Tennessee Code Annotated

Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 (2026)

Isolation or restraint of student - Reports and record

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaTenn. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) For a student receiving special education services, as defined by § 49-10-102, isolation or a physical holding restraint may only be used in emergency situations.

(b) Individualized education programs that provide for the use of isolation or a physical holding restraint for certain behavior must contain a data driven functional behavior assessment and a plan for modification of the behavior developed and implemented by a qualified team of professionals.

(c) In the event that a physical holding restraint or isolation is imposed on a student, it shall be imposed by:
- (1) School personnel who have been trained and certified for completing a behavior intervention training program; or
- (2) Other school personnel when trained and certified personnel are not immediately available.

(d) If school personnel impose isolation or restraint, then the school shall immediately contact appropriate school personnel who are designated under department rules to authorize the isolation or restraint. The school personnel authorized by the department's rules to authorize isolation or restraint must observe and evaluate the student's condition within a reasonable time after the isolation or restraint was used. The school principal, or the school principal's designee, shall notify the student's parent or guardian orally or by written or printed communication on the same day the isolation or restraint was used. The school principal, or the school principal's designee, shall be held harmless for failing to notify a student's parent or guardian in compliance with this subsection (d) if the school principal, or the school principal's designee, made a reasonable effort to notify the student's parent or guardian.

(e) An individualized education plan (IEP) team meeting must be convened within ten (10) days of the use of a restraint if:
- (1) The student's IEP does not provide for the use of a physical holding restraint generally, or for the behavior that precipitated the use of the restraint; or
- (2) A physical holding restraint is used for an extended period of time, as determined by the state board of education.

(f) An IEP team meeting must be convened within ten (10) days of the use of an isolation if:
- (1) The student's IEP does not provide for the use of an isolation generally, or for the behavior that precipitated the use of the isolation; or
- (2) An isolation is used for an extended period of time, as determined by the state board of education.

(g) If the behavior that precipitated the isolation or restraint also warrants a change of placement, then the student must have all rights provided to the student under applicable state and federal law.

(h)
- (1) School personnel may report a suspected crime by calling a law enforcement official.
- (2) School personnel may file a juvenile petition against a student receiving special education services, but only after a manifestation determination review is conducted in compliance with the requirements of 34 C.F.R. § 300.530, and that results in a determination that:
  - (A) The conduct in question was not caused by, and did not have a direct and substantial relationship to, the student's disability; and
  - (B) The conduct in question was not the direct result of the LEA's failure to implement the student's IEP.
- (3) A school resource officer, as defined in § 49-6-4202, may, upon witnessing an offense, take the student into custody.

(i)
- (1) School personnel who must isolate or restrain a student receiving special education services, as defined by § 49-10-102, shall report the incident to the school principal or the principal's designee. The LEA shall create a record of the use of the isolation or restraint and the facts surrounding such use. The state board of education shall promulgate rules that mandate a standard reporting format to be used by LEAs.
- (2) Whenever possible, an additional school staff member should serve as an observer to any physical holding restraint performed on a student to monitor the health and safety of all involved. School personnel shall maintain a continuous direct line of sight to a student who is in isolation to monitor the health and well-being of the student.

(j) To the extent possible within the local education agency's funds, the local board of education should address § 49-6-3004(c)(1) by incorporating the following components into its behavior intervention training program:
- (1) Training in evidence-based techniques shown to be effective in the prevention of isolation and physical holding restraints;
- (2) Training in evidence-based techniques shown to be effective in keeping both school personnel and students safe when imposing a physical holding restraint or isolation;
- (3) Evidence-based skills training on positive behavioral interventions and supports, conflict prevention, functional behavior assessments, de-escalation, and conflict management;
- (4) Information describing state statutes, policies, rules, and procedures on isolation and restraint;
- (5) Training in the identification and reporting of abuse and neglect in the school setting; and
- (6) Certification for school personnel who have completed a behavior intervention training program which should be renewed on an annual basis.

Amended by 2021 Tenn. Acts, ch. 134, Secs.s10, s11, s12, s13, s14, s15, s16, s17, s18, s19 eff. 7/1/2021.

Acts 2008 , ch. 1063, § 4; 2010 , ch. 856, § 1; 2011 , ch. 457, §§ 5 - 8.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2017–2023 · leading case: I.L. ex rel. Taylor v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 257 F. Supp. 3d 946 (E.D. Tenn. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

I.L. ex rel. Taylor v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 257 F. Supp. 3d 946 (E.D. Tenn. 2017). · cites it 6× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 . Taylor says that Briekey-McCloud staff broke these rules at the beginning of I.”

P.G. v. Rutherford Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 313 F. Supp. 3d 891 (M.D. Tenn. 2018). · cites it 4× “, and the Special Education Behavior Supports Act ("SEBSA"), Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 , et seq . which is incorporated therein; (2) Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.”

Nedra Finney v. Franklin Special Sch. Dist. Bd. Of Educ., 576 S.W.3d 663 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “Tennessee Code Annotated section 49-10-1304 states that “[a] student receiving special education services…may be restrained or isolated only in emergency situations” and only when the child’s IEP provides for the use of a restraint.”

J.M. By & Through Mata v. Tn Dept. Of Educ., 358 F. Supp. 3d 736 (M.D. Tenn. 2018). · cites it 3× “SEBSA itself, moreover, is clearly intended to function hand-in-hand with the structure imposed by the IDEA; for example, it defines its scope in terms of the state's general special education statutes, Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 (a), and repeatedly mentions its functioning in…”

E.S. v. Clarksville Montgomery Cnty. Sch. Sys. (M.D. Tenn. 2023). · cites it 3× “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 (d)(3)(B) (“If school personnel impose isolation or restraint, then the school shall immediately contact appropriate school personnel who are designated under department rules to authorize the isolation or restraint.”

O.B. v. Rutherford Cnty., Tennessee (M.D. Tenn. 2023). · cites it 2× “” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 (a). A “[p]hysical holding restraint” (hereinafter, a “restraint”) “means the use of body contact by school personnel with a student to restrict freedom of movement or normal access to the student’s body.”

E.S. v. Clarksville Montgomery Cnty. Sch. Sys. (M.D. Tenn. 2023). · cites it 2× “Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 . SEBSA also sets parameters for prohibited use of isolation or restraint in pertinent part as follows: (c) The use of any mechanical restraint on any student receiving special education services, as defined by § 49-10-102, is prohibited.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304(a) — 1 case

I.L. ex rel. Taylor v. Knox Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 257 F. Supp. 3d 946 (E.D. Tenn. 2017). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 . Taylor says that Briekey-McCloud staff broke these rules at the beginning of I.”

— Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304(b) — 1 case

J.M. By & Through Mata v. Tn Dept. Of Educ., 358 F. Supp. 3d 736 (M.D. Tenn. 2018). “SEBSA itself, moreover, is clearly intended to function hand-in-hand with the structure imposed by the IDEA; for example, it defines its scope in terms of the state's general special education statutes, Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-10-1304 (a), and repeatedly mentions its functioning in…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.