Committee hears sharply divided testimony on penalizing knowingly false child-abuse reports

The Children and Family Law Committee heard more than two hours of testimony on House Bill 243, which would create criminal and civil liability for knowingly false reports of suspected child abuse or neglect and would add a misdemeanor penalty for some professional mandatory reporters who fail to report.

Representative James Spillane, who introduced the bill, described personal experience with anonymous calls that prompted late-night police knock-and-requests and said the measure is intended to discourage malicious repeat callers who "use it as a form of swatting." He emphasized that the bill would not eliminate anonymous reporting but would allow penalties where a person "knowingly false with intent to harm" files repeated malicious reports.

Supporters who testified included grandparents and relatives who said false reports had caused prolonged trauma and disrupted family life. Stacy Tarosian, who testified she had custody of her granddaughters after her daughter overdosed, said a false allegation by her adult daughter was investigated and closed but left lasting damage to family relationships. "I was the victim here of all these malicious attacks," Tarosian said.

Opponents included Waypoint (a statewide nonprofit providing child and family services) and the Office of the Child Advocate, both of which testified in opposition. Emily Lawrence, advocacy director at Waypoint, said she feared a "chilling effect" on reporting: "We would prefer that we encourage more reports than less to protect children," she said, arguing that even a single missed report could be harmful. Cassandra Sanchez, acting child advocate, said central intake workers use a screening process and that anonymous or repeat callers are often part of the screening picture; she warned that adding criminalization could create operational burdens and possible unintended consequences, including professional reporters avoiding calls or re-questioning children in ways that could harm investigations.

Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) general counsel Susan Larrabee said DCYF took no position on the bill but provided context about the agency's intake process. She told the committee that of more than 27,000 reports in a recent year only about 1,203 were anonymous and that anonymous reports can be screened in and sometimes build into assessments when combined with other reports. Larrabee also noted existing criminal statutes that address false reports to law enforcement and unsworn falsification and suggested the committee consider consistency with those statutes when drafting penalties.

Witnesses offered alternatives to the bill's proposed language, including graduated penalties (fines that escalate), civil-remedy options without criminal penalties, or leaving the decision of penalty type to judicial discretion. Several witnesses also asked the committee to clarify the culpability standard (for example, replacing "maliciously or with intent to harm" with a statutory mental-state term such as "knowingly") and to ensure the bill would not deter mandated reporters from calling central intake.

No committee vote occurred on HB 243 during the session. The testimony showed a clear split: survivors of what they called abusive false reporting urged penalties and civil remedies; DCYF, child-advocacy groups and providers warned those penalties could discourage reports or impose new operational burdens on intake staff and investigative processes. Committee members asked for written language options and clarification about which mental-state standard and enforcement mechanism the committee would use if it decides to pursue legislation.