California 2023-2024 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB391

Introduced
2/2/23  
Refer
2/9/23  
Introduced
2/2/23  
Introduced
2/2/23  
Report Pass
3/14/23  
Refer
2/9/23  
Refer
2/9/23  
Report Pass
3/14/23  
Refer
3/14/23  
Refer
3/14/23  
Refer
4/19/23  
Refer
4/19/23  
Refer
4/19/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Report Pass
5/18/23  
Engrossed
5/31/23  
Engrossed
5/31/23  
Engrossed
5/31/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Refer
6/1/23  
Refer
6/14/23  
Report Pass
6/28/23  
Refer
6/14/23  
Refer
6/14/23  
Report Pass
6/28/23  
Refer
6/28/23  
Refer
6/28/23  
Refer
7/10/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Refer
7/10/23  
Refer
7/10/23  
Enrolled
9/14/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Report Pass
9/1/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  
Enrolled
9/14/23  
Enrolled
9/14/23  
Chaptered
10/8/23  
Passed
10/8/23  

Caption

Child abuse and neglect: nonmandated reporters.

Impact

The bill has significant implications for how child abuse reports are processed within California. By mandating that agencies gather more information from nonmandated reporters, it aims to enhance the reliability of reports made to agencies. This requirement introduces a state-mandated local program, which could lead to increased operational costs for local agencies tasked with handling these reports. The bill also requires that if the Commission on State Mandates identifies any new costs, the state will reimburse affected local agencies, in line with constitutional guidelines. This fiscal aspect addresses some concerns about the financial implications of the changes introduced by the bill.

Summary

Assembly Bill 391, introduced by Jones-Sawyer, amends the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act by modifying the requirements for nonmandated reporters. Under existing law, mandated reporters such as health practitioners and social workers have an obligation to report suspected child abuse or neglect. This bill expands the obligations of nonmandated reporters, who can still report anonymously. However, the new provisions require law enforcement agencies to obtain specific information from nonmandated reporters when they make a report. This includes asking the reporter for their name, telephone number, and the basis for their suspicion, while ensuring that their identity remains confidential if they choose not to disclose it.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB 391 appears generally supportive among child protection advocates who believe that this increase in reporting requirements may lead to more robust investigations into suspected abuse. However, there are underlying concerns regarding privacy and the pressures placed on nonmandated reporters. Some stakeholders worry that requiring more personal information may discourage individuals from reporting suspected abuse due to fear of exposure. This tension reflects a broader societal conflict between protecting children's welfare and maintaining the privacy and anonymity of those who report suspicions.

Contention

Notably, AB 391 contains points of contention primarily related to the balance of mandated versus nonmandated reporting responsibilities. While proponents argue that gathering more comprehensive information can lead to better investigations, critics may view this as an overreach that could inhibit the willingness of nonmandated reporters to come forward. Additionally, the confidentiality measures for reporters are crucial in this context, as any perception of breach could deter individuals from reporting known or suspected cases of abuse.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2085

Crimes: mandated reporters.

CA SB360

Mandated reporters: clergy.

CA AB2153

Child abuse or neglect: foster children.

CA AB395

Child abuse or neglect: foster children.

CA AB2274

Mandated reporters: statute of limitations.

CA AB1799

Child abuse: reporting.

CA AB2302

Child abuse: sexual assault: mandated reporters: statute of limitations.

CA AB477

Child abuse multidisciplinary personnel team: children’s advocacy centers.