Amy Rich Crane

As a professional who works closely with children, families, and schools, I am deeply concerned about legislation that would further separate students with behavioral needs from their peers and place them out of district or in isolated settings. Decades of research show that segregation does not lead to better educational or behavioral outcomes. In fact, students with behavioral and emotional support needs consistently do better academically, socially, and emotionally when educated alongside their peers with appropriate supports in place. Removing them from peer environments limits access to positive role models, natural social learning, and the sense of belonging that is essential for growth and regulation. Behavior does not improve in isolation; it improves through connection, support, and skill-building within real-world environments. This type of legislation also negatively impacts students without identified disabilities. When children grow up learning only alongside those who look, learn, and behave like them, they miss critical opportunities to develop empathy, flexibility, and understanding. Schools are one of the few places where children can learn how to navigate differences in a safe, guided way. Separating students teaches avoidance, not collaborative problem-solving when differencsles arise, and reinforces fear and stigma rather than understanding. Isolation carries real risks. Research consistently links exclusion and social rejection to higher rates of anxiety, depression, disengagement from school, and long-term mental health challenges. When students are labeled as “too much” or removed because their needs are complex, it sends a message that they do not belong. That message follows children into adulthood and contributes to cycles of shame, withdrawal, and, in some cases, increased aggression or hopelessness. It is also important to recognize that behavioral needs are not rare and are not limited to a small group of children. Differences in emotional regulation, attention, sensory processing, and stress response are common, especially in a world where many children are experiencing trauma, instability, or unmet needs. Disability, injury, mental health challenges, or neurological differences can affect any family at any time. Creating systems that separate rather than support ultimately puts all children at risk. From a practical standpoint, segregation is not a cost-saving or effective solution. Out-of-district placements and separate programs are expensive and often reactive. Investing in well-trained staff, in-school supports, and proactive systems benefits more students, prevents crises, and strengthens entire school communities. When schools are equipped to support a wider range of learners, everyone benefits. We should be moving toward better support, not more separation. The goal should be helping children learn how to exist in community, not removing them from it. Policies that prioritize exclusion may feel easier in the short term, but they create long-term harm for students, families, and society as a whole. Our children deserve systems that teach understanding, build skills, and keep them connected, not ones that push them further to the margins.