Schools across the United States use abeyance agreements as an alternative to suspension or expulsion, yet little is known about them. These agreements allow students to avoid or reduce suspensions or expulsions, if they meet the terms of the agreement and waive certain due process rights. David Perrodin argues that these agreements enable school districts to circumvent requirements to report disciplinary data, a requirement intended to ensure schools' disciplinary practices are fair and nondiscriminatory. These agreements appear to give students on the brink of suspension a second chance, but the terms are sometimes difficult to follow, and once the terms are broken, students may be subject to suspension without due process. They also bring disciplinary investigations to a quick close, sometimes without a clear understanding of the root causes of the misbehavior. And the lack of data about abeyance agreements means that authorities lose information that is useful in identifying potential safety threats or uncovering schools' violations of students' rights. Perrodin argues for the elimination of abeyance agreements for school discipline or for more standardized processes that can be tracked and that do not interfere with students' rights.