Minnesota child-abuse reporting law does not create civil liability

However, judges said the plaintiffs can use the statute to establish a medical liability claim.

By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Sept. 10, 2007.

A recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision relieves physicians of the threat of civil liability under the state's Child Abuse Reporting Act. But the decision still underscores doctors' responsibility as mandatory reporters of abuse or neglect, lawyers say.

The court found in an Aug. 16 ruling that the statute does not give Nykkole E. Becker's adoptive parents the right to sue Mayo Foundation doctors for allegedly failing to report suspected child abuse to the state.

In 1997, within the first two months after Nykkole's birth, her biological parents brought her to the hospital on several occasions with bone fractures and head trauma. Doctors did not report the injuries as suspected abuse, finding them consistent with the parents' account of dropping the baby, court documents show.

The father was eventually imprisoned for child abuse. In 2001, Nykkole's adoptive parents sued the hospital for failing to report the repetitive maltreatment. They claimed the doctors' alleged neglect contributed to Nykkole's permanent disabilities.

The court concluded, however, that state law already imposes criminal penalties on mandatory reporters who don't fulfill their duty, and the Legislature did not intend to create additional civil liability.

"The idea that the threat of civil liability will lead inexorably to increased reporting, and that this will reduce child abuse, has a certain appeal, but this appeal may be illusory," the opinion states. Judges suggested that further liability could be counterproductive and "contribute to the case overload ... and to unsubstantiated reports, which ultimately work against children in danger."