Will Maryland Step Up this Year? "I support, encourage, and beg the Legislature to pass legislation in this area – one with teeth, one with effective protection for child abuse victims, and one that values children victims over the concerns of highly funded special interest groups including, but not limited to, doctors, psychiatrists, teachers, and churches."

Will Maryland step up this year and finally leave Wyoming to stand alone?  

Only 2 states have no penalties for failing to report child sex abuse. Md. is one of them.

Maryland House Bill 1069 could take Maryland off the map of States that refuse to hold 

public school administrators responsible for their failure to report sexual abuse of students.  But will the Maryland legislature make that move and stand up for children?

Or will Maryland and Wyoming continue to be the only two States that refuse to hold

public school administrators accountable for failing to report sexual abuse of students? 

~~~~~~~~

Maryland General Assembly

HB 787 & HB 1069

The Hon. Luke Clippinger, Chair

The Hon. Vanessa E. Atterbeary, Vice-Chair

Judiciary Committee

Re: HB 787 - Crimes - Child Abuse and Neglect - Failure to Report

Re: HB 1069 - Child Abuse and Neglect - Required Reporting

Hearing: February 28, 2019 – 1:00 p.m.

Testimony of Ernest A. Crofoot – In Opposition to Bill HB 787

Testimony of Ernest A. Crofoot – In support of Bill HB 1069

Good afternoon. I am Ernest A. Crofoot. I am an attorney, graduate of the University of
Baltimore School of Law, a Fellow of the Maryland Bar Foundation, member of the Peer Review
Committee of the Attorney Grievance Commission, and an Ethics instructor for the Academy for
Excellence in Local Government. However, my written and oral testimony on this bill are my
own personal assessments and do not reflect the position of any group, organization, board or
commission. I recently began providing assistance on this topic to other long-term and long-
suffering advocates.

Let me say first that I support, encourage, and beg the Legislature to pass legislation in
this area – one with teeth, one with effective protection for child abuse victims, and one that
values children victims over the concerns of highly funded special interest groups including,
but not limited to, doctors, psychiatrists, teachers, and churches.

House Bill 787 is an attempt, although a half-hearted, flawed, and short sighted one, to
create an incentive for the timely and compassionate reporting by statutorily required reporters of
suspected child abuse. Unfortunately, its shortcomings swallow its meager benefits. In contrast,
HB 1069 addresses all of the defects in HB 787 and takes Maryland on the right path to
protecting children. And, after all, isn’t that what we should be considering, rather than to
vulture-like protests of the special interest groups?

First, and most importantly, HB 787 sets an impossible evidentiary standard by, in effect,
requiring that one must have “actual knowledge” before one is required to report child abuse. In
other submitted testimony, you will see that none other than Professor Emerita Lynn McLain,
University of Baltimore School of Law, the author of the “gospel” on Maryland Evidence, has
maintained consistently that the “actual knowledge” standard is an impossible standard under
Maryland law. In effect, it would require witnessing the actual abuse before requiring a subject
person to make a report of child abuse. Professor McLain taught many of the members of this
body the rules of evidence and I give the utmost deference to her interpretations and opinions.
Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have standards that can be generally described as
“reasonable suspicion.” NONE have an “actual knowledge” evidentiary standard. In effect, the
bill requires a standard for the required reporting of suspected child abuse that is higher than
the standard juries are required to use in capital murder cases. This means that states like
Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi, are ahead of the State of Maryland when it comes to
protecting children. Only Wyoming and Maryland lack the more than generally accepted
standard. Only Wyoming and Maryland lack criminal penalties.

In contrast, HB 1069 sets a reasonableness standard, one that is used throughout the
United States and DC (except for Maryland and Wyoming). The standard for guilt under HB
1069 does not change. As a criminal misdemeanor, the criminal standard of guilt would still apply.

Second (actually a “tie” for first), is that HB 787 refuses to acknowledge the historic,
longstanding, and pathetic record of the clergy in this area – not only in participating in child
abuse but using church practices to cover up rampant child abuse, physical and sexual. Any
serious bill addressing the underreporting of child abuse MUST include the clergy and members
of all religious orders and sects as required reporters. Under HB 787 it is “business as usual” for
the clergy. HB 1069, addresses this issue, and brings Maryland in line with a majority of the
48 states and DC.

Third, the bill does not create a meaningful statute of limitations for charging the offense.
One year is totally insufficient and, in effect, swallows the obligation to report. Often, the salient
facts are not known or reported by others within one year of the failure to report (the applicable
limitations period under the bill as drafted); e.g., abusers often “shop” their victims from doctor
to doctor to avoid detection or otherwise conceal abuse. HB 1069 does contain a provision
specifying by reference no limitations period, the same as for felonies. This is also the
standard proposed for civil damages claims in sexual abuses cases in HB 687, also being heard
today, which bill I wholeheartedly support.

Fourth, the seven year cap on the duty to report measured from the date the victim turns
eighteen (treasured by the medical community and the clergy) eliminates the need to report
where the abuser may be victimizing persons other than the person undergoing treatment of the
subject of the knowledge of the otherwise required reporter. For example, a twenty-five year old
patient may report that her father abused her up until she reached puberty. That father, though,
may be abusing other pre-pubescent children, and not requiring a report would further endanger
those children. HB 1069 addresses this matter and continues the duty to report as noted above.
HB 1069 addresses all of these issues in a concise, fair, and beneficial manner. HB 1069
will protect children, not special interest groups. The clergy, educators, and doctors will all tell
you that they are doing a great job as they conduct their own investigations. Look only to events
in the Catholic Church, Wicomico County Schools, Key School in Annapolis, and elsewhere to
see that this is definitely not the case.

I strongly urge this committee to give HB 787 an unfavorable vote and to vote a favorable report on HB 1069.

Thank you.

Respectfully.
s/Ernest A. Crofoot