The Child Abuse Reporting Laws: An Ethical Dilemma for Professionals

Author:

Thompson-Cooper Ingrid1,Fugère Renée2,Cormier Bruno M.3

Affiliation:

1. School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.

2. McGill Clinic in Forensic Psychiatry, Montreal, Quebec.

3. Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec.

Abstract

A central issue in the development of family law and child protection in this country has been the right of the state to intervene in family life. The reporting laws, which were developed in the 1960s, made it mandatory for any citizen, including professionals, to report child abuse (physical and sexual) to the authorities. These laws have fundamentally altered the relationship between the clinician and families in need of help and have resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of cases assessed and treated by child welfare agencies. Because of the emphasis on case-finding, the limited resources have been stretched to the point where families with serious problems of child abuse do not get the services they require. Apparently, at least 60% of all reports turn out to be unfounded. Other criticisms of the current system include ineffective intervention, over-intervention and ignoring parents’ rights. The legalization and bureaucratization of the child protection process has profoundly affected the relationship between troubled families and social workers who now must “investigate” them as well as help them. This role conflict is exacerbated even further in cases of alleged child sexual abuse, where social workers are often expected to inform the police of the allegations. The authors argue that the reporting laws have been useful in that society is aware of the problem, and they suggest that it may be more beneficial now to dispose of them. A system such as the “confidential doctor” system currently operating in the Netherlands, whereby legal authorities are only notified if the abusive family does not cooperate with the helping professionals, prevents the negative consequences of the coercive and intrusive intervention in our system and provides an opportunity to work with those families on a voluntary basis whenever possible.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3