Teachers should not reduce their reporting of cases to Child Protective Services

In the realm of education, chronic absenteeism among younger children can often be a sign of deeper struggles within a family. However, addressing these issues can be a complex task, as child services typically require multiple allegations from different sources before they can intervene.

Reporting suspected child abuse or neglect is common, but it's important to note that reporting without sufficient evidence is also prevalent. Due to confidentiality laws, teachers have no way of knowing whether other reports have come in about the same family from other sources.

New York City's children's services commissioner, Jess Dannhauser, has emphasised that teachers have alternatives to reporting families in cases where a family just needs help, such as access to child-care assistance, mental health counseling, or concrete resources.

The project "Lives Cut Short" focuses on understanding child-maltreatment deaths and advocating for transparency. It's crucial to note that extended periods of absence from school are a common feature in cases of child-maltreatment fatalities among school-age children. Examples of such cases include Dametrious Wilson, who was absent for 60 days, and Nia Williams, who was absent for more than 50 days before their tragic deaths.

In light of these challenges, a paper released by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) claims that reporting suspected abuse or neglect by teachers rarely helps protect children from harm. The AFT paper does not indicate that teachers feel forced to report things that are not maltreatment or that they are unable to identify abuse or neglect.

However, the AFT paper also discourages policies requiring teachers to report chronic absenteeism, arguing that such policies may deprive child-protection agencies of critical information if teachers are unable to distinguish between a student needing material resources and a student whose parents have significant mental health challenges or substance abuse issues.

It's worth mentioning that a plurality of educators reported no change or a worsened relationship with the school after reporting concerns to the system. Some advocates argue that if children are reported for neglect, it's because they are living in poverty, and providing more material support would eliminate the need for child-protection involvement.

On the other hand, a recent opinion piece titled "We're Not Protecting Children. We're Recycling Their Trauma" was published on The74 by policy researcher Mathangi Swaminathan, arguing for a more proactive approach to child protection.

In an effort to ensure a single, unified entity has all concerns of abuse and neglect, a centralized child-maltreatment hotline exists. Child-protection agencies examine patterns of reports, cross-report with law enforcement, and decide whether to investigate. Teachers not reporting suspected maltreatment may deprive child-protection agencies of critical information.

Despite the complexities and challenges, more teachers express positive views of their experience reporting to agencies than negative ones (43.9% vs. 28.9%). It's clear that addressing chronic absenteeism and child protection requires a nuanced, collaborative approach involving educators, child services, and the community.

Teachers should not reduce their reporting of cases to Child Protective Services