Could someone please explain

[Excelsior! Academy]

what a mandated reporter is?  Aren't we *all* morally mandated reporters?  If one knows of, sees, or has reason to suspect abuse isn't one *obligated* to report such abuse?  

[Excelsior! Academy]

That's what I thought.  Why isn't everyone legally required?  Isn't it illegal to know of abuse and ignore it?  Wouldn't you be somewhat responsible to allow known abuse to continue?

[SKL]

A mandated reporter has to report even if s/he believes the problem could be solved without reporting.

 

I am not a mandated reporter, so if I see a close person making poor childcare choices, I have a range of options.  Talk to them, get their other family members involved, find some other help for them, offer respite if needed, etc.  Or I could report if I think that is the best action under the circumstances.

 

I know 2 dads who have told me that they once spanked their first son and left a mark.  Seeing the mark on the child's rear horrified them and they never spanked a child again.  A mandated reporter finding that mark would probably have to report it, but another person might give the dad the benefit of the doubt unless something happened again.

[SKL]

That's what I thought.  Why isn't everyone legally required?  Isn't it illegal to know of abuse and ignore it?  Wouldn't you be somewhat responsible to allow known abuse to continue?

 

No, it's not illegal to know of abuse and ignore it, unless you have some legal duty to the child.

 

It may be immoral, but it's not illegal.

 

I would not want to create a legal duty to report, because for one thing, most people would not have access to enough information to be sure if there was abuse or not.  A lot of safe but silly behavior could sound like abuse, and accidents can look like abuse.  People shouldn't be afraid to *not* call the authorities when they don't really know what's going on.

[Farrar]

I think legally mandating everyone to report would be a confusing and dangerous thing. Mandated reporters typically have some level of expertise in a field - that's why teachers, nurses, counselors, etc. are all mandated reporters. They're also people who are likely to be in contact with children in a professional capacity. And part of the deal is that the government is then obligated to check it out.

 

One of the issues with making everyone a reporter is people with lack of knowledge. Also, it puts the government even more at the beck and call of anonymous reporters, who may be using the system to harass people who haven't done anything wrong. That's already a problem sometimes, but if everyone was a mandated reporter it would be worse.

[katilac]

That's what I thought.  Why isn't everyone legally required?  Isn't it illegal to know of abuse and ignore it?  Wouldn't you be somewhat responsible to allow known abuse to continue?

 

Mandated reporters generally have a special obligation to protect children, and are also presumed to have some knowledge on the subject. The specifics vary because the laws themselves vary. 

 

I'm not as familiar with it, but I know that some areas have mandated reporting for other vulnerable populations, such as the disabled or the elderly. 

 

In the states, the public at large does not have a general 'duty to rescue' by law. My guess would be because helping someone can open you to danger and/or liability - many Good Samaritan laws, for example, only  cover professionals who try to render aid in an emergency. Laypeople may or may not be covered, and, if they are, it still has to be agreed that you acted in a reasonable manner and did not overreach your training or ability. 

 

I would imagine that the same reasoning is in effect when they do make all people mandated reporters. 

 

Moral responsibility is, of course, a different animal. 

[Tanaqui]

Not all people are equally knowledgeable on the signs of abuse - and, conversely, the signs of a child NOT being abused (are those bruises suspicious or not? perhaps they're just Mongolian spots?) People who know less about the subject should not be required to call in, because they'll call all sorts of things that aren't abuse and the system genuinely can't handle that level of false reports.

[Tsuga]

What Tanaqui said.

 

There are gray areas. In my state, you aren't really free and clear to leave your children alone until 12, but many, many people do that--including myself, my neighbor (a teacher), and the lady down the street (also a teacher). We have backup plans and we know our kids. We watch out for one another. But someone who saw my daughter trying to open the garage door to get in, might be concerned. She doesn't know the child's age, the backup plan, the responsibility level.

 

As it happens, the mandated reporters on my street know me and my plan and I ran it by them but mainly because I like them and not because they are reporters.

 

However, if a new person were to come to the street, we would not all welcome their zealous reporting of massive amounts of children between the ages of 8 and 12 coming home and letting themselves in while moms and dads rushed home after work. A mandated reporter who felt this was a dangerous situation would legally have to report.

 

I think there are a LOT of gray areas that make this a difficult issue, but ultimately we would all rather be a little too cautious than have no way to stop children falling through the cracks.

 

OTOH I don't want us to be so cautious that everyone is always spying on one another. One person's neglect is another person's independence. We only know our own kids, really.

[marbel]

I am a mandated reporter in my state, and I do training for the mandated reporters at my church - volunteers who work with children are mandated reporters, so in order to help in the nursery or Sunday School, they need to get background checks and do the training.  It would be unfair to put people in the position of mandated reporter without giving them training on how to recognize child abuse/neglect -- there are legal consequences to mandated reporters who willfully fail to report suspected abuse. 

 

Sorry if I'm being repetitive of what's been said.  This is on my mind a lot lately because it's getting harder to find people who want the responsibility of mandated reporter, thus our volunteer pool is shrinking.  I understand people who don't want the responsibility of figuring that out.

 

I would not want everyone to be a mandated reporter.  I do agree that everyone has a moral obligation to report if they see obvious signs of abuse or neglect. 

 

[Joanne]

A mandated reporter has to report even if s/he believes the problem could be solved without reporting.

 

I am not a mandated reporter, so if I see a close person making poor childcare choices, I have a range of options. Talk to them, get their other family members involved, find some other help for them, offer respite if needed, etc. Or I could report if I think that is the best action under the circumstances.

 

I know 2 dads who have told me that they once spanked their first son and left a mark. Seeing the mark on the child's rear horrified them and they never spanked a child again. A mandated reporter finding that mark would probably have to report it, but another person might give the dad the benefit of the doubt unless something happened again.

It is not spanking if it leaves a mark.