractical before resorting to physical measures. (other than in an emergency where the event was unforeseeable)
In various fields, such as healthcare, social care or education, these principles guide professionals in making decisions about when and how to employ physical interventions. Adhering to these criteria helps ensure that actions are ethical, justifiable, and respectful of individual rights and dignity.
So what behaviours would an individual need to be showing to warrant the use of physical intervention?
The decision to use physical intervention is typically guided by the need to ensure the safety of individuals, staff, and others in the service. While it is crucial to approach physical intervention with caution and adhere to legal and ethical guidelines, there are situations where it may be deemed necessary.
Prevention of Harm:
Physical intervention may be employed to prevent immediate harm to themselves, or other individuals, damage to property or committing an offence. This could include situations where a student is posing a threat to their safety or the safety of those around them.
Emergency Situations
In emergencies such as fights or violent altercations between individuals, staff may use physical intervention to quickly and effectively intervene and prevent further harm.
Following an emergency situation a plan should be put in place as soon as possible.
Risk Management:
Physical intervention may be necessary to manage a situation where there is a perceived risk of harm, and verbal de-escalation or other non-physical strategies have proven ineffective.
Compliance with Policies:
In services where physical intervention is used policies in place that permit the use of physical intervention in specific circumstances.
Individualised Plans:
Following the use of physical intervention a plan should be put in place that explicitly explains the reasons for physical intervention under certain conditions. When a plan is failing a dynamic risk assessment should be used.
It's important to note that any use of physical intervention in services should be proportionate, reasonable, and necessary. Additionally, schools must adhere to legal guidelines, including the Education and Inspections Act 2006 and associated regulations, and ensure that staff are adequately trained in appropriate techniques to minimize the risk of harm and protect the rights of all individuals involved. Services should also have clear policies and procedures in place regarding the use of physical intervention, with an emphasis on prevention and de-escalation whenever possible.
