CHILD ABUSE

Child Abuse

Child Abuse

I. Introduction

The law generally defines “malice” to include “a wish to vex, annoy or injure another person, or an intent to do a wrongful act”, A.R.S. § 1-215, and in this context would include reporting your observations while either knowing that the information is false, or with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of the information reported. So long as one is reporting documentable and observed or reliably reported information that has led one to a reasonable belief that abuse has occurred, the likelihood of a report being found to be motivated by malice is extremely remote. Current Arizona School Boards Association (A.S.B.A.) suggested Policy JLF (formerly JHG) aids in the objective collection of facts regarding suspected child abuse; following this Policy would further insulate an educator from risks of successfully being sued.

II. History and Statistics

Since 2003, the legal threshold for reporting is a reasonable belief] as used in A.R.S. § 13-3620 means that if there are any facts from which one could reasonably conclude that a child had been abused, the person knowing those facts is required to report those facts to the appropriate authorities. 'Reasonable grounds' is a low standard. Encouraging people to report child abuse mandates the determination that the trial court did not err in finding that [the counselor] had reasonable grounds to suspect abuse and therefore to report it. The statute does not contemplate that a person must fully investigate the suspected abuse before making a report. All the person must do is make the report. It is the responsibility of Child Protective Services and the police to investigate the allegations. We do not believe our legislature intended persons with knowledge of alleged child abuse to conduct their own investigation to decide whether enough evidence of abuse exists to warrant a report. (Brown, T. 2003 367-380)

As noted, before 2003, § 13-3620 required a report when the person considering whether to report, based upon personal “observation or examination of any minor”, had “reasonable grounds to believe” abuse as defined in the law had occurred. The triggering legal threshold is now that the person, regardless of whether there has been any personal observation or

examination of the minor, reasonably believes, based upon any source of information, that abuse has occurred. To the extent that this standard differs from the earlier reporting standard, it is, if anything, more subjective, and a report is more easily justified (and immunities more readily available for reporting) by relying upon the educator's own intuition applied to the facts and circumstances that become known to the educator, instead of having to base a reporting decision on an “observation or examination” and “reasonable grounds to believe” abuse occurred. (Patrick J. Borchers, 2005)

III. Case I

The Arizona Court of Appeals dealt with this issue in L.A.R. v. Ludwig, 170 Ariz. 24, 821 P.2d 291 (App. 1991), where a mental health counselor reported allegations to C.P.S. of molestation committed by a father, which were described to the counselor by the child's ...