This entry critically examines the use of physical restraint and seclusion on children with intellectual disability (ID), focusing on the Australian context as a lens through which global concerns are reflected. Drawing on the international legal framework, namely, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), this entry argues that these practices represent a significant breach of children’s rights, personal dignity, and developmental integrity. Children with ID are disproportionately subjected to restrictive practices due to complex communication needs, sensory vulnerabilities, and trauma histories. Despite being framed as safety interventions, physical restraint and seclusion frequently result in harm, including psychological trauma, physical injury, disrupted attachment, and developmental regression. Case studies, Royal Commission findings, and interdisciplinary evidence underscore the profound risks associated with these interventions, particularly in education settings where regulatory oversight is minimal. This entry advances a call for prohibition, positioning the use of restraint and seclusion as ethically indefensible and clinically counterproductive. It promotes evidence-based alternatives, such as positive behavior support (PBS), trauma-informed care, and low arousal approaches, that are relational, neurodevelopmentally attuned, and aligned with human rights principles. These models prioritize the prevention of distress, the understanding of behavior as communication, and the cultivation of environments that promote emotional safety and co-regulation. Through a synthesis of developmental science, legal analysis, and policy critique, this entry urges a paradigm shift away from coercive control toward a rights-based behavioral support for children with intellectual disability.