Mandatory Reporting
Literature Snapshot – July 2012
Prepared by
Centre for Social Research and Evaluation
Prepared for
Child, Family and Community Policy
Contents
Literature Snapshots
1
Introduction
2
Benefits that mandatory reporting might bring to maltreated children
2
Consequences of mandatory reporting for child protection agencies
2
Behaviour of mandated reporters
3
Optimum conditions for effective mandatory reporting
5
References
6
Appendix One - Internal Mandatory Reporting Report, July 2011
8
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Literature Snapshots
This literature snapshot is one of a number of time-limited research scans
commissioned by Child, Family and Community Policy to inform the development of the
White Paper for Vulnerable Children. The snapshot provides a narrative review of
literature that focuses on a general topic of interest. It does not seek to weigh up a body
of focused scholarship in order to make a definitive judgement about the strength
of evidence in support of particular programmes and practices.
The information in this snapshot is limited to a single literature search across reputable
online information sources, government websites and other printed materials.
Parameters for the literature search
The Ministry of Social Development’s Knowledge Services searched academic and peer
reviewed literature. The purpose of the search was to examine recent literature on
mandatory reporting for any material that might cast new light on: (a) benefits that
mandatory reporting might bring to maltreated children; (b) consequences for child
protection agencies; and (c) behaviour of mandated reporters.
Methodology
The keywords used in various combinations for this search were: mandatory reporting,
child abuse, child maltreatment, child welfare and failure to protect. The databases used
for this search were: MSD catalogue, National Union catalogue, EBSCO databases,
Gale, Proquest, Child Data, and the world wide web.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
1
Introduction
This literature snapshot provides an update on the internal Mandatory Reporting report,
dated July 2011 (Appendix One). It focuses on any new and supplementary information
on the following aspects of mandatory reporting:
•
benefits that mandatory reporting might bring to maltreated children
•
consequences for child protection agencies
•
behaviour of mandated reporters.
Benefits that mandatory reporting might bring to maltreated
children
This literature snapshot has no additional information1 on the benefits that mandatory
reporting might bring to children. Perhaps because many countries already have
mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect, the focus of the recent research
literature is on the evaluations of different aspects of these reporting systems.
Consequences of mandatory reporting for child protection
agencies
Workload and resourcing issues for mandatory reporting case reviews
A study of data from South Australia suggests that the mandatory reporting system, as it
is presently designed, is giving rise to an extraordinarily high number of notifications that
often do not require formal action by child protection agencies (Delfabbro et al., 2010).
Barriers to information sharing
A number of studies discuss barriers to information sharing that make mandatory
reporting less effective such as:
•
lack of communication and collaboration in multi-disciplinary teams (Feng et al.,
2010)
•
the need to address potential conflicts in roles, organisational systems and interagency co-operation (Conti, 2011; Bean et al., 2011; Bunting et al., 2010).
Criteria and thresholds for reporting
The criterion of ‘reasonable suspicion’, which defines the legal threshold for whether a
report is warranted, forms the foundation for mandatory reporting practices in the US.
1 This literature snapshot notes the internal memo of 21 February 2012 that refers to the lack of supporting evidence for an
argument in Mathews (2012) that mandatory reporting is successful in identifying the majority of cases of severe maltreatment in
the US.
2
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Levi and Crowell’s study (2010), in line with past research, raises questions about
whether the threshold for mandated reporting is applied consistently because there is:
•
Significant variability in how experts in the field of child abuse interpret reasonable
suspicion (Levi and Crowell, 2010).
•
No standard among experts in the field of child abuse for how likely child abuse must
be for reasonable suspicion to exist (Levi and Crowell, 2010).
Ensuring comparable valid data
Mathews (2012) discusses the issues for child protection agencies around ensuring
comparable and valid data, both qualitative and quantitative. These issues arise from
different systems for recording data, different terminology and system responses, a lack
of relevant or complete data, and include the ‘inability to chart trends within a jurisdiction
because of changes to recording and disposition’. A point of interest is that the study
places particular emphasis on Australia and the UK, showing that these data issues are
pertinent to child protection whether mandatory reporting exists or not2 (Mathews, 2012).
Behaviour of mandated reporters
Negative attitudes to mandated reporting of child abuse and neglect
Negative attitudes to mandated reporting of child abuse and neglect influence the ability
of mandated reporters to recognise the seriousness of cases or to hesitate when
reporting. A number of factors give rise to these negative attitudes:
•
not having faith in child protection services
•
perceiving a number of individual and organisational barriers to reporting
•
not believing that a report will benefit the child or the family.
This can be seen in the following studies that focus on different professional groups of
mandated reporters:
•
a study of registered nurses in Australia (Fraser et al., 2010)
•
studies of counsellors in the US (Bean et al., 2011; Bryant and Baldwin, 2010)
•
a study of reporting child abuse and neglect of disabled children in Sweden (Mallén,
2011).
These findings are consistent with other studies where negative attitudes are associated
with non-compliance in reporting practice (see Appendix One).
2 Australia has mandatory reporting; the UK does not.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
3
Insufficient knowledge of child abuse and its symptoms and lack of
professional awareness of reporting processes and requirements
There are a number of professions that are well placed to contribute to child protection
and who are already mandatory reporters in many countries. Much of the literature on
mandatory reporting refers to the need for better training in child protection for workers
in these professions, as shown in the following tables:
Profession
Study details
References
Front-line clinical
workers
Raman et al. (2012) found significant differences in confidence
and practice between front-line clinical workers in primary care
and in a hospital Emergency Department in New South Wales.
Raman et al., 2012
School nurses,
paediatric nurse
practitioners, and
paediatric mental health
nurse practitioners
A study of school nurses, paediatric nurse practitioners, and
paediatric mental health nurse practitioners in the US suggests
the need to re-examine child maltreatment course materials for
paediatric nurses to include not only the most common signs
and symptoms of child maltreatment but also those that are less
overt.
Eisbach and Driessnack,
2010
Teachers
Kesner (2008) points to past research indicating that the lack of
training about child maltreatment in teacher education
programmes in the US communicates to teachers that they have
only one priority: that is, teaching. (Crenshaw et al. 1995). The
study argues that this message ignores the legal responsibility
teachers have with respect to mandated reporting laws, which
should be given greater attention in teacher education.
Kesner, 2008
Teachers
In Florida, Kenny (2001a) found that 45% of teachers reported
that their professional training in the area of child abuse was
minimal; a further 13% reported that their training had been
inadequate. Kenny (2001b) reported similar results, with 48% of
teachers describing their professional training as minimal and a
further 14% describing it as inadequate. Similarly, Baginsky
(2000) found that only 17% of newly qualified teachers surveyed
in the UK had attended a child-protection course.
Goldman, 2010
Teachers
Australian studies show that training received by student
teachers on policy requirements or directives about child sexual
abuse and mandatory reporting was ‘incidental, sparse and
sporadic, rather than sustained and systematic’.
Goldman and Grimbeek,
2011
Positive outcomes from training
References
Initial findings by Hawkins and McCallum (2001a) suggest that a one-day Mandatory
Notification Training programme for teachers in South Australia increased teachers’
knowledge about the indicators of child abuse and neglect, awareness of their legal
responsibilities and procedures for making a notification. Teachers who had recently
received training were also found to be more likely to respond appropriately to a child’s
disclosure than those who had received no training.
Goldman, 2010
The results of a US study of the development of a training programme to assist medical
health practitioners in effectively reporting suspected child maltreatment indicate that
participants who were assigned to this training programme improved their knowledge of
State and Federal laws, were better able to identify child maltreatment scenarios, and
evidenced knowledge of requisite clinical skills relevant to reporting suspected child
maltreatment.
Alvarez et al., 2010
4
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Optimum conditions for effective mandatory reporting
The research indicates the following optimum conditions for effective mandatory reporting:
Optimum condition
Details
References
Identifying, sourcing
and combining multiple
sources of information
to be used to recognise
an accumulation of risk
factors for children
to assist reporters to make more effective reports of child neglect
and abuse3
Annerbäc et al., 2010
to enable an accurate determination of the needs of vulnerable
children and families, and the delivery of more efficient services
Brown, 2012;
Annerbäc et al., 2010
Enhancing
collaboration and
communication
by addressing barriers to sharing information
Feng et al., 2010; Conti,
2011; Bean et al., 2011;
Bunting et al., 2010
by:
- clarifying specific reporting roles in child abuse for each discipline
- simplifying complex and ambiguous procedures
- engaging in training programmes across professional disciplines
Feng et al., 2010
Ensuring that the
continuum of services
for child welfare
includes a broad range
of community-based,
interagency services
that support families
and promote the
general wellbeing of
children
This approach acknowledges the many and complex causes of
child maltreatment.
Brown, 2012
Addressing workload
issues through
differentiated
responses at tiers of a
system
through early intervention services or through broader child and
family services
Delfabbro et al., 2010
Ensuring that data
being used for
mandatory reporting is
comparable and valid
Clarify criteria and thresholds for reporting.
Mathews, 2012; Levi and
Crowell, 2010
Addressing negative
attitudes to mandated
reporting of child abuse
and neglect
Understanding the amount of evidence required by the child
protection agency and addressing the lack of follow up information
after reporting.
Fraser et al., 2010;
Bean et al., 2011;
Mallén, 2011; Bryant &
Baldwin, 2010
Addressing training,
including training
across disciplines, for
professional groups
who are well placed to
be mandatory reporters
such as teachers,
nurses and doctors
Teachers are ideally placed to contribute to child protection:
No other professionals have such close, continuous, daily contact
with child abuse victims on a day-to-day, long-term basis or have
such an extensive knowledge of the children in their care. (Briggs
and Hawkins 1997:17 in Goldman. 2010: 283).
The importance of training to facilitate effective mandatory
reporting is emphasised by the Council of Australian
Governments:
Prevention, detection, early intervention and, crucially, education,
for professionals, parents and other adults, and for all school
children, are highly desirable and cost-effective strategies.
(Council of Australian Governments, 2009 in Goldman 2010:292).
Raman et al., 2012;
Eisbach & Driessnack,
2010; Goldman, 2010;
Kesner, 2008; Goldman
and Grimbeek, 2011;
Bunting et al., 2010;
Alvarez et al., 2010;
Fraser et al., 2010;
Bryant & Baldwin, 2010;
Feng et al., 2010
3 An effective report may be seen as one that leads to substantiation and to an intervention to help the child.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
5
References
Alvarez, K., Donohue, B., Carpenter, A., Romero, V., Allen, D. and Cross, C. (2010).
Development and preliminary evaluation of a training method to assist professionals.
Reporting Suspected Child Maltreatment. Originally published online 14 April 2010.
http://cmx.sagepub.com/content/15/3/211
Annerbäc, E., Svedin, C. and Gustafsson, P (2010). Characteristic features of severe
child physical abuse – A multi-informant approach. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 165172.
Bean, H., Softas-Nall, L. and Mahoney, M. (2011). Reflections on mandated reporting
and challenges in the therapeutic relationship: A case study with systemic implications.
The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 19(3), 286-290.
Brown, R. (2012). Reporting Child Abuse and Neglect: Who is Responsible? APHSA
Policy and Practice: February.
Bryant, J. K. and Baldwin, P. A. (2010). School counsellors’ perceptions of mandatory
reporter training and mandatory reporting experiences. Child Abuse Review, 19, 172186.
Bunting, L., Lazenbatt, A. and Wallace, I. (2010). Information sharing and reporting
systems in the UK and Ireland: Professional barriers to reporting child maltreatment
concerns. Child Abuse Review, 19, 187-202.
Conti, S. (2011). Lawyers and mental health professionals working together:
Reconciling the duties of confidentiality and mandatory child abuse reporting. Family
Court Review, 49(2), 388 – 399.
Delfabbro, P., Hirte, C., Wilson, R., and Rogers, N. (2010). Longitudinal trends in child
protection statistics in South Australia. Children Australia, 35(3), 4-10.
Eisbach, S. S. and Driessnack, M. (2010). Am I sure I want to go down this road?
Hesitations in the reporting of child maltreatment by nurses. Journal for Specialists in
Paediatric Nursing, 15(4), 317-323.
Feng, J., Fetzer, S., Chen, Y., Yeh, L., and Huang, M. (2010). Multidisciplinary
collaboration reporting child abuse: A grounded theory study. International Journal of
Nursing Studies, 47, 1483-1490.
6
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Fraser, J. A., Mathews, B., Walsh, K., Chen, L., and Dunne, M. (2010). Factors
influencing child abuse and neglect recognition and reporting by nurses: A multivariate
analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47, 146-153.
Goldman, J. D. G. (2010). Australian undergraduate primary school student-teachers’
responses to child sexual abuse and its mandatory reporting. Pastoral Care in
Education, 28(4), 283-294.
Goldman, J. D. G. and Grimbeek, P. (2011). Sources of knowledge of departmental
policy on child sexual abuse and mandatory reporting identified by primary school
student-teachers. Educational Review, 63(1), 1-18.
Kesner, J. (2008). Child protection in the United States: An examination of mandated
reporting of child maltreatment. Child Indicators Research, 1, 397-410.
Levi, B. and Crowell, K. (2010). Child abuse experts disagree about the threshold for
mandated reporting. Clinical Pediatrics, 50(4), 321-329.
Mallén, A. (2011). ‘It's like piecing together small pieces of a puzzle’: Difficulties in
reporting abuse and neglect of disabled children to the social services. Journal of
Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 12(1), 45-62.
Mathews, B. (2012). Exploring the contested role of mandatory reporting laws in the
identification of severe child abuse and neglect. In M. Freeman (Ed.), Law and
Childhood Studies (pp302-338). Oxford University Press: Oxford, United Kingdom.
Raman, S., Holdgate, A., and Torrens, R. (2012). Are our frontline clinicians equipped
with the ability and confidence to address child abuse and neglect? Child Abuse
Review, 21(2), 114-130.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
7
Appendix One - Internal Mandatory Reporting Report, July
2011
Purpose of the Report
This report provides:
•
background information about mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect, including the
countries with comparable jurisdictions to New Zealand that have introduced it
•
an overview of mandatory reporting systems in the Australian States and Territories
•
findings on mandatory reporting systems, with a particular focus on the Australian
experience
•
possible next steps for improving our understanding before introducing mandatory reporting
in New Zealand.
Executive Summary
1
There is no evidence that mandatory reporting improves the protection/welfare of children.
2
New Zealand currently achieves higher rates of notification than most Australian States.
3
Some benefits of mandatory reporting noted in the literature are:
• acknowledgement of the seriousness of child abuse
• increased public awareness of child abuse
• overcoming reluctance by some professionals to report suspected child abuse.
4
Disadvantages noted in the literature include:
• overloading care and protection agencies with reports, some of which will not meet the
threshold for statutory investigation
• serious cases being overlooked as agencies struggle to manage workloads
• effects on help-seeking by families and children
• once introduced it is almost impossible to go back.
5
There are steps the Ministry of Social Development could take to enhance our
understanding of our current system and inform our understanding of what any future
change might involve.
5.1 We could examine Child, Youth and Family (CYF) notification data to find out more
about:
•
current levels of reporting by notifier groups and for subpopulations of children of
interest including young children and children who are being re-notified
•
8
more nuanced CYF data pictures of renotifications over time, by examining a
cohort of children
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
•
notifier type categories that could better track the level of reporting over time for
key professional groups.
5.2 We could identify the proportion of child deaths due to maltreatment where the child
was not known to CYF and consider whether outcomes may have been different had
mandatory reporting been in place.
5.3 Engage in conversations with Australian officials about what is being learned from:
•
the recent introduction in Western Australia of mandatory reporting of sexual
abuse
•
the comparatively low and steady annual level of notifications in Victoria,
Australia of about 40,000 notifications
•
the introduction of the on-line Mandatory Reporter Guide in New South Wales,
Australia.
5.4 Engage in conversations with key groups such as the CYF National Call Centre social
workers, Family Start providers, the Paediatrics Society, Well Child/Tamariki Ora
Providers and Plunket about their views about the benefits or otherwise of introducing
mandatory reporting legislation in New Zealand.
Background
6
The legal requirement to report suspected cases of child abuse and neglect to child welfare
authorities is known as ‘mandatory reporting’. The objective is to protect children who may
be or are being abused or neglected by ensuring that incidents of suspected or actual child
abuse or neglect are reported.
7
Mandatory reporting laws specify those conditions under which an individual is legally
required to make a report to the statutory child protection service in their jurisdiction. This
does not preclude an individual from making a report to the statutory child protection
service if they have concerns for the safety and wellbeing of a child that do not fall within
mandatory reporting requirements.
8
Most mandatory reporting laws have common elements such as:
• selected individuals mandated to report
• the forms of child abuse and neglect to be reported and thresholds for the level of harm
• details of the reporting procedures (how reports are made and the agencies to receive
and investigate reports)
• penalties for failing to report and false reporting
• provisions for immunity from prosecution.
New Zealand’s new legislative proposal “failing to protect a child”
9
The proposal to amend the Crimes Act 1961 by introducing a new offence of failing to
protect a child or vulnerable adult from risk of death, serious injury or sexual assault is now
before Parliament. The purpose of the provision is to place a duty on people who live in the
same households as a child to intervene rather than do nothing when a child living with
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
9
them is subject to major risk of harm or death. The maximum penalty proposed for failing to
intervene is 10 years imprisonment. The key aspect of the provision is that, knowing that a
child is at such risk, a member of the child’s household has failed to take reasonable steps
to protect that child.
10
A person may be regarded as a member of a particular household if they live in the same
house or are so closely connected with the household that it is reasonable to regard them
as a member. This will cover all situations where a member of a household knows that a
child is at risk of death, serious injury or sexual assault and does not take reasonable
steps. It would most obviously have applied to the adult members of the Glassie family who
knew what was happening to Nia. It would have applied to the parent of the Kahui twins
who did not perpetrate abuse (assuming they knew of the abuse). It will not cover
schoolteachers, doctors and others who are clearly not members of the child’s household
even if they knew about the risks the child was subject to.
11
The key differences from mandatory reporting are:
• this provision applies to members of the child’s household only
• it does not compel a person to report concerns to the Police or to CYF
• it obliges the taking of reasonable steps. Reasonable steps may mean doing something
other than reporting to agencies. Ensuring that a non-custodial parent takes action may
be sufficient in some cases. However, having regard to the high level of risk facing the
child, reporting the concerns to an agency may be the only reasonable step to take.
New Zealand’s position on mandatory reporting
12
New Zealand has considered, and rejected, mandatory reporting on at least two occasions:
• during the development of the CYPF Act in 1987-8
• by a Ministerial Review Team reviewing the CYPF Act in 1992.
Instead, in 1994, the duties of the Chief Executive in section 7 of the CYPF Act were
extended to include responsibility for developing child abuse reporting protocols and public
education campaigns.
Most countries with comparable jurisdictions to New Zealand have
mandatory reporting
13
Model laws to introduce mandatory reporting were first drafted in the USA in 1963 with
every state having laws passed by 1976 (Hutchinson, 1993). Just over ten years later, a
similar process took place in Australia, so that all Australian states and territories now have
some form of mandatory child abuse reporting laws.
14
Mandatory reporting is legislated for in all Canadian jurisdictions apart from the Yukon
Territory which has a general discretionary reporting provision, although teachers and day
care workers are required to report abuse. Alberta has had mandatory reporting provisions
since 1966.
15
Denmark, Sweden and Finland also have such laws though their role and function is
somewhat different to those in the USA and Australia because of these countries’ different
histories and the nature of their care and protection systems (Gilbert, 1997).
10
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
16
England introduced a mandatory reporting system on the basis of ‘cause for concern’ for a
child’s welfare (Munro and Parton, 2007). Changes made to the Children’s Act 2004
enabled the national database (ContactPoint) to be created, capturing information
accessible to agencies. In May 2010, following heavy criticism by a wide range of groups
regarding children’s rights and privacy issues, the UK Coalition Government announced
plans to scrap ContactPoint, and in August 2010 the database was switched off.
What are the benefits of mandatory reporting systems?
17
Mandatory reporting has come in for considerable and often heated debate about its
efficacy and effectiveness. These debates inevitably involve the functioning of the care and
protection system, of which the reporting of child abuse and neglect forms an important
part.
18
The inability to disentangle reporting and responding effects, the lack of comparable
jurisdictions with and without mandatory reporting and the influence of a myriad of factors
on reporting behaviour means that to date there is no evidence of the effectiveness of
mandatory reporting legislation in protecting children in Australia or elsewhere (Ainsworth &
Hansen, 2006).
19
At the same time some of the literature identifies anticipated benefits of mandatory
reporting systems, some of which are outlined below.
Symbolic acknowledgement of the seriousness of child abuse
20
Mandatory reporting is considered to be a symbolic acknowledgement of the seriousness
of child abuse; that children need to be protected, that governments believe this, and that it
is the duty of certain people to be vigilant about protecting children. Mandatory reporting
requirements reinforce the moral responsibility of community members to report suspected
cases of child abuse and neglect. It can act as a signal of the community’s abhorrence of
child abuse and the state’s responsibility to protect vulnerable children. Child’s rights to
protection, dignity and security arguments have been applied by Mathews and Bross
(2008).
Increased public awareness of child abuse
21
Mandatory reporting, and the publicity associated with its introduction, has been found to
increase public awareness of child abuse, both within mandated professional groups and
within the community at large. In many instances it also results in a substantial increase in
the number of reports being made to child protection departments. Some Australian states
noted increased levels of reporting from mandated and non-mandated reporters. Whether
this results from mandating, the publicity surrounding it, or other factors is not always clear.
Overcoming reluctance of some professionals to report suspected cases of
child abuse
22
The introduction of mandatory reporting aims to overcome the reluctance of some
professionals to become involved in suspected cases of child abuse by imposing a public
duty to do so.
23
In 2009 the Parliament of Western Australia introduced mandatory reporting of sexual
abuse. The number of notifications increased by 13 percent in 2008-09 compared to 2007-
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
11
08. More than half of those additional notifications were about sexual abuse. An increase in
notifications received in the first eight months of 2009-10 was possibly due to a
continuation of the effect of mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse by doctors, nurses,
midwives, teachers and police, that was introduced half way through 2008-09 (Government
of Western Australia, 2010).
24
Some studies have confirmed the influence of the legal obligation on reporting (Walsh et al,
2008). However how other factors such as the reporter’s ability to interpret terminology
used in these laws, can prove problematic. For example, applying concepts such as
‘reasonable suspicion’ and ‘significant harm' to actual cases has proved problematic
(Walsh et al, 2008 and Mathews et al, 2006). These and other issues led to calls in New
South Wales for more targeted training and support for groups mandated to report,
including agencies’ access to aggregated data, and more information on the outcomes of
the reports they make to child protection authorities (State of New South Wales, 2008).
25
New South Wales recently introduced the 0nline Mandatory Reporter Guide that allows
reporters to enter case information to determine whether the threshold for ‘significant harm’
is met. The tool can be viewed at http://sdm.community.nsw.gov.au/mrg/app/summary.page.
What are the disadvantages of mandatory reporting?
26
In Victoria Australia the introduction of mandatory reporting was found to result in:
• marked increases in the level of notifications from all types of notifiers whether mandated
or not
• initial increases in reports by mandated professionals and then a tailing off
• a comparatively small increase in the number of investigations and the number of
children found to be maltreated. There was a modest increase in the detection of sexual
abuse (Ministry of Social Development, 2000).
These and other issues identified as creating problems to the good functioning of the
mandatory reporting legislation and the responses to it are outlined below.
Non-compliance
27
Non-compliance is believed to be a significant problem in many jurisdictions but it is difficult
to ascertain at what level this operates. There is a range of personal, situational and
systemic factors that may impede a professional’s legal obligation to report.
28
Doctors are one professional group whose reporting rates are below what could be
expected given the contact they have with children and families and their training. In New
Zealand over the 12 month period from October 2009 to October 2010, there were 307
notifications to CYF from GPs for children under 7. This number comprised 0.6% of the
total notifications for this group of children. Doctors in one Australian study were evenly
divided as to whether mandatory reporting legislation had been effective in compelling
doctors to report abuse (Holland, 1999).
29
When mandated people report suspected cases of child abuse or neglect, they expect the
child protection department to investigate and take action regarding their report. If this does
not occur, there is a risk that such people may cease to make reports in the future. In
12
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
particular, such systems may discourage older children from reporting abuse, fearing the
consequences.
Increased notifications overwhelming statutory care and protections
responses
30
If there are inadequate resources available to the responsible department to respond to the
increased demand, then the increasing number of reports may result in services being
overwhelmed with cases to investigate, and lacking sufficient staffing to do so (Ainsworth,
2002 and Mansell, 2006). This places pressure on the statutory care and protection
process system, making it harder to focus on children at risk of significant harm and taking
up resources away from restorative and care services.
31
New Zealand currently achieves higher rates of notification than most Australian states that
have mandatory reporting.
Table 1: Rate of notifications per thousand children 0-17yrs of age4
NZ
32
NSW
Vic
WA
SA
2004-05
46.8
87.9
33.6
N/A
53.1
2008-09
102.0
139.9
37.5
20.6
69.8
In order to cope with this influx of reports, some child protection departments have
increased the threshold or level of seriousness of reports that give rise to an investigation.
In 2010 in New South Wales the threshold for reporting child maltreatment changed from
“risk of harm” to “risk of significant harm”.
Sharing responsibility or ‘passing the buck’
33
A fundamental expectation in the safeguarding agenda is that better agency
communications will increase cooperative working. If professionals believe that they have
done their legal duty by making a report this can reduce sharing of responsibility or no one
taking responsibility. There may also be possible effects on help being given to families due
to professionals needing to be seen to do the ‘right thing’ rather than offering help when
needs are identified.
Effects on help-seeking by families and children
34
Confidentiality is known to be an important factor in people seeking help. Studies
conducted with children seeking their views on the proposed UK database found that the
lack of confidentiality would make them reluctant to use a service when they need help
(Munro & Parton, 2007).
35
There have also been problems raised for the mandatory reporting of children living with
domestic violence (Humphreys, 2008). Where notification is mandated or expected, this
4 Based on Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Child protection Australia 2008/09 (published Jan 2010) and previous
editions; and Ministry of Social Development, The Statistical Report and Statistics NZ population estimates.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
13
step must be taken by professionals regardless of the woman’s view or protective factors
that may be in place. This can undermine the voluntary and empowerment model of
intervention and fail children.
Possible steps to improve our knowledge if mandatory
reporting is to be introduced in New Zealand
36
Over the past thirty years New Zealand has been responding to similar care and protection
system problems and issues as have countries with mandatory reporting and learning from
these countries’ experiences. There are various steps we could take to inform our
understanding about potential benefits and disadvantages of introducing mandatory
reporting in New Zealand. The information gathered would deepen our understanding of
how our child protection system is working, regardless of whether mandatory reporting is
introduced or not.
37
We could examine CYF notification data to find out more about:
• current levels of reporting by particular notifier groups and for subpopulations of children
including children who are renotified
• review the current notifier type categories to better track reporting levels over time;
currently there are no categories for some professional groups that could be mandated to
report
• provide a more nuanced CYF data picture of children born in 1993 to better understand
reporting levels within the child population in New Zealand.
38
It would be helpful to review child maltreatment deaths where children were known and not
known to CYF and consider whether outcomes may have been different had mandatory
reporting been in place.
39
We could engage in conversations with Australian officials about what is being learned
from:
• the recent introduction in Western Australia of mandatory reporting of sexual abuse
• the comparatively low and steady level of notification in Victoria of about 40,000
notifications
• the introduction of the Mandatory Reporter Guide in New South Wales.
40
We should engage in conversations with key groups such as the Paediatrics Society, Well
Child/ Tamariki Ora providers, CYF National Call Centre social workers and Family Start
providers about their views about the benefits or otherwise of introducing mandatory
reporting legislation in New Zealand.
41
Finally we should consider the pros and cons of mandatory legislation focused on
protecting children as opposed to a system focused on ‘safeguarding children’, which has a
much wider remit.
14
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Mandatory reporting in Australia
42
This section examines in more detail Australian mandatory reporting systems in terms of
the groups mandated and types of abuse to be reported.
About whom can notifications be made?
43
Legislation in all Australian jurisdictions except New South Wales requires mandatory
reporting in relation to all young people up to the age of 18 (whether they use the terms
"children" or "children and young people"). In New South Wales, the legislative grounds for
intervention cover young people up to 18 years of age, but it is not mandatory to report
suspicions of risk of harm in relation to young people aged 16 and 17.
Which groups are mandated to report?
44
The groups of people mandated in Australia to notify their concerns, suspicions or beliefs to
the appropriate statutory child protection authority range from a limited number of specified
persons in specified contexts (Queensland) through to every adult (Northern Territory).
Some states have a limited number of occupations listed, such as Queensland (doctors,
departmental officers, and employees of licensed residential care services) and Victoria
(police, doctors, nurses and teachers). Other jurisdictions have more extensive lists
(Australian Capital Territory, South Australia, and Tasmania) or use generic descriptions
such as "professionals working with children".
45
In addition to state and territory law, there are provisions within Commonwealth legislation
that relate to mandatory reporting. Under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), personnel from
the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Magistrates Court and the Family Court of
Western Australia also have mandatory reporting obligations. This includes registrars,
family counselors, family dispute resolution practitioners or arbitrators, and lawyers
independently representing children's interests, as outlined in Appendix A.
What types of abuse are mandated reporters required to report?
46
In addition to differences across jurisdictions in the people who are mandated to report
abuse concerns, there are also differences across jurisdictions in the abuse types for which
it is mandatory to report. In some jurisdictions it is mandatory to report suspicions of each
of the recognised abuse types (ie physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse and
neglect); while in other jurisdictions it is mandatory to report only some of the abuse types.
Most States and Territories require reports of all suspicions or beliefs of sexual abuse,
without imposing a requirement that the abuse has caused or is likely to cause significant
harm. Western Australia's new provisions also adopt this approach.
47
In contrast, in Queensland and Victoria the legislative reporting duties specify that a
reporter is only required to report cases where the abuse has caused significant harm, or is
at risk of causing significant harm. New South Wales has recently introduced a ‘significant
harm’ threshold.
Is the identity of notifiers protected?
48
In most Australian jurisdictions the identity of notifiers - whether mandated or not - is
explicitly protected. However, in some jurisdictions there are limits to this protection. For
example, in the Northern Territory, the identity of reporters is not disclosed to families, but
may be disclosed to the Family Matters Court.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
15
References
Ainsworth, F. (2002). Mandatory reporting of child abuse and neglect: Why would you want it?
Developing Practice: The Child, Youth and Family Work Journal, 4, 5-8.
Ainsworth, F. & Hansen, P. (2006). Five tumultuous years in Australian child protection: Little
progress. Child and Family Social Work, 11, 33-41.
Gilbert, N. (Ed.). (1997). Combating Child Abuse: International Perspectives and Trends. Oxford
University Press: Oxford, United Kingdom.
Government of Western Australia Department for Child Protection, Department of Child
Protection Annual report 2009-2010.
Harries, M., & Clare, M. (2002). Mandatory Reporting of Child Abuse: Evidence and Options.
Report for the Western Australian Child Protection Council. Perth: Department for Community
Development.
Holland, G. (1999). Mandatory reporting of abuse: The influence of legislation on doctors'
reporting behaviour. Youth Studies Australia, 18(2), 30-36.
Humphreys C. (2008). Problems in the system of mandatory reporting of children living with
domestic violence. Journal of Family Studies, 14 (2-3), 228-239.
Hutchinson, E. D. (1993). Mandatory reporting laws: Child protective case finding gone awry?
Social Work, 35, 56-63.
Mansell, J. (2006). The underlying instability in statutory child protection: understanding the
system dynamics driving risk assurance levels. Social Policy Journal, 28. 97-132.
Mathews, B and Bross, D. (2008) Mandated reporting is still a policy with reason: Empirical
evidence and philosophical grounds. Child Abuse and Neglect, 32, 511-516.
Mathews, B. Walsh, K. Fraser, J. (2006). Mandatory reporting by nurses of child abuse and
neglect. Journal of Law and Medicine, 13, 505-517.
Ministry of Social Development (2000). Mandatory Reporting Briefing Note to the Minister of
Social Services and Employment.
Munro, E., & Parton, N. (2007). How far is England in the process of introducing a mandatory
reporting system? Child Abuse Review, 16, 5-16.
Quinton, P. (1991). Mandatory Reporting. Canberra: ACT Community Law Reform Committee.
State of New South Wales (2008). Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into Care and
Protection Services in New South Wales. Downloaded 23 June 2012 from
http://www.dpc.nsw.gov.au/publications/news/stories/?a=33794
Tomison, A. (2002). Mandatory reporting: A question of theory versus practice. Developing
Practice: The Child, Youth and Family Work Journal, 4, 13-17.
16
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Walsh, K. M., Bridgstock, R. S., Farrell, A. M., Rassafiani, M. & Schweitzwer, R. (2008). Case,
teacher and school characteristics influencing teachers’ detection and reporting of child physical
abuse and neglect: Results from an Australian survey. Child Abuse and Neglect, 32(10), 983993.
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
17
Appendix A: Mandatory reporting requirements across Australia
Table 1 Overview of mandatory reporting in each Australian state and territory
State
Who is mandated to
Territory notify?
What is to be
notified?
Maltreatment types for
which it is mandatory
to report
Relevant sections
of the
Act/Regulations
ACT
A person who is: a doctor;
a dentist; a nurse; an
enrolled nurse; a midwife;
a teacher at a school; a
person providing
education to a child or
young person who is
registered, or provisionally
registered, for home
education under the
Education Act 2004; a
police officer; a person
employed to counsel
children or young people
at a school; a person
caring for a child at a child
care centre; a person
coordinating or monitoring
home-based care for a
family day care scheme
proprietor; a public
servant who, in the course
of employment as a public
servant, works with, or
provides services
personally to, children and
young people or families;
the public advocate; an
official visitor; a person
who, in the course of the
person's employment, has
contact with or provides
services to children,
young people and their
families and is prescribed
by regulation
A belief, on
reasonable
grounds, that a
child or young
person has
experienced or is
experiencing
sexual abuse or
non-accidental
physical injury;
and
Physical abuse
Section 356 of the
Children and Young
People Act 2008
(ACT)
A person who, in the
course of his or her
professional work or other
paid employment delivers
health care, welfare,
education, children's
services, residential
services or law
enforcement, wholly or
partly, to children; and
Reasonable
grounds to
suspect that a
child is at risk of
significant harm;
and
NSW
a person who holds a
management position in
an organisation, the
duties of which include
direct responsibility for, or
18
Sexual abuse
the belief arises
from information
obtained by the
person during the
course of, or
because of, the
person's work
(whether paid or
unpaid)
Physical abuse
Sexual abuse
Emotional/psychological
abuse
Sections 23 and 27
of the Children and
Young Persons
(Care and
Protection) Act 1998
(NSW)
those grounds
Neglect
arise during the
course of or from
the person's work Exposure to family
violence
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
State
Who is mandated to
Territory notify?
What is to be
notified?
Maltreatment types for
which it is mandatory
to report
Relevant sections
of the
Act/Regulations
A belief on
reasonable
grounds that a
child has been or
is likely to be a
victim of a sexual
offence; or
otherwise has
suffered or is
likely to suffer
harm or
exploitation
Physical abuse
Sections 15 and 26
of the Care and
Protection of
Children Act 2007
(NT)
direct supervision of, the
provision of health care,
welfare, education,
children's services,
residential services or law
enforcement, wholly or
partly, to children
NT
Qld
Any person with
reasonable grounds
Sexual abuse
Emotional/psychological
abuse
Neglect
Exposure to physical
violence (e.g., a child
witnessing violence
between parents at
home)
Registered health
professionals
Reasonable
Sexual abuse
grounds to
believe a child
aged 14 or 15
years has been
or is likely to be a
victim of a sexual
offence and the
age difference
between the child
and offender is
greater than 2
years
Section 26 of the
Care and Protection
of Children Act 2007
(NT)
An authorised officer,
employee of the
Department of
Communities (Child
Safety Services), a
person employed in a
departmental care service
or licensed care service
Awareness or
reasonable
suspicion of harm
caused to a child
placed in the
care of an entity
conducting a
departmental
care service or a
licensee
Section 148 of the
Child Protection Act
1999 (Qld)
Physical abuse
Sexual abuse or
exploitation
Emotional/psychological
abuse
Neglect
A doctor or registered
nurse (Public Health Act
2005, s158)
Awareness or
reasonable
suspicion during
the practice of his
or her profession
of harm or risk of
harm
Sections 191-192
and 158 of the Public
Health Act 2005
(Qld)
The Commissioner for
A child who is in
Section 20 of the
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
19
State
Who is mandated to
Territory notify?
What is to be
notified?
Maltreatment types for
which it is mandatory
to report
Relevant sections
of the
Act/Regulations
Children and Young
People
need of
protection under
s10 of the Child
Protection Act
(i.e. has suffered
or is at
unacceptable risk
of suffering harm
and does not
have a parent
able and willing
to protect them)
Commission for
Children Young
People and Child
Guardian Act 2000
(Qld)
SA
Doctors; pharmacists;
registered or enrolled
nurses; dentists;
psychologists; police
officers; community
corrections officers; social
workers; teachers; family
day care providers;
employees/volunteers in a
government department,
agency or instrumentality,
or a local government or
non-government agency
that provides health,
welfare, education,
sporting or recreational,
child care or residential
services wholly or partly
for children; ministers of
religion (with the
exception of disclosures
made in the confessional);
employees or volunteers
in a religious or spiritual
organisations
Reasonable
Physical abuse
grounds that a
child has been or Sexual abuse
is being abused
or neglected; and
Emotional/psychological
abuse
the suspicion is
formed in the
Neglect
course of the
person's work
(whether paid or
voluntary) or
carrying out
official duties
Section 11 of the
Children's Protection
Act 1993 (SA)
Tas.
Registered medical
practitioners; nurses;
dentists, dental therapists
or dental hygienists;
registered psychologists;
police officers; probation
officers; principals and
teachers in any
educational institution;
persons who provide child
care or a child care
service for fee or reward;
persons concerned in the
management of a child
care service licensed
under the Child Care Act
2001; any other person
who is employed or
A belief,
suspicion,
reasonable
grounds or
knowledge that:
Sections 13 and 14
of the Children,
Young Persons and
Their Families Act
1997 (Tas.)
20
a child has been
or is being
abused or
neglected or is
an affected child
within the
meaning of the
Family Violence
Act 2004; or
Physical abuse
Sexual abuse
Emotional/psychological
abuse
Neglect
Exposure to family
violence
there is a
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
State
Who is mandated to
Territory notify?
What is to be
notified?
Maltreatment types for
which it is mandatory
to report
Relevant sections
of the
Act/Regulations
engaged as an employee
for, of, or in, or who is a
volunteer in, a
government agency that
provides health, welfare,
education, child care or
residential services wholly
or partly for children, and
an organisation that
receives any funding from
the Crown for the
provision of such
services; and any other
person of a class
determined by the
Minister by notice in the
Gazette to be prescribed
persons
reasonable
likelihood of a
child being killed
or abused or
neglected by a
person with
whom the child
resides
Vic.
Registered medical
practitioners, registered
nurses, a person
registered as a teacher
under the Education,
Training and Reform Act
2006 or teachers granted
permission to teach under
that Act, principals of
government or nongovernment schools, and
members of the police
force
Belief on
Physical abuse
reasonable
grounds that a
Sexual abuse
child is in need of
protection on a
ground referred
to in Section
162(c) or 162(d),
formed in the
course of
practising his or
her office,
position or
employment
Sections 182(1) a-e,
184 and 162 c-d of
the Children, Youth
and Families Act
2005 (Vic.)
WA
Court personnel; family
counsellors; family
dispute resolution
practitioners, arbitrators or
legal practitioners
representing the child's
interests
Reasonable
grounds for
suspecting that a
child has been:
abused, or is at
risk of being
abused; ill
treated, or is at
risk of being ill
treated; or
exposed or
subjected to
behaviour that
psychologically
harms the child.
Section 160 of the
Western Australia
Family Court Act
1997 (WA);
Licensed providers of
child care or outsideschool-hours care
services
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot
Physical abuse
Sexual abuse
Emotional/psychological
abuse
Neglect
Allegations of
Physical abuse
abuse, neglect or
assault, including Sexual abuse
sexual assault, of
an enrolled child
Neglect
during a care
session
Regulation 20 of the
Child Care Services
Regulations 2006;
Regulation 19 of the
Child Care Services
(Family Day Care)
Regulations 2006;
21
State
Who is mandated to
Territory notify?
What is to be
notified?
Maltreatment types for
which it is mandatory
to report
Relevant sections
of the
Act/Regulations
Regulation 20 of the
Child Care Services
(Outside School
Hours Family Day
Care) Regulations
2006; Regulation 21
of the Child Care
Services (Outside
School Hours Care)
Regulations 2006
Doctors; nurses and
midwives; teachers; and
police officers
Belief on
reasonable
grounds that
child sexual
abuse has
occurred or is
occurring
Sexual abuse
Section 124B of the
Children and
Community Services
Act 2004 (WA)
Children and
Community Services
Amendment
(Reporting Sexual
Abuse of Children)
Act 2008 became
part of the Children
and Community
Services Act 2004.
Notes: * Section 67ZA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) applies to all states and territories.
22
Mandatory Reporting: Literature Snapshot