Mandatory Reporting
Mandated reporters are individuals required by law to report suspected child abuse or neglect. These individuals are not investigators and therefore responsibility for proving whether abuse or neglect is actually taking place resides in special governmental organizations established for that specific reason. According to a report by the Office of the Auditor General (2015), Arizona has exceeded the national average of child abuse or neglect reports in federal fiscal years 2011 through 2013, a steady increase that is attributed to changes in legislature that expands the definitions of abuse and neglect. The expansive definition of abuse or neglect increases awareness levels to the susceptibility of abuse and how it may manifest itself in behavioral
…show more content…
Seemingly it would appear that federal law is the foundation on which state law is created and then expanded upon. Though both entities do complement each other in shared responsibility to protect children and prevent abuse, there is still a strong indication that there are separate entities at work. Hirschy & Wilkinson (2009) point out that due to variations in reporting requirements of each state, data is not available every year. As each state expands legislation like Arizona has, there is an obvious change in data that could be used for research in order to evaluate the overall effectiveness of mandatory reporting. Even more surprising is the fact that not all states mandate the same criteria for specified reporters or offer varying exceptions to definitions of abuse or neglect. According to the Child Welfare Information Gateway (2016) 12 states exempt inability to financially provide for a child as neglect and 17 states exempt physical discipline as long as it is reasonable and does not cause bodily harm as abuse. Though it is not a question personally, of right or wrong, but rather an insight to how varying definitions provides a variance in reporting. Relying on a foundational definition of abuse or neglect, can still provide the necessary data to analyze national averages, but as states report differently on suspected events there becomes a grey area in effectiveness as seen state to
Seemingly it would appear that federal law is the foundation on which state law is created and then expanded upon. Though both entities do complement each other in shared responsibility to protect children and prevent abuse, there is still a strong indication that there are separate entities at work. Hirschy & Wilkinson (2009) point out that due to variations in reporting requirements of each state, data is not available every year. As each state expands legislation like Arizona has, there is an obvious change in data that could be used for research in order to evaluate the overall effectiveness of mandatory reporting. Even more surprising is the fact that not all states mandate the same criteria for specified reporters or offer varying exceptions to definitions of abuse or neglect. According to the Child Welfare Information Gateway (2016) 12 states exempt inability to financially provide for a child as neglect and 17 states exempt physical discipline as long as it is reasonable and does not cause bodily harm as abuse. Though it is not a question personally, of right or wrong, but rather an insight to how varying definitions provides a variance in reporting. Relying on a foundational definition of abuse or neglect, can still provide the necessary data to analyze national averages, but as states report differently on suspected events there becomes a grey area in effectiveness as seen state to