At first glance, Idaho’s Child Protective Act looks like it does a better job than Delaware in establishing the difference between reporting child abuse in”good faith” and reporting child abuse in “bad faith”.
However, considering the many possible interpretations of the legislation from both states, it is clear that adding the operational definitions of “good faith” and “bad faith” within the texts could serve to reduce the confusion and debate among those who favor mandated reporting and those who want it abolished.
Perhaps it would help if members of the Judiciary Committees in each state would consult with collegues of the Judiciary Committees from every other state so that our best and brightest can finally make laws that will protect our children as soon as possible.
TITLE 16JUVENILE PROCEEDINGSCHAPTER 16CHILD PROTECTIVE ACT16-1606. Immunity.Any person who has reason to believe that a child has been abused, abandoned or neglected and, acting upon that belief, makes a report of abuse, abandonment or neglect as required in section 16-1605, Idaho Code, shall have immunity from any liability, civil or criminal, that might otherwise be incurred or imposed. Any such participant shall have the same immunity with respect to participation in any such judicial proceeding resulting from such report. Any person who reports in bad faith or with malice shall not be protected by this section. Any privilege between husband and wife, or between any professional person except the lawyer-client privilege, including but not limited to physicians, counselors, hospitals, clinics, day care centers and schools and their clients shall not be grounds for excluding evidence at any proceeding regarding the abuse, abandonment or neglect of the child or the cause thereof.