An Administrator's Guide to California Private School Law

Chapter 11 – Mandated Reporting

G. I MMUNITY F ROM S UIT A mandated reporter is immune from civil and criminal liability. The immunity applies even where the mandated reporter acquired the reasonable suspicion outside of the scope of his or her employment. Similar protections apply to non-mandated reporters who file a mandated report. The only exception is for a knowingly false report or one made with reckless disregard for the truth. 1899 A mandated reporter may recover attorney’s fees and costs that are incurred as a result of the mandated reporter defending himself or herself for making a report. 1900 P OLICE I NVESTIGATIONS O F R EPORTS O F C HILD A BUSE A ND N EGLECT A. I NVESTIGATORY I NTERVIEWS A mandated report of child abuse or neglect may be investigated by local law enforcement or another appropriate agency. 1901 As a result of a mandated report, law enforcement or child protective workers may visit the workplace in order to interview the child or other witnesses. Until recently, very little guidance was provided regarding what a school, day camp or other entity should do in response to law enforcement investigations and requests for interviews. In Greene v. Camreta , the Ninth Circuit analyzed a school district’s responsibility in the wake of a request from law enforcement or another investigative agency for an interview with a child in the district’s care and custody. 1902 An Oregon Deputy Sheriff accompanied a Department of Human Services case worker to a minor student’s school and was present during the two-hour interview of the minor. The case worker conducted the interview but the Deputy Sheriff sat through the interview, although the Deputy Sheriff did not have a warrant, court order, exigent circumstances or parental consent to question or be present while the student was questioned. 1903 The Deputy Sheriff did not ask any questions during the interview. The Court held that the in-school seizure of a suspected child abuse victim is not permissible without a court order or parental consent because of the Fourth Amendment. 1904 The case worker’s decision to have the Deputy Sheriff accompany him to interview the potential child abuse victim “constituted sufficient entanglement with law enforcement to trigger the traditional Fourth Amendment prerequisites to seizure of a person.” 1905 In reaching its conclusion, the Court relied on reasoning from an earlier decision where it held the warrantless, non-emergency search and seizure of an alleged victim of child sexual abuse at her home violated the Fourth Amendment. 1906 The Court opined there was no evidence in the record to suggest that the “silent presence of a uniformed, armed police officer at an interview of a child in a grade school is helpful in any legitimate way to determining whether the child needs child protective services.” 1907 It rejected an across-the-board exception for government officials who may believe there is a “special need” that would automatically justify dispensing of traditional Fourth Amendment protections. 1908 Section 6

An Administrator’s Guide to California Private School Law ©2019 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 426