TL;DR:
Physical restraint in an English children’s home is permitted only to prevent injury, prevent serious damage to property or, in a secure children’s home, prevent a child from absconding. It must be necessary and proportionate. Restraint cannot be punishment or a routine way to secure compliance. Homes should prevent incidents through relationships, individual planning and de-escalation, then record, review and learn from every use of restraint.
Images in this guide are AI-generated illustrations, not photographs of Welcare premises or evidence of a particular home’s facilities.
Introduction
Restraint is one of the most serious interventions a residential childcare worker may use. Even when it prevents immediate harm, it can be frightening, painful or retraumatising. The legal question is therefore only the starting point. A good home also asks what led to the incident, how the child experienced it and what can reduce the likelihood of it happening again.
This guide explains the rules for children’s homes in England, the required records and the safeguards inspectors expect. It provides general information and should be read alongside the home’s policies, training and each child’s plan.
What Counts as Restraint?
The Children’s Homes (England) Regulations 2015 define restraint as using force or restricting a child’s liberty of movement. Physical holds are an obvious example, but the impact and intent of an intervention matter more than the label used by a training provider.
Supportive touch without force is not necessarily restraint. If a worker uses force to direct a child away from something they want to do, or towards something they do not want to do, the home should consider whether that meets the definition and requires a restraint record.
Restrictive practice is a wider term. It can include locked doors, monitoring or surveillance, limits on access, mechanical devices, medication used to control behaviour or other arrangements that reduce freedom. Different legal rules may apply, but all restrictions should be necessary, proportionate, individually assessed and kept under review.
When Is Restraint Permitted?
Regulation 20 permits restraint only for the purpose of preventing:
The restraint must also be necessary and proportionate. Staff should be able to explain the immediate risk, why less restrictive options were insufficient and why the force, method and duration were proportionate to that risk.
The third purpose applies to secure children’s homes. Staff in an ordinary children’s home cannot restrain a child simply to stop them leaving. They still have safeguarding duties and should follow the child’s missing-from-home plan, but those duties do not create an extra purpose for restraint under Regulation 20.
Evidence a Strong Review Should Consider
Restraint must not be used as punishment, to humiliate a child, to enforce staff authority or merely because a child refuses an instruction. It should not compensate for poor staffing, unsuitable environments or an inadequate support plan.
The regulations prohibit corporal punishment and other inappropriate sanctions. A home’s behaviour management approach should promote positive relationships, dignity and repair rather than control through fear.
An intervention can begin lawfully and become unlawful or unsafe if it continues after the immediate risk has passed. Staff should release or reduce restriction as soon as it is safe to do so.
Prevention Comes First
The safest restraint is the one that becomes unnecessary. Prevention starts long before a crisis. Staff need to know each child’s communication, sensory needs, triggers, trauma history, strengths and preferred ways of receiving support.
Helpful measures can include:
- Predictable routines with meaningful choices
- Early recognition of distress or overload
- Calm, respectful communication
- Space, time and reduced demands where safe
- Access to familiar activities or regulating resources
- Consistent boundaries and explanations
- Repair after conflict
- Plans developed with the child and important adults
De-escalation is not a scripted phrase. What reassures one child may increase another child’s distress. Plans should be individual, regularly reviewed and informed by what the child says works.
Staff Training and Professional Judgement
Staff need training in the home’s approved approach, but a certificate does not make every technique suitable. Workers must use professional judgement in the specific circumstances and remain accountable for necessity, proportionality and impact.
Training should cover prevention, communication, legal limits, medical risk, practical skills, recording and post-incident support. Competence needs observation and refreshers, especially after incidents or changes in children’s needs.
Ofsted notes that there is no universal government accreditation system for children’s restraint models. Providers must therefore assess the evidence, risks and suitability of any programme rather than relying only on a brand or course name.
What Must Be Recorded?
Subject to the narrow exception below, Regulation 35(3) requires a record within 24 hours of using a measure of control, discipline or restraint.
The record must include:
- The child’s name and the behaviour leading to the measure
- Date, time and location
- A description of the measure and its duration
- Steps taken to avoid using it
- The people who used or witnessed the measure
- Its effectiveness and consequences
- Any injury and medical treatment
Within 48 hours of the use of the measure, the registered person or an authorised person must speak to the person who used it and sign the record to confirm its accuracy. Within five days of its use, they must add confirmation that they have spoken to the child about it.
Regulation 35(4) disapplies those paragraph (3) requirements for restraint planned or provided for as a matter of routine in the child’s EHC plan or statement of special educational needs. This is not an exemption from lawful, necessary and proportionate practice. Regulation 36 and Schedule 3 still require the child’s case record to include the date and circumstances of any control, discipline or restraint. Welfare checks, the child’s views and management oversight remain important.
These are maximum regulatory times, not reasons to delay immediate welfare checks, medical attention, safeguarding action or a child’s chance to speak when ready.
Speaking with the Child After Restraint
The conversation should be more than obtaining agreement with the staff account. The child should have a safe, accessible opportunity to describe what happened, how the intervention felt and what could help in future. They may prefer an advocate or another trusted adult.
Children who communicate without speech are still entitled to have their experience explored. Staff may need communication aids, observation, specialist advice and input from people who know the child well.
The child’s account can differ from the staff account. Both should be recorded fairly. An allegation or safeguarding concern must be handled under the relevant procedure, not absorbed into a routine debrief.
Management Review and Learning
Managers should examine more than whether the form is complete.
Review should ask:
- Was the intervention permitted, necessary and proportionate?
- Were less restrictive options tried or reasonably available?
- Did staff follow the child’s plan and their training?
- Was the child injured, frightened or otherwise adversely affected?
- Was medical or safeguarding action required?
- Does the support plan or risk assessment need to change?
- Is there a pattern involving a child, worker, shift, location or trigger?
Patterns such as prone or ground holds, lengthy interventions, restraint in bedrooms, repeated injuries, high staff numbers or increasing frequency will attract close scrutiny. The response should focus on reducing risk and restriction, not improving the wording of reports alone.
When Should Ofsted or Others Be Notified?
Not every restraint is automatically a Regulation 40 notification. A serious incident, allegation of abuse, significant injury, serious police involvement or another reportable event must be considered under the notification rules. The placing authority and other relevant professionals may also need prompt information under the child’s plan and safeguarding procedures.
Managers should record the decision and rationale. Sending a notification does not replace child protection action, medical care or communication with the child.
Restraint and Deprivation of Liberty
A short, necessary intervention to prevent immediate injury is different from an ongoing arrangement that deprives a child of liberty. Regulation 20 confirms that the children’s-home rules do not prevent a deprivation of liberty authorised by a court order.
A provider cannot create lawful authority for continuous restrictions through a placement plan or parental agreement alone. Where restrictions may amount to a deprivation of liberty, the placing authority should obtain legal advice and the necessary court authorisation. The home must understand the exact terms and continue seeking the least restrictive care.
Final Thoughts
The purpose of restraint law is not to give homes a technique for managing difficult behaviour. It sets a narrow limit for responding to immediate serious risk. Safe homes work continuously to understand children, increase freedom and make restraint less likely. When it is used, honest review and the child’s voice must drive learning.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Not for refusal alone. Restraint must be for one of the purposes allowed by Regulation 20 and must be necessary and proportionate to the immediate risk.
Not solely because the child is leaving. Regulation 20's absconding purpose is specific to secure children's homes. An ordinary home may still use necessary and proportionate restraint to prevent injury or serious property damage where those conditions genuinely apply. Leaving alone does not meet that test; staff should use the child's safeguarding and missing-from-home procedures.
Normally, Regulation 35(3) requires recording within 24 hours, the staff discussion and accuracy sign-off within 48 hours, and confirmation of discussion with the child within five days. All run from use of the measure. See the recording section for the limited EHC/SEN exception and the continuing case-record duties.
The child's plans, placement arrangements, safeguarding procedures and the seriousness of the incident determine who must be informed. Homes should have a clear policy and should not delay urgent communication.
No. It requires a Regulation 40 notification when the circumstances amount to a specified serious event or another incident the registered person considers serious. The decision and reasons should be recorded.