Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection Reporting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would tighten child‑abuse reporting to Attorney General after gaps in county reporting
Summary
Rep. Joel Mercer said HB 593 would require more detailed and consistent reporting from county attorneys and DPHHS to the attorney general to detect under‑prosecution of alleged abuse; opponents raised survivor‑privacy concerns and urged anonymized identifiers instead of public names.
Representative Joel Mercer opened the hearing on House Bill 593 by tracing the statute's history and the 2019 effort to improve flows of information among mandatory reporters, Child and Family Services and county attorneys. Mercer said the bill would add specificity to annual reporting to the attorney general — including jurisdictional case counts, cases declined and identifiers for charged defendants — so the attorney general can detect patterns of under‑prosecution.
"When you start looking at these numbers and how few cases are actually being prosecuted every year, the point of the whole exercise is to say we want the attorney general to be looking at these reports," Mercer said, describing the bill as an effort to create statewide follow-up and oversight.
Kelsey Young of the Montana Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence described the group’s concerns about whether expanded reporting could expose victims in small communities and recommended safeguards. "This is a complicated proposal," Young said, noting potential privacy harms in small towns when names or identifying details are disclosed.
Robin Turner of LegalVoice urged caution about publishing identifying information on charged or accused persons, raising survivor privacy and defense concerns. Committee members pressed the sponsor about alternatives such as using initials, aggregated demographic data or delayed release of identifying detail until after conviction; Mercer said he was open to considering initials or other privacy-protecting edits.
The hearing produced detailed discussion of reporting compliance (some counties did not report in 2024), the content of DOJ's prior reports, and whether the attorney general’s office should receive more granular data to trigger inquiries into jurisdictions that appear not to investigate cases.
Next steps: Committee discussion may result in drafting amendments to limit public disclosure of identifying information while increasing the attorney general’s oversight of reporting compliance.
