How a Positive Systems Approach Could Have Prevented the Exclusion of Luca: A Case Study in Support vs. Suspension

The recent case reported by 1130 NewsRadio  in Vancouver, British Columia about the exclusion of eight-year-old Luca, an autistic and non-verbal student in Nanaimo B.C., shines a harsh light on systemic gaps in how we respond to complex behavioural challenges in schools. Luca has now been out of his Life Skills Program for more than 60 days, barred from returning due to what the school describes as "Level 3 Behaviours." His family, frustrated and distressed, has been navigating unclear demands for documentation, mixed messages, and exclusion from key decision-making meetings.

This situation is heartbreaking, but unfortunately not uncommon. And it highlights precisely the kind of systemic failures that my work — particularly our (with Terry Kirkpatrick) book Managing Disruptive Behaviours with a Positive Systems Approach — seeks to address.

See the article here:  (https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2025/04/25/nanaimo-child-autism-excluded-from-school/)

Let’s look at where the system broke down, critique the actions of the school district, and show how a Positive Systems Approach could have turned this crisis into a success story — for Luca, his family, and the school community.

Where the School Board's Actions Went Wrong

1. Exclusion over Support

By swiftly moving to a medical exclusion without implementing or exhausting positive intervention strategies, the school district chose removal over rehabilitation. Luca’s behaviours — while intense — are not uncommon among students with complex developmental needs, particularly in high-stress or under-supported environments.

Rather than asking, "What supports does Luca need?", the system asked, "How do we remove Luca?".

Critique:

• Immediate exclusion suggests the school lacked a clear, proactive behaviour support plan.

• It criminalizes behaviours that are often a form of communication for non-verbal autistic students.

• It exacerbates feelings of alienation for Luca and his family.

2. Poor Communication and Mixed Messaging

The school district’s handling of documentation requirements — flip-flopping between needing a medical "letter" and a "certificate" — reflects a troubling bureaucratic rigidity. Worse, excluding the parents from key meetings removes their vital voice and experience from problem-solving efforts.  In addition, it is not clear how a “medical” letter/certificate is going to result in positive changes to Luca’s behaviour or to the system trying to support him. 

Critique:

• Clear, compassionate communication is critical in these cases — and it was absent.

• Excluding parents from meetings violates best practices for inclusive education and family-centered planning.

• Moving goalposts regarding documentation is unjust and erodes trust.

3. Failure to Conduct Timely, Meaningful Assessments

Functional Behaviour Assessments (FBAs) are a cornerstone of best practice when addressing significant behaviour challenges. The promise, cancellation, and re-mentioning of an FBA without actually completing one indicates a serious procedural failure.

Critique:

• FBAs should have been conducted promptly after the first signs of escalation.

• No meaningful Behaviour Intervention Plan (BIP) can be designed without quality assessment data.

• Luca’s "behaviours" were treated as justification for removal rather than data points for intervention planning.

How a Positive Systems Approach Could Have Led to a Better Outcome

In Managing Disruptive Behaviours with a Positive Systems Approach, I argue that managing behavioural crises requires moving from a punitive, reactive model to a proactive, systemic, strengths-based model.  For more detail on how to use PSA in a classroom setting, the reader is referred to a previous blog post on drbobcarey.com entitled: Using a Positive Systems Approach to Manage Disruptive Behaviour in a Classroom.  (https://www.drbobcarey.com/post/a-positive-systems-approach-to-managing-disruptive-behaviour-in-the-classroom)

Applied to Luca’s case, here’s what should have happened:

1. Immediate Activation of a Positive Support Team

Upon noticing the rise in challenging behaviours, a school-based Positive Support Team should have been activated — involving:

• Luca’s parents,

• Educational Assistants,

• Psychologist (with expertise in Autism)

• Behaviour Analysts (or Special Education Teachers),

• Outside medical professionals.

Instead of sidelining the parents, they should have been central collaborators.

2. Comprehensive Functional Behaviour Assessment (FBA)

A timely, compassionate FBA would seek to understand:

• What triggers Luca’s behaviours?

• What is Luca trying to communicate?

• What environmental changes reduce distress?

Instead of labeling him "dangerous," the team would frame the behaviours as needs not being met.

3. Strength-Based Behaviour Support Plan (BSP)

From the FBA, a personalized, positive Behaviour Support Plan would be developed, emphasizing:

• Skill-building (e.g., alternative communication methods for frustration, programs emphasizing positive reinforcement rather than punishment)

• Environmental accommodations (e.g., sensory-friendly spaces, predictable routines)

• Crisis prevention strategies (e.g., early warning signs, de-escalation scripts)

This would focus on empowering Luca rather than managing him through fear or exclusion.

4. Ongoing Data Collection and Family Collaboration

Data should be used formatively — to guide improvements — not punitively. Regular meetings would review:

• Luca’s progress,

• Barriers to success,

• Adjustments needed to the plan.

Parents would be active, respected members of the team — not outsiders.

How Luca Should Be Supported Going Forward

Using a Positive Systems Approach, here’s the pathway back for Luca:

• Immediate re-entry with enhanced supports (not contingent on ambiguous medical paperwork).

• Functional Behaviour Assessment initiated within 10 days.

• Parent-inclusive Positive Support Team meetings every two weeks.

• Staff training on autism spectrum differences and Positive Behaviour Supports.

• Mental health support for Luca to address the emotional impact of exclusion.

• Clear, measurable success criteria for Luca’s educational plan — with built-in flexibility.

This pathway not only supports Luca but creates a more compassionate, resilient school culture for all students.

Conclusion

The tragedy of Luca’s exclusion is that it was avoidable. Had the Nanaimo Ladysmith Public Schools used a Positive Systems Approach, they could have transformed a crisis into an opportunity for growth, connection, and understanding — for Luca, for their staff, and for their wider community.

Our children deserve more than exclusion. They deserve systems that believe in their potential and commit to unlocking it — with them, not against them.

If you want to learn more about how Positive Systems Approaches can transform disruptive behaviours into lasting success, check out our book: Managing Disruptive Behaviours with a Positive Systems Approach (available on Amazon; drbobcarey.com).