NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs
and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
F I S C A
L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR:
|
Taylor
|
DATE TYPED:
|
2/06/03
|
HB
|
247
|
SHORT TITLE:
|
Clergy Members’ Duty to Report Child Abuse
|
SB
|
|
|
ANALYST:
|
Maloy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained
|
Estimated
Additional Impact
|
Recurring
or
Non-Rec
|
Fund
Affected
|
FY03
|
FY04
|
FY03
|
FY04
|
|
|
|
|
|
NFI
|
|
|
SOURCE
OF INFORMATION
Responses received from
Office
of the Attorney General
SUMMARY
Synopsis of Bill
·
House Bill 247 adds “members of the clergy” to
the list of professionals having a specific duty to report known, or reasonably
suspected, child abuse or neglect to local law enforcement, children’s services
agencies or Indian services agencies.
·
HB 247 also provides, however, that this duty is
subject to the limitation that the communication through which the clergy
member became aware of the abuse may be privileged as a matter of law.
·
HB 247 provides that persons violating their
duty under this law are guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be charged and
sentenced accordingly.
Significant Issues
- If a member of the clergy learns of,
or come to suspect, abuse because of a confidential communication with a
member of his congregation, such as Confession, the communication would be
privileged and the clergy member would have no duty to report it.
- If a clergy member learns of, or
comes to reasonably suspect, abuse occurring within the church (involving
a fellow clergy member), the member would have a duty to report the
matter. For example, a bishop could
no longer ignore complaints regarding a priest for whom he is responsible,
particularly if multiple complaints are received. The problem could not be
resolved simply by moving the priest to a new parish.
- As part of the FIR process, the Attorney
General’s Office made a preliminary assessment of the issues that may be
raised if this law were to come under a constitutional / First Amendment
attack, and has stated that it believes "the exclusion of information
that is privileged as a matter of law may well be sufficient to allow it
to survive constitutional attack.”
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
- What if a clergy member learns of,
or comes to reasonably suspect, abuse at the hands of a fellow member, but
the communication that gives rise to the knowing or suspecting is
privileged because the fellow clergy member has shared it as part of a
confidential communication, such as the Confession and Absolution process?
- Can a clergy member seek Confession and
Absolution from another
member, confessing to having abused a child, and the communication be deemed privileged and, thus, not reportable?
- If a child reveals that he or she has been the victim of abuse to a clergy member in the course of a confidential conversation, such
as Confession, should that
be a privileged
communication to which no response
is required? Seemingly, a child would not have the same confidentiality
expectations as would an adult
abuser who is seeking forgiveness or
guidance.
SJM/sb:yr