In April 2026 the Yukon Government issued a formal apology to former students of Jack Hulland Elementary School. Children in a special education classroom were restrained, secluded and subjected to harmful practices for years. The apology came after a class action lawsuit which acknowledged that students experienced ongoing harm inside a public school.
According to the reports and court documents, students at Jack Hulland Elementary were physically restrained, held or pinned down, and locked in seclusion rooms. Children were subjected to these practices repeatedly and sometimes even daily. Many of these children were those with disabilities or required extra support. Parents were not informed and internal reviews were also not shared. The staff continued working with children in the same way even after concerns were raised.
The Yukon Supreme Court accepted that the practices were used far beyond what is legally permitted. Restraint and seclusion are allowed only when there is imminent danger, however at Jack Hulland this practice was regularly used. Unfortunately, Ontario has no laws regulating when, how or whether these practices can be used. It instead asks all school boards to have their own policies when it comes to seclusion and restraint. The Education Act offers broad authority for maintaining safety but fails to define or restrict seclusion. As a result, practices differ across boards with no mandatory reporting and no external oversight.
Unfortunately for many families in Ontario, the details of this case felt painfully familiar. Ontario has had its own class action settlements relating to segregated spaces for people with disabilities: $8 million to settle abuse at a provincial school for the blind, and $35 million plus an official apology for the Huronia Regional Centre, where for over 130 years persons with disabilities were housed in horrific conditions.
More recently, the death of sixteen year old Landyn Ferris on May 14, 2024, a student with Dravet syndrome, has raised urgent questions. He was found unresponsive in a sensory room at the Trenton High School, in the Prince Edward County District School Board. He required constant supervision yet was left alone. This raised questions about the use of sensory and seclusion rooms and the supervision medically fragile students require. This again reflects the impact of no consistent oversight and the absence of province wide legislation.
These cases aren’t isolated. According to an April 2025 report by Community Living Ontario, 29 percent of caregivers reported that their child had been secluded in school, i.e., placed in a separate space away from their peers, often behind locked or blocked doors. Fourteen percent of caregivers reported that their child had been restrained in school, including being held down on the ground, held while standing, and held while being forced to walk. Thirty-one percent of students had been sent home or instructed to stay home because the school was unable to meet their needs. More than half of caregivers reported that their children were sometimes, often, or always excluded from academic events and opportunities. One in four students represented in the survey ‘rarely’ or ‘never’ enjoy school or feel valued or accepted by school staff. Forty percent of students avoided school or were reluctant to attend because of anxiety and fear caused by their experiences within the school community.
Apologies are important, but what matters is what governments do next. Segregation of vulnerable persons has repeatedly been demonstrated to be unsafe and abusive. A failure to train and support teachers, properly implement necessary accommodations and supports in schools, and elsewhere, and simply failing to understand the indignity of segregation is a failure on a systemic level Ontario does not seem to have the will to overcome.
IAO calls for the elimination of segregated settings, and instead demands properly supported classrooms and schools, designed for all students, and a ban of seclusion rooms province wide, along with clear standards for when restraint can be used. Reporting must be mandatory and parents must be fully informed. These are not radical demands: they are basic requirements for children’s safety and dignity and educating all learners.
