Stances differ over reporting child abuse

UNDER a mandatory reporting system certain people would be legally obliged to report suspected child abuse to the authorities. The Minister of State responsible for children, Mr Austin Currie, said last week the Government is currently considering the introduction of such a system, and that he has an open mind on it.

The Law Reform Commission and the Kilkenny incest investigation team recommended that mandatory reporting of suspected cases of child abuse be introduced. It would oblige certain people such as doctors, social workers and gardai to report any case in which they suspect or believe that child abuse has occurred.

The Department of Health's discussion document on mandatory reporting, published last week contains a survey of the handling of child abuse allegations in other countries. It finds no international norm on the merits of introducing a system of mandatory reporting.

Some countries have introduced such a system, others have rejected it. Finland, France, Italy, Norway and Sweden have systems of mandatory reporting: Germany, England and the Netherlands do not.

In Britain and Northern Ireland, mandatory reporting was specifically rejected by an inter departmental review of child care jaw in 1985. It was felt then that mandatory reporting might "be counter productive and increase the risks to children overall, first by weakening the individual's [the professional's] sense of personal responsibility and secondly, in casting the shadow of near automatic reporting over theirs' [the professionals'] work, by raising, barriers between clients and professionals and also between professionals involved in the same case."

In the Netherlands there is a voluntary system of reporting child abuse. Anyone suspecting child abuse can contact the Confidential Doctors Bureau for advice on how to handle the case, or to have it referred to professionals. A similar system operates in Belgium and Germany.

In New South Wales, Australia, a mandatory reporting system was introduced in 1977. Other states in Australia have systems of voluntary reporting, with the condition that a person reporting is protected from civil liability.

In the US, mandatory reporting, has been in operation in many states since the 1960s. Federal legislation requires states to have laws on mandatory reporting in order to qualify for federal funding for certain services. Most states require medical and mental health professionals, teacher, child care workers, social workers and police to report suspected cases of child abuse.

Some require clergy to report. The inclusion of clergy in Ireland would be a thorny issue should at priest, who hears of child abuse in a confessional, be obliged by law to report it?

US legislation provides specific protection against law suits for those filing reports. While studies generally show mandatory reporting to have had a positive effect in terms of child welfare, there are many criticisms of specific aspects of the system and calls for reform.

The main, positive effect has been the increase in the number of, cases reported. Greater protection is given to children at risk. Over the past 30 years, the number of reported child abuse cases in the US has risen from 150,000 in 1963 2.9 million in 1992.

With an increase in the number of reports, however, has come an increase in the number of unsubstantiated reports. These have risen from 35 per cent of those reported in 1976 to 65 per cent in 1992. Critics say child protection services have been swamped, that too large a proportion of resources is going on investigations rather than services, and that the costs of mandatory reporting outweigh the benefits.