{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0183982683982684, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006493506493506494, 'mean_word_length': 5.801470588235294, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Is it Meant to Hurt, is it?”

The use of seclusion, restraint, and rapid tranquilization for people with developmental disabilities is controversial. A statistical analysis of 3,767 such incidents, involving 82 clients with developmental disabilities, is presented along with semistructured interview material completed following personal experience of emergency intervention. Women were involved in a disproportionately high number of incidents. It was found that women had a significantly higher probability of being given rapid tranquilization following a violent incident. In contrast, seclusion was more likely to be used with men. Interviews with women demonstrated a commonly held understanding of interventions as punishment and expressions of intense anger and anxiety. The study highlights the importance of including the perspectives of people with developmental disabilities in care planning and staff training.