In Sweden, pupil referral units (PRUs) have been recommended by the government, suggesting that “inclusion has gone too far”. This governmental recommendation is not based on research focusing on PRUs, as such research is sparse. Furthermore, there has been a lack of evaluations of the efficacy of PRUs, and no national evaluations of such provision have been undertaken. Furthermore, more attention must be paid to PRU students’ own perspectives and experiences as we lack knowledge of their needs and situation. This study aimed to investigate how educational needs have been and should be addressed in one PRU according to nine stakeholder groups, for example, current students, former students, parents, school staff, and various groups of people who, in their work, were responsible for deciding about the PRU (e.g., chief education officers or politicians) or supporting the PRU (e.g., school healthcare unit staff). Comparative analysis of all groups’ perceptions considered similarities and differences of views of this topic. Preliminary results indicate substantial between- and within-group variation concerning the purpose of the PRU and uncertainty about educational quality, partly due to insufficient documentation. Some students described a “Catch-22”: having been told to catch up educationally with peers and that PRU placement would help in this, they were disappointed, as the emphasis on non-educational practices impeded catching up.