Child abuse investigations in Pennsylvania are governed by something called the Child Protective Services Law (“CPSL”).  Over the last two years, in the wake of the Penn State and Catholic Church sex abuse scandals, there has been a push in the state legislature to significantly overhaul the CPSL and close some loopholes and ambiguities. The last and most sweeping of these changes, actually 23 pieces of new legislation, took effect on December 31, 2014.   Educators are the group of professionals that are most largely effected by these changes.

Although there are several significant changes to the way child abuse is reported and investigated in Pennsylvania, the most significant change effecting educators is that the “chain of command” reporting procedure for child abuse is no longer acceptable.   In fact, this is something that went from an accepted practice to a third degree felony if the underlying abuse rises to the level of a felony.

These changes are best illustrated through the Penn State example. An assistant football coach at Penn State saw Jerry Sandusky sexually abusing a boy in the shower of the football locker room.  He reported that to the head coach, who supposedly reported it to the athletic director, who supposedly reported it to the head of campus security and to the University President.  As we now know, the matter was never properly investigated and no one caught up with Sandusky until years later. Under the old version of the CPSL, neither the assistant coach nor the head coach had a mandatory duty to do anything for two reasons.   First, only certain school employees were subject to the old CPSL’s mandatory reporting requirements and, second, the definition of “school” did not include colleges and universities.

That has now changed.  All school employees are now mandatory reporters and must report suspected child abuse.  Also, the definition of “school” has been expanded to include, among other entities, all colleges and universities in the state.   Using the Penn State example above, the assistant coach would now be required to report the abuse to Childline, a toll free hotline maintained by the Commonwealth Department of Human Services   (1-800-932-0313),   established   specifically   for   the   purpose   of   reporting suspected abuse.  Failure to do so could result in a criminal prosecution for a felony of the third degree.

When the educator works for an institution such a school or university, the duty to report not only includes the actual calling of Childline, but also notifying the person in charge of the institution, school or facility, or the designated agent of the person in charge. Again, using the Penn State example, under the current CPSL the assistant coach would now have the obligation of calling Childline and also of notifying the head coach.

Throughout  this  article  I have  used  the  term  “educator”  rather  than  “teacher” because the duty to report child abuse now includes all school employees.  It also includes employees of a child care service who have direct contact with children in the course of their employment; any volunteer who, on the basis of that individual’s role as an integral part of a regularly scheduled program, activity or service, accepts responsibility for a child; employees of public libraries who have direct contact with children in the course of their employment; and independent contractors who have contact with children as part of their employment.   So mandatory  reporters now include the school custodial staff, persons working  for after-school programs,  cafeteria staff, part-time  volunteer sports coaches, daycare  workers,  Little League  coaches,  scout  masters,  counselors  at a university’s summer sports camp, and the retired person who does story time for preschoolers at the local library; basically anyone who comes into contact with children as part of his or her employment or volunteer service.

Also, what is to be reported has been broadened under the new CPSL.  Educators, as mandated reporters, are obviously charged with reporting suspected child abuse that happens in their presence, but also whenever a person makes a specific disclosure that an identifiable child is the victim of child abuse, or whenever an individual fourteen (14) years of age or older makes a specific disclosure that the individual has committed child abuse.  Nothing in the new CPSL requires that the child victim must come before the mandated reporter for a report to be made or that the mandated reporter can or must identify the person responsible for the abuse.

Just as under the old law, the policy the Commonwealth wants to promote is the protection of children.  For this reason mandated reporters are encouraged to err on the side of protecting the child, not the suspected perpetrator.   The operative words in the CPSL mandating reporting are that the educator has, “reasonable cause to suspect that a child is a victim of child abuse”.  The educator is not charged with the responsibility of investigating the allegations, only making the report.   The state or local child welfare agency will follow-up on a report and also new, at the conclusion of the investigation the mandated reporter will promptly receive the results of the agency’s investigation and whether or not any services will be provided to address the child’s situation.

Another protection for reporters is immunity from criminal and civil liability for a good cause report of suspected abuse, regardless if the report is mandated or not.  This includes not only the making of the report but also cooperating or consulting with an abuse investigation, testifying in a proceeding arising out of an investigation, or engaged in any action authorized as part of an investigation, such as photographing signs of abuse or taking a child to a hospital.

Finally, another change that effects educators is that the definition of “child abuse” has been broadened.  No longer is the threshold “serious bodily injury” but now merely “bodily injury”; defined as any impairment of physical condition or substantial pain.  The definition of abuse also includes causing or substantially contributing to serious mental injury to a child through any act or failure to act; causing sexual abuse or exploitation of a child through any act or failure to act; creating a reasonable likelihood of bodily injury to a child through any recent act or failure to act; creating a likelihood of sexual abuse or exploitation of a child through any recent act or failure to act; causing serious physical neglect  of  a  child;  kicking,  biting,  throwing,  burning,  stabbing  or  cutting  a  child; unreasonably restraining or confining a child; forcefully shaking or slapping a child under one year of age; interfering with the breathing of a child; causing the child to be present at the location of a methamphetamine lab; or various other enumerated situations.

In summary, the landscape has changed when it comes to an educator’s responsibility to report suspected child abuse.  The definition of child abuse has been broadened and the list of mandated reporters has been expanded.  Most importantly the process by which the report is made has changed such that the person on the front line is required to call in the incident of suspected abuse.

Lawrence (Skip) Persick is a partner at Lamb McErlane PC in West Chester, PA and is credited for his ability to resolve complex family law issues. Skip represents clients involved in divorces, custody disputes and adoptions. His experience also includes cases dealing with juvenile dependency and the termination of parental rights.

Skip is a former assistant public defender for Chester County, PA and is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Family Law Section Family Court Rules Committee and Council. Skip can be reached at 610-430-8000. 

Reprinted with permission from the February 20, 2015 – VOL: 251 issue of the Legal Intelligencer © 2015 ALM Media Properties, LLC. Further duplication without permission is prohibited.  All rights reserved.