NCJ Number
147028
Journal
Child Welfare Volume: 73 Issue: 1 Dated: (January/February 1994) Pages: 15-28
Date Published
1994
Length
13 pages
Annotation
A case is made for revising state mandatory reporting laws in cases of child abuse. The authors support a more flexible approach that integrates the statutory scheme that exists in most States and a therapeutic approach favored by many mental health professionals.
Abstract
Mental health and medical professionals (MPH) do not comply uniformly with mandatory reporting requirements in suspected cases of child abuse. A review of the literature reveals some of the explanations found for the reluctance to comply in some cases and factors that influence the decision to comply with the law. The conflict between the supporters of a statutory approach and the supporters of a therapeutic approach to reporting is addressed. The statutory scheme is a macro approach, focusing on finding a broad solution to the societal problem of child abuse without regard for case specifics. The therapeutic argument is a micro approach and focuses on individual cases. Intervention of social and legal services may be included but only if the MPH feels it is in the therapeutic interest of the client. The authors assert that neither model has been shown to be superior in ending child abuse. They propose that a more flexible model of reporting be developed that integrates both the statutory and the therapeutic approaches. A national survey was conducted to obtain the views of child protective services personnel on three proposed alternative models. Forty-four agencies participated in the survey. The reporting model preferred by nearly all of the respondents was the standard mandatory reporting law which exists in 43 of the States represented. 2 tables