V

IM 182 ($54) -

,

IPS 011 208. .

.

,,

toctimm MOSE i

ACTIti :

alISTIOT/Op'001IS AGENCY

MORT. IN.,'PUB SATEGRANT ,

VOTEAVAILABLE raoi

.. .

---v-- .

!DRS PRICE mrovicol Pauli pbstakje: .

DESCRIPTORS , *CI;tild Abuse,: Child Welfare: Identification: .

4. /nterviption.: *Lass:. *Neglected Children: %Public. Education: *State Legislatift

mitirms . ilithil4 Abuse-Peporting:`*Child° Protection..

Trends.in'Ckild Prooction Laws--1979.Education Cbmsission'of the States, Denver? Colo.581.ational Center on Child Abuse and Negliect(DHRW/OND), Weski1s:1ton, D.C.ECS-R-128 /

Oct 79010-90-c-172645p. ,

2ducaiion Commissio.of the States, Suite 300, 18.60Lincolq street, Denver. CO 80295 ($2.50: prepaymentrequired) .

k

ABSTRACT - ..

. -This bookletpresents a-summary ot State childprOtection ititutes that have Nies enacted, amended or revised'

,thro,ugh the 1978 legislative-session. Reporting statutei.of each of\

e identified and discussed: (t) what element:II dfthe 10:states werwlysed and 13 lements of the child abusemsportingprocess

fohildcabuse must be reported, (/) who must report suspected cases ofchild.abuse, (3) -when a rePort must be made, (W) to whbm a report: 'lust be slider (5) imeunity for *good faith reports, (6) penalty for..

. not making.a.sandsted report, (7) tbrogation of privilegedcossunicatiose, (8). color fhotootaphs and x-rays, (9) temporary 4'

.

protectikre issipdy/emergency removal. (10)centrai: registry, (11)child prbteatioh-teass (12) guaidian ad. litei/counsel, and 113t-public educatiOn. /ncluded is a chart which indicates 'which of these,13 elements-are cont4ned'in the ;rotection acts of each state.

- . - irr

(JNB). . .4c . i

l , . / ..N :\,, .,

N

.

4

.

.4

.4.

,

4.

.

*************************V*441******** ************Reproductions supplied by !DRS are the best

. from the docusent_*************4*************************** *****

4*

; N. I

-

4.

*********i** **Iir******%. .

bat. an be eadM *

ft/

1

4

40

S.

Ub DIR PAIN/maw DIP He At TH.'DUCAT 1014 .. ARP

111 14ATIONAt. iNSTITUTII OFIOWA T

tly 00( OW NT 11AS 141-1 N RI PRO.I1Utr f *At /I 4% fit (1 040 I ROM

-1Hk Pt. RWN Ull WitiAN124 I KIN OK ic.1.4.ATINt. IV PiNINVR 01' VIf W OR OPINION%%11(0 1)0 NO1 'NU( I %%AR if V 141 PRE-ct N1 01 RIAl, NAIIONal 04%1 rl 1.111

011:71'IQN POS11 ION OR POI I( V

/

rends in Child Protedion

P

Laws °079

Report No. 1281 ,

-PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE 1 HIS

'MAT ERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTeD BY

Ecigs,futcommiu,.0+-tvot

'10 THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

Edtutatiod.Commission of the StatesDenver,'Colorado

.Warren G. Hill, Executime Director

National Center for Edticators in ChildWelfare Project

'C. D. Jones Jr.., DirectorDavis T. Schielb, Program Specialist

1

October 1979

Additional copiei of this report may be obtained from theEducation Commission of the States, &lite 300,

1860 Lincoln Street, Denver, Colorado 80295, (303) 861.4917.For each report send $2.50: This price includes postage

and handling. Prepayment requires. 0

I.

4V

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The National Center for Educators in Child Welfare Projeot

staff would like t6 acknowledge the assistance of Briah

Fraser, executive director, National Committee for thePreventior) of Child Abuse, in the preparation of Appendix

C. State Action on Child Protection; and Richard Cortola,

third\year law student, Loyola University School of Law,

'for the legal research and techgicbi infOtfltIon. The,staffappreciates the editorial assistance of Wilford Samuels,

assistant professor, English Department, University 'of

Colorado.

'.)

r

P

This publication we's made possibil 'by Grant No.90-C-1726 from the NationalVenter on Child Abuse and

Neglect, Children's Bureair, Administration for Children,Youth arid Families,* Office of Huinen DevelopmentServices, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF licALTH, EDUCA-TION AND WELFARE. Its contents should not, beconstrued as official policy of the National Center onChild Abuserand Nolect or any agency of the federal

government.

73r

a

.7a

4,

. a

CONTENTS -

Child Protection Laws An.O#erviewA 1.

Identification, Investigation'and Intervention2

Recognition of Siate and Federal Governmcint's Role . 3.

Trends in Child Protection Laws 1979, 4

What Element(s) of Chita Abuse Must Be Reported? . . . 5

Who Must Report Suspected Cases of Child Abuse? . . . 5

When Must a Report Be Made?5

To Whom Must a Report Be Made? 6 . tImmunity or Good Faith

6

Penalty for Not Making a Marttlated RePort 6

Abrogation of Privileged Communications7

Color Photographs !tint X-Ray7

Temiiorary Protective Custody/Emergóncy Removal 8

Central Registry8

Child Protection Teams 49

Guardian ad, Litem/Counset. 9

Public Edueation10

,

Conclusion11

Rpferehces12

1iiiktkilpendicesA: State Reporting Statutes a

144, Qualifications for Funding Under.P.L. 93-247 . : . 16

C: Stet Actions 6n Child OrotectIon18

.1

4

ECS STEERING 'COMMITTEE1919-RO

Chairman'

William G. Milliken, Governor of Michigan

Chairman-ElectD. Robert Graham, G9yer nor of Florida

Vice Chairmen

James Chrest. Stete Repr entative, Orebon

Treasurer

E. T. Dunlap, Chancellor for State Higher Education Regents, Oklahoma

Members

Lamar Alexander.Governor of Tennessee

George D Busbee, Governor of Georgia

John W. Carlin,Governor of Kansas

Julian M. Carroll, Governor of KeAtucky

John N. Dalton. Governor of Virginia

J. Joseph Garrehy. Governor of Rhode Island

Arthur A. Link, Governor of North,Dakdta

Scott M. Matheson, Governor of Utah

Albert M. Qui& Governor of Minnesota

Robert D. Rey, Governor of lowe

Richard A. Snelling. Governor of 4./ermont

" Jotr M. Barker. State Senator, Idaho

Teresalee Bartmuson, State Representative, Connecticut

Edward F. Burns Jr.. State Representative, Pennsylvania

Albert Burstein, Stete Assemblymarl,New Jersey

Eugenie S. Chapman, State Representative. Illinois

Harry A. Chapman Jr., State Senator. SouttfCaroline

Robert G. Clark Jr., State Representative. Mississippi

Tom C. Massey, State Representative, Texas

Norman L. Merrell, State Sen'ator. Missouri

Frank Papen, State Senator. New Mexico

Alan Stauffer, State RepresentatIve,WyomIng

William Arceneaux,Commissioner of Higher Education, Louisiana

'Mere Bethem, Director of Education, American Samoa

Anna Campbell,Commissioner of Education, Nebraska

Carlos E. Chardon, Secretary of Education, Puerto Rico

Henrik Dullee, Assistant Secretary to the Governor for Education.end the Arts. New Volt

Novice G. Fawcat3, PresidentEmeritus, Ohio State Univerelly

Catherine Gill, Principal. Fairpark Primarytchool, Arkansas

Louis R. Guzzo,-Assistant to the Governor, Washington

George Hurt, Member, State Board of Education, New Hampshire

Charles E. Johnson, Sedretery of Educational Affairs, Massachusetts

Albert Jones Jr.. President.'State Board of Education. Delaware

4r Michael W. Kirst, President, State Board of Education, California

Sheldon Knorr, Commissioner, Board for Higher Education, Maryland

Masako Ledward, Chairman. Education Council, Hawaii

H. ewin Millett 4. Maine School Management Association,

Pat Pascoe, University of Denver, Colorado

A. Craig PhillI, Superintendent of Public Instruction, North Carolina

oris D. Ray. Teacher. West Valley High School. Alaska

Wayne leeguft. Superintendent of Public Instruction, Alabama

Barba4 S. Thorrfpson, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Wisconsin

o Charles W. Turnbull, Commissioner of Edudation, Virgin Islands

Charles D. Wagoner, D.D.S Member:State Board ol Edupation, Walt Virginia

George B. Weathersby, Commissioner for Higher Education, Indiana

Harris J. Wollman, Secretary-of Education and Cultural Affairs, South Dakota

t-

s .

ft

1

aft

4e.

Child Protection Laws An Ovi;rview

Child abuse was first identified as a clinically observable condition

in 1-962. At that time, a general belief was that professionals who

had access to children, would be hesitant: to report suspected cases

of child abuse and neglect. As a result, the first mandatory

reporting statutes were provosed in 1963. These statuCes sought to

(1) define chiltil abuse, (2) identify professionals whj had constant

access to children, and (3) require that these professionals'report

suspected cases of child abuse to a state-wide agency that: could

piake a complete investigation.

By 1974 mandatory repprting statute's had been enacted national-'

ly, by all 50 states, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico. However,

'their primary identification function has broaden.eil as knowledge'

about the calms and family dynamics pf child 'abuse has grown.

Today, Ifecause their scope and purpose have been substantially

expanded, it is more accurate ttit refer to them as child protection

laWs.

A

4.

I a

nends in child tqtection Laws 19791

*41

s

1

Identification, Inveitifiation and..Intervention

.

, .

In every %tate three steps are followed to successfully resolve a

case of child abuse. First, tge child in peril must be iknbified and

his case reported. Until this is done, thete can be no investigation

or treatment. Segond, once a report ià made to astatevhde agency,,

an investigatio'n must be conddeted to' resolve thre4: complex

issues: (1 )el las the ckiild been abused? (diagnogls) (2) What are the

chances that treatment will be successful? (prógnosis) (a) What are-

the treatment) needs.of the child and what provisions fpr freatmeklt

exist within the community? (treatment plan). Thirdt voluntary or

involuntary intervention or implementation of the treatment plan

mu-st take place.

The majority of cases are resolved oq a voluntary basis by the

abused child's parents. In this case, the agelicy Worker is

responsible for fnonitoring the family's prOgress and protecting the

child's interests. A few cases are resolved *lc an involuntary basis

where the treatment Wan is mandated through the juvenile

jurisdiction.

In the past, reporting statutes were primarily concerned with the

investigatory pir&cess, but in recent years, child protection laws /

have Itegua to address some of the more complex issues and

problems that exist during intervention.

P

2Ectucaiion Commission o4the States-1

*IL

Recognition of- State and Federal

Government's Role "1%4

Because each state has, through its police powers, the right and

responsibilqy to etuk laws that deal with the health, safety,-

.welfare and morals of its residents, awl because cft.il(l abuse falls

within this penumbra, each state has tfie primary responsibihtyfof

enacting child protection laws.

Although th6 felderal government usually does not dictate how an

individual state ei .deal with the health, safety, welfare and

morals of its resit-01th, nor phrases a state'S :child protection laws,

it'has had a sitbstantial impact oti the manner in which states now

deal with the problems of child abuse. .

Oio Jan. 31, 1914, President Richard M. Nixon signed the Child

Abuse Prevention and Treatment Actlt42 USC 5101-5106),.,allocating $85 million far the identification, treatment andpfevention of child abuse over a three-year period. Although a

,substantial amount of this sum was set _aside for state use, any

state wishing to receive funds had to meet certain criteria (see

Appende Today, 46 states, have met these cri4,eria and

participate in federal funding.

8.

4

Trends in Child Protection Laws ,1979 3

Nr.

Trends in ChildtProtection Laws 19794

Rased primarilyA the reporting statute of each state, this analysis

does not represent&the total effort each makes in ehtid alnkse, but

simply reflects its 7tatute. II. is the third in a series of analyseTi_of

child protectcion acts 'published by the Education ( 'ommission of

kw States (Et SL Whereas /WS Report No. ar,), Trends\-171 Child

Aims(' anci Neglect Statutes (January 1977), and E('S Iteport N.

106, Trends in Child Protection Laws 19T7 (March 1978),

examined chikl abuse and neglect. statutes imd focuged

4 legislation that had been enacted, amended or revised through the

1977 legislative session, this report, N. 128:Trends1 in Child

Protection Lqws ;- 1979, r4resents a record of statutes that have

been epacted, anwnded or revised through ithe 1978 legislative

session. It also includes a chart of the elenwnts contained ih each -

state's protection act. Its fundamental purpose is five-fold: (1) To

enable interested individuals to- *conipare one state's statutory

response to another, (2) to enable .interested individpals to ;

compare changes 'within one state over a two-year pertod, (3) to

provide the appropriate citation for each state's child protection

act, (1) to identify general trends that seep to be developing

around the country and (5) to provide additkmal citations where

necessary.

To begt, fulfill _these goals, _this .report addresses ftself to the

following 13 questiois and issues surrounding child abuse:-

1. What7'ele ent(s) of child ahuse must he reported?

Whb mu t report suspeaed casys of child abuse?

3. When m st a report.be made?4. T(') whom must a report be made?5. Immunity for good faith.6. PonCty for not making a mandated report.

s, 7. AbrogItion of privilegedcommunications.8. Color photographs and x-ray..9. Temporary proteetive.eustodynergenety removal.

10. Central registry..

11. Child .protection teams. ,

12. Guardian ad litem/counsel.1'3. Public education.

.

9. 1:Vuea1i4)n Commission (.9' .StateN

What Element(i) of Child Abuse *Musi Be Reperted?

Child abitse and neglect is a generic term that contains four

elements. With specific reference to the 'fundamental elementq of

child abuse (i.e., nonaccidental physical injury, .neglect, sexual

abuseNexual molestation and emotional abuse/mental injury), the

following requirements exiEit: (1) Every state requires that non-

.. accidental physical injury be Teported (same as last year); (2) 50

states require that neglect be reported (an increase of 2 over last

year); (3) 46 states require that sexual '44;e/sexual molestation be

reported (an increase of 5); and (4) 37 states require that

'emotional abuse/mental, injury be reported. Some notable differ-

. ences are found in Idaho and Maryland. Whereas in Idaho,

"neglected child" is defined but not included in the required

reportMg statute, Maryland has two reporting statutes A 27 36A

is for abuse and A 72A 4-11 is for neglect.

Who Must Report Suspected CIsei of Child AbuSe? .

Although the oPiginal reporting statutes only requiredthat medical

personnel report spspected cases of child abuse, in recent years tiii±

base of mandated reporters has substantially broadened. Although

some grates now specifically list 15 or more different groups of

individuals who must report, the following tare the four most

commonly designatd reporters: The physician/nurse must report

in all 50 stacks (an increase of 4), social- workers in all 50

states (an increase of 9), and law enforcement personnel in 42

states (an increase of 10). Indiana, New Jersey, Ithodelsland,

Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming require reporting by "any per-

san." Oklahoma and Utah require reporting by doctors ."or

.annother person," If a state requires "any person"Ao report, it

makates by inclusion doctors, social workers, teachers and law

enforcement personnel.

When Must4a Report Be.Made?

Ideally, reports should be made immediately beciuse the longer

the delay, the greater the chance 'of additional harm to the child.

Today 36 states require that an oral report of suspected child

abuse be made iinmediately (the same as last year); 6 states require

that the. report> be made promptly (same as last year); .and 4

states a somewhat longer period (same -as last year): Thik vast

majority. of .states also require that a written report fopllow I,he oral

one, usually within 48-72 hours. However, North and, South

Carolina, Nebraska and Vermont do not specifically indicate When

the report of suspected child abuse mtst be, made.

nends in Child Noteetion Laws I 9-79

- :

o

Nt.

To Whom Must a Rep,H3e Made?.

Although in the late 1960s and early ,1970s, local law enforcement

agencies were the only ones able to respond 24 hoursa day, 7 days

a week, to reports of suspected chili!, abuse, tbis is no longer true.

Today, a majority of states require local departments of social

servWes to make the report. Three valid reasons are offered: (1)

Departments of social services are viewed as being less punitive,

j and it is believed this will increase the number of reports made; (2)

/ departments of.social services are believed to have more expertise

in dealing with these .kinds of problems; and (3) most departments '-

of social services are now able. to respcird to reports of suspected

child abuse 24 hours a day, 7 days a reek. .

Today 28 'states require reports of suspected clkild abuse be

reported to lo\epl departments of social services, and in 2 stater

reports. are made, to .the local lairenforcement agency.Niyieteen

states require reports be made to the local departments of social

services or th'e loeal law enforcement agency. One state requires

reports he made to the locals departMent of social services or. the

court, and another requires reports be made to local departments

of social services, local law enforcement agencies or the coUrt.

. ..States that permit the reporter to choose between different

agencies invite disaster. The identification of two or more

receiving agencies promotes a lack of coordination and coopera-

tion in handling these cases, and increases the likelihood that the

child-victith will not be helped. Responsibility shouldraide solely

in :one agency. If there is a need to*identify more. than one ,

receiving agency,:strict coordination must be mandated by the

system. A notable difference is found in New Mexico where

reports. can be made to the state distrid attprney or. the probation

office.

14

ImMunity for Gooil Fbith Reports

Because they fear liability if the report of suspeVed child abase

proves to be erybneous, irilividuals who are mandated to report

are often hesitant to do so. Aware of this fact, all states prbvide

immunity from liability if the report is made in good faith, i.e., an

honest belief that the child was abused.

Penalty for Not Making a Mandated Report ....r - etBelieving that the inclusion of a penalty will encourage reporting,

majority of states also provide a penalty, criminal and/or civil,

6h'ducation

tominisslon of the States

^

Sw-S-

.

I. Ar

for taihire to make a thandated report. -it 'fihould . be no,te'd,':.

however, that civil 'liability for "failure tp report tr suspkiitd ciao

of ehikkabusa.may exist even without statutory authorization. Mak: -,'lor

Today 3:1) states. provide a criminal penalty for failure to make a

rePort (a decrease of 3), 2 states make provision.foi civil liability'

tor similar faijure (a decrease of 4), and 5 stattts provide

crimituil. and/or civil liability for-failure lo report. (The decreases..

are due to 'a recoguition of the extreme difficulty in -proving.

"eritnricial liability for a failure to yepost, or an effort to. make the

child protection.act less punitive and more therapeutic.)

Abrogation of Privileged Communications?

Because it takes place-"-behind closed doors,7 within thewanctity

of the home, child abuse is an 'extremely difficult case to prove in

a .court of law. Sometimes there are no eye Witnesses, or witnesses

are not'willing"-to tA,ify. In many caseg, the child is too yowTK to

partitipate in _the I* al pfoceedings, or cqmmunications between

involved parties are deemed confidential and cannot be introduced

info evidence. Recognizing these facts, many states now abrogate

the status of certain priVileged communications in cases of child

abuses, allowthg for, the possibility of three consequences: (1) A

,s.report . can made, (2) there can be participation in the

investigation,and.(3) a witness can testify .in a court Af.

'Today in respect to child ab-Use, 19 states 'teth e statusprivilegq communications between husbarids and wiies, 2.2abro:.,

_gate this status between doctors and patients, and 20 abrogate.

privileged conimunicaiions except those betWeen atiorney and-

Kansaz allows those with "a simile privilege, against.

disclosure" to testify. Pennsylvania and' South Carolina 'abrogate

alr but, the attorney-client privileged communications and priest:-

minister-penitent privileged' communiCatiohl MissiSsippi simply

states that the act of reportingiK`not a breach oi confidence.", .

Color Photographs end.X-rays

Color photographs and.x-rays of the injured areas are valuable as

diagnostic tools and as evidence in a court of law. Usual

procedures require that the hospital or physician obtain parental

permission before any x-rays or.color photographs are.taken of the.

child. This is an unrealistie burden in a case of child abuse because

the parent/caretakee Is often the perpetrator, and permission is

simply.not granted.

Trends in (Wild 'Protection laws 1979. 7.

24.

.

or

0.

,

.A nuniber of states now recognize the need and difficulty of

obtaining' color photographs and x-rhys in easel. of child abuse.

Today, 2 states permit- color photographs to be taken; 1 stateallows x-rays to be, taken and 21 states On increase. of 3) alloy

--color photographs and/or- x-rays to. be taken of the abused child

witror without parental authoriiation. s

Temporary Protective Custody/Emergency Rem}oval

-""ln. some. caSes it ig- necessary to (.1tickly remave the ghild from

Thisther home: This need may o.ccur or be identilfied.immediately

upon receipt of -the report, during4 the investigation. court

proceeding& gr:tseatment. \.

.

prd er. in ah$44.0se- cases, however, it 'is highly ,unlikely that

parents WilifOlitritlirtly "consent.te the child's remo!ral because to

'do so is almost tantalnount to admitting guilt. Moreover, in.many

cases,- there isn't adequate time.to.Obtal.0 court ordey, Recogniz-

, ,ing these two factors, 38 states (an.ineseases of 11) are Cognizant of

the liMited need to assure tempOrary Af*ctive .tustody' jn child

abuse cases. Most states that have enacted such provisions have

ne so carefully. In most cases the statutes limit the number of

4ividuds who may assume such custody, and the circumstances, in, 'which the right may be invoked. In addition, parents must be

no t\led immediately, and a hearing must be conducted as quickly P."'

as pOSsibly.

Generally, a AM can be.removed with parental cdpsent or court.

IT

Central Registry

Because child abuse is a pattern of behavior and subsequent injury

occuls over a- period of. time, it is often difficult to diagnose,

eipecially -since abusive parenti/e etakers aye a. proclivity to

"doctor shop" and "hospital op." reover, diagnosis is

'compounded by the general pattern followed by the abuser

who usually takes the. child to a different doctdr with each

surgery. %Dee each doctor sees only one injury, he is .unable to

recogrlizerpatterns of abusive behavior. Although he may believe or(. that the child has _been abused, he gannot determine if

other physidians have recently treated the clald -for othersuspicious injuries.

:.

At present 41 states (an incOite- of .:2) have created central

regiStties where records of all reports of child abuse cases are kept

alphabetically (35 via legislation, 6 via -administrative fiat). -These

registries are instrumental for diagnostic .purPoses. They provide

:13I 3 ,Education,Commission of the States

S.

Sb

./.

physi t. and- soti workers with records of all reports ofsuaiectiqwhild abuse, which are iriwortant in- establishing the

,,abltsive pa tris. Also, they prdkiide stoltistica el information, and ar

/ Ilistrumen in, tracking down- abusive parentS Who move from

!county Co &)unty or state to staie. Finally; they can be titled t6

evaluate the mandate0.officials' handling of child abuse cas.

Aware of the fact that data ac6imulateA in-a central registry cag

be abused, many states have hmited the types of reports that are

housed in them, made all reports Confidential, lhnited access to

the recordS, provideVor ex,purgement and sealing of records,

notified the- parents that tile records exist' and provided a

meuhanism for the 1.4arents to appeal the existence of such records.

Child Protection Teams1

When the investigation has been. completed, three difficult and

complex issues must be resolved: (1) ilas the child been abused

(diagnosis)? (2) What are the chances that treatment will besuccessful (prognosis)? (3) What are the treatment needs of the

child and what provisiona for: treatment exist within the commu-

nity (treatment plan)? The reacclution ,of theae-three issues requires

substantive expertise in the disciplines that include medicalpathology, psychiatry; law:and social work. Tide majority of states

require that the social,*rkericomplete the iniestigation and then

resolve these.three issues. ThiS dernand is unrealistic...

Begause *is procedure is somewhat impractical, 11 states havecreated uhild protection ,iteams 'comprised of individuals who

collectively:have expertise fn a n'umber of 'different filds including'.

medisal Itathology,' psychiatry, law, education and social work.

NotWy can these teatns .be used by an agency to help'de.termine. the'nqed tb . . lm, o local departments of social services in

resolvmi issu of dlagnosis, prognosis and treatment, but Also to

, otlersee4m9 oordinate all ehilc14abuse activiti*ithin a 'partiktiar. _state. *fusee ueetts, Michigan California. Missouri, Pennsylvania

and Sotith Carilina have. Oaild consultation and advisory boards.

that are similar to phild protection teams but have no inherents. v.- . .

decision-rnakipg poWers. I r',i - -- i ' 9

0 .

4firardian.a4Liiehr/Count9,J - 0,,''' -0!L- . . i .. ..k. ' '' Yti

, ... , T.. ;

child a se: eases e'ventitaW reach the juvenile- or district, nit with juvenile jurisdii5titt(i4In such ases the' attorneys.who

ti itignally varticipatk Are tgerCounty att tney, who presents the

(Awe, to .the....fourt on) 15ehalf of the loc department oftsocial

. -..

.

.!.. .-Trends in Chil# Protection 1.4vs 19 79 .- Sk

, ( . .:4- , v... tg ,.. .....-..,

N!' 2,4

i ',

!

services, and the attorney for the parents suspected of child abuse.

A vast majority of-states are cogrkzallet of -the fact that neither

attorn adequately represents the mterdts of the abused Fhi ld,

TW attorney for the parents represents the interest of the person

or persons' suspected of abusing the child. It is ologliCus that the

interests of the parents and the child .are not the.same in a hearing

or proceeding to coletermine who did what to whom. On the other

hand, the'county attorney, who tepresents tlie local department of

so4al services that-has filed the petition, muskshow that the (yhild

has been abtised if the case is to go forward. Unforturlately; most

county attorneys have more cases than time, and 'are unable to

adequately protex t the c:hild's long-range interests.,

At preseni 46 states (an increase qf 1) provide either a guirdian ad

ox counsel to protect the child's short- and lc ng-range.

'interests if the case goes to the juvenile court.

Public Education

Contrary to common belief:child abuse is not merely a oblem

for the professional, hut: a community problem.There c-an, be no

viable solution to child abuse until the general.PubliC recognizes

the exWnt of the problem, gives it priority, and makes ,a

commitment to a solution.

Today 13-states (an increase of 3)'not only rejoknize the need to

provide,*formation to the general publ about the problems and

ussible-sblutions to child abuse, but als identify and mandate at

last one statewide agency to provide th. education. '-

If child abuse prevention is ever to become a reality, more states

...will have to make a commitment, to public education, and those

who have already made the commitment will have to do a better

job. .

I 5

10Education Commissiodo/ theStates

AM,

Conclusion

1

I t is impkative to keep the value of the legislative process and

statutes in persttective. Legislation is never a solution or.cure in

itself; it is a framework Within which a problem can be attacked.

The better the legislation, the better the chance the system -Will

react and reVond appropriately. The drafting of gooctlegislation is

' only the first step attacking the problem in a prudent manner.tEqual resourCes, t. e and expertise must be committed to the

treatment and prevention of child abuse. .,. ,.., ..

V

44

7Yends in Child Protection Laws 1979

References4.

Besharov, D., "Putting 'Central RegistritAto Work," 54(3), Chicago-Ifont Law

Review, 687 (1978).Child Abuse and Neglect. Model Legislation for the Stales, Reftort Ng. 71

4(Denver, Colo.: Child Abuse and Neglect Project,,Eddcation Commission

of the States,.1976). .--

Comment, i'Civil Liability for Failing to Reprirt Chilli Abuae," 1, Detroit Law

Review, 136 (1977).Ford, Smister and Glue, "Ph4tography of tiuspkted Child Abuse and

Maltreatment," Biomedical Communications. July 1975.

Fraser, 43., "A Critical Analysis of the Development of Cbild Abuse Reporting

Statutes," 54(3), Chicago-Kent Law Review, 641 (1918),

Fraser, B.-, "A Pragmatic Alternative ti) Current Legisrative Approaches to

Child Abuse," 12 AM, Criminal Law Reviev.e, 106 (1974). ,

Fraser, B., "Independent Representation for the. Abused and Neglected

Child: The Guardian aig Litem," 13, California Western Law Review, 16

(1977).Fraser, '13,, "Toward a More Practical .Central Regielt," 51, Denver Law

Journal, 509, (1974).Schmitt, B.The Child Pmtection Team Handbook, (Garland,-1978). . ,

Suantan aneCohen, Reporting Child Abuse and Neglact11974), paw& * .1

EduCation Commission of the States

.1.

10,

A.

. Appendix ka

State Reporting Statutee

State

Alabama

Alaska

Arkimsas

California

Co Iniado

Con'nectic1st

-ALA. ST A § 26-14-1 to 20- i (1978 Sipp:1_ 4

ALAS. 1r 47.17.010 to 47.17.070 (1978 SuPp.),

*- _ARK. STAT. 42-807 to 42818 (1975 SuPP.).

ARIZ. REV. STAT. 0 131620: §8531 (ISuardiah ad Liter*);

§8-546.03 (Central flegistry) (108-79 Supp.).

GAL. PENAL CODE § 1116011.162. 111.10 (Record Keeping)

(1979 Cum. Supp.). \CAL. HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE § 306.6 (State Advisor

Commission) (1978 Supp. Pamphlet).CAL. WE L F AND INST CODE §18950td 18962 (Office of Child

Abuse Preveption: Edu&ition: Family Crisis Teams) (19-18 Supp.

Pamphat't).

COLO. REV. STAT. ANN, § 1910-01 to 191 0-115 (1976 Cum.

SuPP.).

CONN. GEN. STAT. ANN. § 17-38a to 17-380 (1979 Special

Pamphlet).

DolawaVe .DEL. CODE ANN. Tit. 16, §9Q1, to 909 (1916 pum. Sum.).

1 t

.District of,ColuMbia D.C. CODE ENCYCL. 2-161 to 167: 16-2301 (9) (dot, of neglect)

..(1978-9 strpp.).

Florida

Genrgia

F LA. STAT. ANN. § 82707 to 82700 (1979 Cum. Sum.).

GA. CODE ANA.-§ 74.111:244-3301, (Guardian ad Limn) (1978

Cum. Sum).4

Hawaii ' HAW. REV. STAT. § 350-1 to 350-5 (1978 Sum.).

Idaho IDAHO. Coci § 16 1601 to 1629 (1978 bum. Slum.).

Illinois , / ILL.-REV. STAT. § Ch. 23, 2051 fo 2061 (1979 Supp.); Ch. 37

704-5 (Guardian ad (Atom) (1970 Supp.).

IND. CODE ANN. §31-5.8-11 to 31-6.5-348 (1978 Cram.Supp.).Indicina

- Iowa -.IOWA CODE ANN, 1235A,1 to 235A.24 (1978-9 Cum: Supp.). As

&minded by House File 2404, lowtLegis. Service 1978.

Kansas KAN. STAT. ANN'. § 38-716 tb 48-724; 38-815b (Guardian ad

Litem) (1978 Com. duple.).

. 44

riends in Child Protection Laws' 1970'18

1 3

p.

de

. New Hampshire N.H. REV. STAT. ANN. §169: to 169:45; 170:C-8 (Guardian

'ad Litern) (1977 SuPp.).

State

Kent uck y

Louisiana

Maine

Maiyiand

Citation

KY REV. S1 AT. ANN. § 199.336. 199.011 (b) (definitions (1979

Cuin. Supp.),

LA. REV SI AI. ANN, §14 403(A 1). 46:51(16) (eduFation)

(1979 Cum. Supp.r

ME. REV. STAT. ANN. Tit. 22, § 3861 to 3860 (1978 Supp.):

VD. ANN. COr)E, Art. 2,7, § 36,4(6)(8); Art. 12A § 4-11 (neglect)

(1978 Cum. Supp.).

Masiechusetts MASS. ANN. LAWS Ch. 119 §51A-G (1978 Cum. Supp.).

.Michigon MICH. STAT. ANN. § 122-621 to 636 (1918.79 Cum. Sup.).Jv

MInflosota MINN. STAT. ANN. § 626.556; 260.015(10) (definition of

1%\ neglect). 260.155 (Guardian ad Litem); 260.165.(ternp6rary-Custody) (1979 Cum. Supp.).

44I

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebuiska

rNevada

MISS. CODE ANN. § 43.21-5-to 43.21 11;43-23-3 to 43-23-41

(Court Proceedings)243-74-1 to 43-24-9 (Cent7i( Registry) (1978

Cum: Supp.).

MO. ANN. STAT. § 2101.10 to 210.165 (19)9 Cum. Suppc).

MONT.'RE V. CODE ANN. § 10-1300 to 19-1322 (1977 Cum.

Stipp.).

NEB. REV. STAT. § 28 1501 to 1606; 43-202, 206(3)'(Guardian

ad Litem) (1978 Supp.).

NEV. REV. STAT.' § 200.501 to 200.508;432.090 to 432.130

(Cential Registry) (1'477)

New Jersey N.J. STAT. ANN. §9-6-8.8 to 9-6-8.34 462-11(Guardian ad Litam)

(1978-79 Soup.).

New Mexico N.M.. STAT. ANN. § 32-1-15.(1978)

New York N.Y. SOC. SErIN). LAW Tit. 6 6, § 411 to 428 q78-79 burn.

Supp.)... ..

N.Y. FAMILY CT. Lii.W Art. 2, Pt. 4, § 249 (Law Guardian); Art.,

10, Pt, 1, § 1012 (DAinitions): § 1024 (Protective Custody); 4

§1046 (Photos, Privileges) (1978-79 Cum.SuPP.)-

North Ca;oliria N.C. GEN, STAT. § 110-115 to 136-123; 8-53.1 (Privilege);

4. 7 A0278 (Def. of, Neglect); 7A-283 (Guardian ad Lltem) (1978

.PP.)- ph

.

North Dakota N.D. ENT. QODE 00-25.01 to 50-25.1-14;27-20.02(5) (Def. of

Negle ed-Deprived Child) (1977 Stipp.).

Ohip OHIO REV1C0DE ANN. § 2151.031, .04, .05; 2151.31 (Protective

'Custody); 2151!281 (Gianni-Ian ad Went); 2151.351, 2151.421

(1978 Supp.).

4

1419 iNueatioil ColumissiOn ofthe States

ft.

'

Spite

Ok !aflame

Naomi

PennsYlvannt

Rhode Island

...South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

CiptioQ

OKLA. REV. STArTit. 71. §845 to 848 (19 /879 Cum. Siam.).

OHE REV STAT. § 418 749,14.418475: 418-990 (Penalty).

419-498.(Attm nay Appointment) (1978 Replacement).

PA, STAT. ANN. Tit. 11. § 2201 to 2224 (1918 19 Cum. Supp.).

H.I. GI N. AWS ANN. §40-11-1 to 40-11-16 (1977

Rem:rich/lent).-

S.C. CODE 20-10.10 to 2Q110190 (1978 Supp.).

S D. CODIF IED LAWS ANN. 26-10-1 to 26-10-15; 26 8-6 (Del.

Neglect) (1978 Sum.).

1 ENN. CODE ANN. Ch. 37, § 1201 to 1212; 248 (Gualdien ad

Litem) (1978 Cum. Supp.),

TEX. FAMILY CODE § 34.01. to 34.08; 35:04 (X-rays) (1978-7( .'

Cum.Supp.).

UtahUTAH-CODE ANN. 4 78 36-1.13 (1978 Supp.).

VermontVT. STAT. ANN. Tit. 13, § 1351 to 1356 (1978 Gum. Supp.).

Virgin ia VA. GODE § 63.1-248.2 to 63.1-248.17; 16.1-266 (Guardian ad

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

1-

Litem) (Corn. Supp. 1978)

WASH. REV. CODE ANN. § 25.44.010 to 26.44.900; 26.37.040

(Protective Custody) (1977 Suppi.

W. VA. CODE ANN. § 49-1-1 to 49-7-27 (1918-Cum. Supp.);

§3j-653 (Guardian ad Litem) (1978 Cum. Supp.).

WISC. STAT. ANN. § 48.981; 48.56-57 (Duties of County Agency)

(1978): §905.04 (Physician-PatientPrivilege) (1978 SupP.)..

VVYO. SlAT. ANN. §14.i-201 to 14:3-215 (1978)

1.

20

11'

Trends in Child Protection Laws 1.979.4 1 5,./.

-

s.

Amiendix BQualifications for Funding Under

P. L. 93-247

ftOu lan. 31, 19/4, P.1,. 93-'247 waxenacted into law. The primary pur-pose of this law is to providefederal financial assistance for theprevention, kientification and treat-ment of chird alms(' and neglect.For a state or its politicy subdivi r

sions to 'qualify for.funding underP.1,. 93.247, 10 requirements mustbe met.'

1. A state must provide Tor therepmrting of known or suspectedinstMtces of child abuse and ne-glect.

2. A state npst provide, uponreceipt of a report of known orsuspected child abuse or neglect, anuwestigation of that report by aproperly constituted state author.ity. Each Mvestigation must he -inf.tiated promptly; however, the prop-erly conictituted state authoritymust be an agency other than theagenty, institution or facility in-

volved in the acts or omissions, ifthe report of child abuse and ne-glect involves the acts or omissionsof a public or private agency orother institution or facility. In addi-tion, ii state must provide, upon iifinding of abuse or neglect, forimmediate action to -protect. thehealth and welfare of the. abused orneglected child and any other chil-dren who may he in danger in thesame home.

3. In connection with the, en-forcement of child abuse :ma. ne-glect laws and the reportnzg ofsuspected instances Of child abuseand neglect, 11 state mast demon.%trate t hat there are, in effect,'administrative procedures. trainedpersomicl. Imining procedures, fbI-

s/i/u lomat and;.ollicr facilities andmull, disciplinary programs and

.16

'services sufficient to assure that thestate can deal effectively and effi-ciently .2vith 'child abuse and ne-glect. At a minimum this, mustinclude a ptovisionfor the receipt,investigation and' verifibidion.of re-ports; a provision for the. determi-nation of treatment or ameliorativesocn4 serviee and medical needs;provi n of such services; and,where ecessary, recourse to thecriminal Of juvenile court.-

4, -A state must have, in effect, achild abuse and neglect law thatProvide6 imMunity for all* persons-who in good faith report instancesof child abuse or neglect (immunityto apply to both civil and criminalprosecution that might arise fromsuch reporting).

5. A state must preserve thecoVidentiolity of all records con-ceriting reports of child abuse andneglect by hying, in effect, a lawthat (a) 'makes such records confi-dential and (b) makes any personwhO permits' or encourages the un-authoriZed dissemination of suchrecords or their contents guilty of a tcrime.

0. A state must establish coop-eratimi among law -enforcement Of-

ficials, courts of competent jurisdic-tion and all appropriate state agen-cies providing human services forthe prevention, treatment and iden-tification- of child abuse and ne-glect.

7. In every case involving anabused or neglected child that re-sults in a judicial proceeding, a statemust provide that a Guardian adLitem be appointed to representthe child in such proceedingo.

Ethication CominiAsion of the States

N A state must providStat theuggregute of slate support for `theprograms Or prmects .related tochild.ohuse and neglect shall not hereduced below the level pkvidedduring the fiscal year-197:1.

9. A state must provide for pithlie thssemination of mformatunion the probltms of child abuse and

I.

es

q##

Trends in (Wild Pro(ection Laws I 979

- A

neglect)as well as the fat-dillies andthe prevention and treatment methods available to conduit...child abuseand neglect.

It) A siate's to the.sextent fensehle. must insure that parental oraflUatUifls contbatifig, child alome

and neglect receive .preferentiaitreatment.

22

IV*

17

Appendix GState Action on Child Protection

.

...1._Iiii

.

i -.1/111i11.

.

11 .11-11.11 illWhat Elements of Child Abuse MustBe`Repoi tad p

nonacandoaterneglect

; 1 sextrql abuseerailonal abuse

Who Must Reportdoctors

.social workers

. p

teadierslaw eidtsrcernent .

.. 7. ..When Kist Report Be(/ o Inrmediately, P - PromOny.S .. Soon, L ...Longer) .

To Whom Must Rapprj&Be Mad.1

e

(SS - Social Services. C .. Court,PO Law Enforcement)Immunity for.GtSod Faith Report

Penalty f or Not Making ReportICR ''. C I. CI ...' Civil)

Abrogation of Privileged Conimunieationile husband ,

doctor '-.

all but attorney/client.1,

Photoguiphs and X rays .

Temporly Prolective CustodyEinel"cy RemovalCOO t r al Registry - .

Child Protection TeamGuardian ad Litam/Counsel

Public EducatIgn . .

X.xxX

X

. XXX,XXXX

I

SSPo

x

C

* X

X

X

X

x

X

I

ssx

X

)(

X

XXX.

Xxxxxxxxxxx3rxxxxxxExxxxxxxXX

X

I

ss)PO

x

CR

PX

X

X

X

X

XXXXXX

.11IIIIIPLI'ILPIIISIII,

ss)(

CA)CI

x

PX

X

XXk

X

X

X

X

SSiPox

CR

PX

*

6

. Xx

X

X X

XXXX

ssPO

x

CRCI

X

x

PX

X

X

X

X

X

X

XXX

II

SSiPO

x

cr

X

.

X

XXX

X

X

XXX*X.X

sx

CR

xx

XxxxX

X'XXX

eS

x

CR

PX

xX

X

x

XX

X

x

4

ssx

CR

5XX6

X

XXXi,xx.xx x

X X

X XXX/IC"X

X

ss PO ssx x x

'

x xxxx

x

is PX

.x xxX.5X.

tX X

2X22Y.2XX

Ss/PO

x

CR

xxPXII

X

X

X

X

sStx.CRI

CI

PX

XXxx

X

X

xxxxxxxXX

X

.Ss/.cx

Cft

xxxxxx,x

.

X X Xx xxx

X XXXX X X.XX XXX X

-

SS(ss PO ssx x x

CR CR CI

PX Px

5 X

4( X

x

'X

XXk

SS/ssx

xx

xxX.

Xx

X

XXXX.ia

ssx

CH

xi.

X

6X

XXxx. xxXXXXXX4

.

sS

x

CI

k

PX

xxX

6X

'X

SS/PO

x..

CR

xx

6

X

XXxxxxxxxxxxXXXXX

XX

IIP3SS

x

C

X

X

ssx

CR

x.

PX

xi-x6X

x

XXxx

XXX4X

X

ssx

xxx

X

X

.

X

PO

x

CR

X

X

'

X

. It

1,...3 a

teZ What Elements of Child Abuse Must

,

E4 Be Reported4. nonaccIdental X

neglect X X

sexualabuse X XZ

g *ZI emotional abuse it, XQ.

11Who Must Report

todoctors X. X

n)social workers X X-.

r' teachers X X'Z..to law enforcementZ When Must Report Be Made

(I ,.., Ipmediately, P .., Promptly,

4S a Soon, L - Loop?) P

To Wheam Must Report Be MadeI (SS .%SociAl Services, C .. Court, SSI

..., PO - Lew Enloroement) PO SSvz....3 Immunity for Good Faith Report X Xvz

5.4

Penalty for Not Making Report(CR wCriminal, CI - Civil)

*Abrogation of Privileged Communicationhusbanddoctorall but attorney/client

Photographs and Xrays

Temporary Protective CustodyEmergency Removal

Gystral Registry

Child Protection Team

Guardian ad Litem/Counsel

Public Education

)"Nealected child" is defined but not included in the rsquired reporting statute.

2 Require reporting bye:any person."3llo not indicate when the report of suiRrectod child abuse must be made.

4New Mexico: Reports can be made to state district attorney dr probation office.

South Dakota: Reports can be made to state district attorney or social services. :

5V1a adndnistrative fiat, not by statute.6Have child consultation and advisory board*.

24

CR

9.

X

X

,22

2

2

SS

X

CR

PX

X

X

X

X

4/

CR

X

x .

SS

X

R/CI

PX

'3

SS

X

X

X

g dXX X

X 2 X)( X X

X XX

SS/SS PO esx x , x

PX

CR

SS/PO

X

CR

X

X

x

ss

CR

PX

- x

22

2

2

L.

SS

X

3

SS/PO

X

CR/CI

X

PX

X

X

6X

X

g.

4/SS

X

CR

X

X

X X

di.

X X

X X

X X .'XX

5

515046.3,

2

2

2

2

2 X2

X XX X x

2

2

5151

22

2

2

2

X X

X

2

2 X.51

42

I 3 I I I

1-36, P-6,L.'4,S.S28,

allSS/PO

SS/PO SS

SS/SS PO SS

SS/PO

SS/PO

SS/PO

SS/P019, P0-2,SS/C1, all:1

X X X X X X .)( X X X 61

CR.33,CI-2,CR Ci3 CR CR ICR CR CR CR CR/CI.6

XX 19

X x x X X 22

X X X 20

X

PX PX I

x

P PX P X

PX-21,P-2, )(-1

38

X X X 5 41

X 6

X X X X X . X- X 46

X X 13

`.04.cj

a

ArariraEducation Commission of the States

1 he 1 thicdtIon Contme,stott of the !.;t.iteN .1 nonprofit

ottithIldhoh homed }hi Intehddte comp.trt otty ',oven

"Ltatl's. Amor Irdli Iileo mid Ow \/oluo IsIdnak

tioNN membrts Its go.11 r, to fur Wet .1 \vor1,111(1 leIdtl)oOmp

dmonti govolnors. t.ito o(hi) mon, fur tho 1m

ptovonipnt ot 'foI:otII I hp, wow Ill ootrorov of 0(1). (Of

111,111V COMIIIIV,IMO tintiet tlI(ii1J oIl lowlIs 1 1.(foor,,ition f fit .

commly,Ion of fires ,ro, Iocotoof .it Suitt. 18(i() I wrolo

Strom. 1)Plivot (:oIoi ado itl'29!)

It polIcy of tho. I (1101-,1110)0) Comomr.,,lolli (It 1111. Shill", to

hoke dfforodtive octom to prevent olo%commi,thott lt tooloritu,,

.111(1 employmeht ot.trtlee.

25