‘ Reasonable suspicion ’ of abuse or neglect Note that the threshold triggering a mandatory report is a reasonable suspicion ( of child abuse or neglect ), rather than actual knowledge or admitted bad behavior on the part of the abuser . Ministry leaders should not attempt to prove the existence of abuse or undertake an investigation as a condition of reporting .
Information flow The following diagram illustrates the flow of information from an initial report to the close of the file . Reporting processes vary from state to state : the diagram below illustrates a simplified description of the basic steps in any jurisdiction .
Almost without exception , abusers ‘ groom the gatekeepers ’ in ministry environments , working diligently to have those around them believe they are responsible , trustworthy individuals . Keep in mind : false allegations are rare . Studies indicate that only 2 % -3 % of all sexual abuse allegations are false ; the majority of outcries are truthful and factual .
When an allegation of abuse is brought to a ministry leader ’ s attention months , years or even decades after the fact , some ministries have failed to report simply because the allegation is old or involves individuals no longer involved or employed at the church . Be prepared to report historical allegations , unless it can be verified that someone in the ministry previously reported .
information , and will likely prompt the caller for data or request it be gathered . The intake representative will not instruct you to investigate or provide PROOF of the suspected abuse or neglect .
INTAKE SYSTEM Every state has an intake system with intake representatives trained to receive reports of child abuse and neglect , whether the report is made orally or online . The intake representative expects to receive as much of the following information as possible :
• Name , age and address of the child
• Nature of the abuse or neglect
• Name of person suspected of abusing or neglecting the child
• The relationship ( if any ) between the abuser and the child
• Person ( s ) responsible for the child ’ s safety / protection
• Contact information for additional individuals with information
• Location where suspected abuse occurred
• Description of the situation
• Existing injuries , if any , and any medical or behavioral issues
• Any other information known or deemed important
The reporting process varies from state to state — hotlines , online reporting or simply dialing 911 — and might include additional requirements , depending on the profession or licensure of the reporter . The intake representative commonly requests the above-listed
REPORT EVALUATION What occurs after this report can vary . Many states use a scale of safety to determine where and to whom the reported information is routed — and how quickly . Based on the reported information , the report will be prioritized or classified based on whether the child is in imminent danger ( i . e ., the abuse is violent or ongoing , the abuser is an authority figure in the child ’ s home , or an immediate risk of abduction or retaliation exists ).
Is the child in imminent danger ? The first and fundamental issue relates to the immediate safety of the child in question . The intake representative will quickly assess whether the facts justify immediate removal of the child ( and other children ), or removal of the alleged abuser . A child deemed in imminent danger is considered a High Priority or Priority 1 , which might also result in an immediate referral to law enforcement .
Will the child be removed from the home ? The majority of reports of child abuse and neglect do not invoke Priority 1 status , which might give rise to the removal of the child . In fact , removal is rare . Nonetheless , the purpose of the system is protection churchexecutive . com STOP CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE • CHURCH EXECUTIVE 71