Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Restraint Therapy Ban topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves ban on certain restraint-based therapies for children; supporters cite harm, opponents warn of scope
Summary
The Utah House passed first substitute House Bill 356 to prohibit certain licensed restraint therapies for children, with supporters citing injuries and deaths and opponents arguing the bill is overly broad and may curtail some therapeutic practices. The measure passed on a floor roll call and will go to the Senate.
The Utah House on March 4 passed first substitute House Bill 356, a measure sponsored by Representative Mike Thompson that would prohibit licensed mental health therapists from administering certain restraint-based therapies to children.
The bill’s sponsor, Representative Mike Thompson, said the legislation responds to troubling evidence and testimony about practices he described as harmful. "I have come to believe that this therapy is extremely harmful to those who can least fend for themselves, which is our children," Thompson said on the House floor, citing videos and accounts shown to members and the legislature's review process. Supporters urged immediate action, saying children have been injured and that professions and families differ on whether the techniques are therapeutic or abusive.
The debate on the floor was emotional and at times sharply divided. Representative Farrin recounted a constituent’s experience, saying "holding therapy has saved her life and saved their family," and urged caution, warning that the bill as written could ban therapies that some families and therapists consider beneficial. Opponents asked for additional study and voluntary professional standards rather than a statutory ban. Supporters repeatedly referenced nationally reported deaths connected with similar techniques and argued the state must protect children.
Lawmakers also debated carve-outs and exceptions. Thompson and supporters framed the bill as limited to licensed providers and not aimed at parents who "hold" a child out of love. Thompson said the bill targets licensed practices and sought to balance parental rights with child safety. Opponents pushed alternative approaches such as developing professional certification or narrower statutory language, with Representative Farrin urging interim study and standards development.
After extended debate and several procedural motions, the House opened the roll call. The bill passed with a recorded majority (the floor transcript recorded 52–53 yes with 20 no votes in the roll call as read on the floor) and was referred to the Senate for further consideration.
Why it matters: supporters said HB356 addresses a practice that can produce serious physical and psychological harm, including trauma bonding and, in isolated cases reported elsewhere, fatalities. Opponents argued the bill may sweep too broadly, affecting families and therapeutic approaches that some professionals and parents say have helped children; they pressed for clearer definitions or additional study.
What’s next: the House-passed measure will be transmitted to the Senate for its consideration and potential amendment. The House debate made clear lawmakers are split on how narrowly to define prohibited practices and what exceptions, if any, to permit.
