BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 1434 Page 1 Date of Hearing: March 6, 2012 Chief Counsel: Gregory Pagan ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY Tom Ammiano, Chair AB 1434 (Feuer) - As Introduced: January 4, 2012 As Proposed to be Amended in Committee SUMMARY : Makes employees of a public or private institution of higher learning, as to child abuse or neglect occurring on that institution's premises, or at an official activity of, or program conducted by the institution, mandated reporters for the purpose of the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act (CANRA). EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires that any mandated reporter who has knowledge of, or observes, a child in his or her professional capacity or within the scope of his or her employment whom he or she knows, or reasonably suspects, has been the victim of child abuse shall report that incident immediately to a specified child protection agency by telephone, and requires a written report be sent within 36 hours. ÝPenal Code Section 11166(a).] 2)Requires that reports of suspected child abuse or neglect shall be made by a mandated reporter to any police or sheriff's department, a county probation department if designated by the county to receive mandated reports, or the county welfare department. (Penal Code Section 11165.9.) 3)Defines "child abuse or neglect" as including physical injury inflicted by other than accidental means upon a child by another person, sexual abuse, neglect, the willful harming or injuring of a child or the endangering of the person or health of a child, and unlawful corporal punishment or injury. (Penal Code Section 11165.6.) 4)Defines a "mandated reporter" as specific child-care custodians, health practitioners, law enforcement officers, and other medical and professional persons. (Penal Code Section 11165.7.) AB 1434 Page 2 5)Defines "reasonable suspicion" as meaning that it is objectively reasonable for a person to entertain a suspicion, based upon facts that could cause a reasonable person in a like position, drawing, when appropriate, on his or her training and experience, to suspect child abuse or neglect. For the purpose of this article, the pregnancy of a minor does not, in and of itself, constitute a basis for a reasonable suspicion of sexual abuse. ÝPenal Code Section 11166(a)(1).] 6)Provides that the reporting duties under CANRA are individual, no supervisor or administrator may impede or inhibit the reporting duties, and no person making a report shall be subject to any sanctions for making the report. ÝPenal Code Section 11166(g)(1).] 7)Provides that any mandated reporter who fails to report an instance of known or reasonably suspected child abuse or neglect as required is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in the county jail; by a fine of $1,000; or by both imprisonment and fine. ÝPenal Code Section 11166(b).] 8)Requires specified reporting agencies to forward to the Department of Justice (DOJ) a report of every case of suspected child abuse or neglect which is determined to be substantiated; and if a previously filed report proves to be unfounded, the DOJ shall be notified in writing and shall not retain that report. ÝPenal Code Section 11169(a).] 9)Requires at the time a reporting agency forwards a report of suspected child abuse or neglect to the DOJ, the agency notify the known or suspected child abuser that he or she has been reported to the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI). ÝPenal Code Section 11165(b).] FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : 1)Author's Statement : According to the author, "This bill responds to the shocking and tragic allegations at Penn State, where campus employees and administrators failed to report multiple claims of abuse. Each year, thousands of minor children spend time on California college campuses, for AB 1434 Page 3 activities ranging from soccer tournaments to academic programs to school tours. AB 1434 addresses a gap in mandated reporter law that does not require college employees who are not otherwise mandated reporters to report child abuse to law enforcement. We owe it to kids spending time on college campuses to ensure that suspicions of child abuse are detected and reported. "Higher education institutions educate many minor students each year who need this bill's protections. Some community colleges allow high school students to take college courses while still in high school; additionally, many high school graduates who attend college are under the age of 18 when they begin college. Further, thousands of children participate in programs that use college facilities each year; these children deserve protection from child abuse. AB 1434 helps close this critical gap in mandated reporter law." 2)Argument in Support : According to the California Protective Parents Association , "We agree with the need to expand the mandated reporting statute. Abusers often find employment in occupations such as higher education that bring them close to vulnerable children and youth. The Penn State scandal that erupted ruing football season last fall and the Catholic church pedophile priest scandal show us that institutions tend to protect themselves and their personnel before protecting victims. This bill would help to stop that unfortunate and dangerous practice. "Our organization seeks to ensure child safety in the context of separation/divorce and custody. Children of divorce are involved in higher education and may disclose abuse or neglect to employees. This bill will provide clarity to the education institution administrators and employees regarding the mandated reporting process." 3)Argument in Opposition : According to the California Public Defenders Association , "This legislation seeks to address the Sandusky/Paterno debacle which unfolded on national TV. But the legislation could open a Pandora's Box of unintended consequences including issues surrounding attorney/client and doctor/patient privilege, barring higher education to anyone under than 18 years of age, raising the student tuition and fees and other associated costs. AB 1434 Page 4 "While the conflict of law this bill creates between the mandate to report, and attorney/client privilege would be problematic for all attorneys and doctors employed by institutions of higher learning, it would be particularly so for those who work in the clinic setting. Take for example attorneys operating clinics at law schools providing post release community supervision legal services-if their client makes a statement or provides information giving rise to the attorney's obligations under this bill, the attorney and the law students whose attorney/client privilege trumps all, would face disbarment for violation of the sacrosanct obligation of attorney client privilege and would face criminal charges under AB 1434 for upholding this required privilege. A doctor who works at a college clinic would be equally conflicted if a student patient divulged something, which the student patient did not want further disseminated. Without clarification that the obligation imposed under this bill does not supersede such privilege obligations, attorneys and doctors working at college campuses will be forced to violate this law." REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Protective Parents Association California State Sheriffs' Association Child Abuse Prevention Center Children's Advocacy Institute Crime Victims United of California Opposition California Public Defenders Association Analysis Prepared by : Gregory Pagan / PUB. S. / (916) 319-3744