So. . . if I were in any other profession, and a client physically abused me or another client while on my property, I could refuse service. This doesn't make sense to me.
From the first link:
Planned transitions, after documented attempts to address the child’s needs, are not considered expulsions. So there's wiggle room?
The following early childhood programs are prohibited from expelling young children (0-5) due to
child behavior:
School- and community-based early childhood programs receiving Early Childhood Block
Grant funds, such as Preschool for All and Prevention Initiative, to serve children birth to five
Licensed child care programs serving children birth to five
o Bill requires DCFS to adopt rules in alignment with requirements of this legislation
Note: Expulsions are already prohibited for Head Start and Early Head Start programs
On the plus side, how many of your kids with major behavioral issues are the offspring of PARENTS with major behavioral issues (on-time pick up, on-time payment, following the policy handbook)? Termination for nonpayment will probably kick WAY up when providers realize the fastest way to remove a difficult child is to stand their ground on their fee policies.
When a child exhibits consistently challenging behaviors, the ECE program or provider must
document:
Initial observations of challenging behaviors
Communication with and participation of family
Intervention plan and strategies, including the use of or attempts to access available external
resources
Instances where child is ultimately transitioned out of program
Documentation allows ECE programs to show that attempts were made to continue serving the
child, ensuring that transitioning the child out of the program is the last resort.
That is still termination for challenging behavior, just under a nicer name-- "transitioning out." As in, "Bob, you're being rightsized."
What is a planned transition?
If available resources have been exhausted and it is the professional judgment of the provider that
transitioning the child to another setting is best for his/her wellbeing or that of his/her peers, the
provider should work with the family to identify and transition the child to a different setting. This
includes making referrals to other providers and planning with the parents, and new provider when
applicable, to ensure continuity of services.
What if the child poses an immediate threat to the safety of him/herself or other children?
In the case of serious safety threat, the child may be temporarily removed from attendance in the
group setting. The temporary removal of a child should trigger the process outlined above, including
engaging the family and available resources as part of an intervention plan, as well as working to
return the child to a group setting as soon as possible. If it is the professional judgment of the provider
that it is in the best interest to transition the child to a different setting, the provider will initiate the
planned transition process.
Isn't this just termination as most of us are already practicing it?