Across the United States, state laws designate licensed mental health professionals (MHPs) as mandated reporters when they have reasonable suspicion of child abuse or neglect (Ettinger, 2022). This legal obligation requires MHPs to report such concerns to child protection authorities and exposes them to potential criminal charges, fines, or professional discipline (including loss of licensure) if they fail to report. Although mandated-reporting laws play a vital role in safeguarding children from maltreatment, they can also create challenging clinical and ethical dilemmas (Barsky, 2023). In some situations, child clients may strongly oppose involving child protective services (CPS), particularly when they fear family disruption or parental retaliation. This post examines options available to MHPs who must balance their statutory reporting duties with the expressed wishes of child clients who do not want their parents reported, despite presenting significant child protection concerns.

There are many reasons why children may not want their parents reported to CPS. For example:

When MHPs have a reasonable suspicion of child maltreatment, their primary legal obligation is obviously to report the concern to CPS. What is less obvious is that mandated reporters may have different ways of approaching the reporting process, some of which can help maintain a trusting work relationship with the child and reduce the child’s distress. Options for reporting include reporting without the child’s involvement and support, reporting with the child’s involvement or support, and (when permitted) seeking an initial consultation with CPS without identifying information. Each option requires careful consideration of legal requirements, ethical duties, and the child’s emotional needs.

One approach is for the MHP to contact CPS initially to enquire whether the situation meets the reporting threshold. If CPS........

© Psychology Today