Mandatory reporting of sexual abuse 'silenced survivors', psychologists warn

Psychologists described mandatory reporting as invoking anger, depression, stress, worry, sadness, and frustration.

Psychologists believe the system of mandatory reporting of sexual abuse "silenced survivors", who hold back from engaging in therapy amid "harmful unintended consequences" for both client and clinician.

The first study into the experiences of psychologists of the mandatory reporting (MR) system also found that "while participants believed that MR was introduced with well-meaning and good intentions, they noted how they felt that it has paradoxically put people at increased risk".

"Psychologists in the current research described how clients who did not wish to participate in the MR process could not discuss certain traumas as this would have automatically triggered a referral," it said. 

Clients were therefore silenced and had to focus on self-policing themselves instead of engaging fully with therapy."

According to one psychologist: "I know that there is all this stuff that they’re not telling me because they know I would have to report it, and it tends to be key information."

The study is called Experiences of Psychologists in Applying Mandatory Reporting in Ireland (Children First) and was carried out by a team of researchers from the School of Applied Psychology at University College Cork, led by Seán Pellegrini. It looked at the experiences of Irish psychologists in implementing mandatory reporting, which was introduced in December 2017. 

Under the system, those making the report are obligated, under law, to assist Tusla with any ongoing investigations that have been the subject of a mandated report.

However, 18 psychologists, who met in three focus groups, said while mandatory reporting was clearly "well-intentioned", it caused difficulties.

"Psychologists in the current study outlined how mandatory reports need to be submitted regardless of whether there is any identifying information on alleged abusers," it said. 

This results in the anonymity of victims being threatened in small communities when reports are made to local child protection and law enforcement agencies."

One psychologist reported a client injuring themselves deliberately for two weeks in a row on a daily basis in response to the amount of distress that MR was causing.

Psychologists described MR as invoking anger, depression, stress, worry, sadness, and frustration in response to their role as mandated reporters, with one stating: "I feel like I’m actually betraying someone’s trust. I’m bringing back that sense of powerlessness that they experienced in their childhood."

Some said there were positive aspects to MR, but also noted "how there was huge variation in the way that MRs were managed by Tusla", with "disjointed" child protection teams and referrals sometimes having to be resubmitted in different jurisdictions due to factors like the victim’s address at the time of the alleged abuse.

Psychologists said they needed more discretion and autonomy, with more resources to deal with the higher number of referrals, adding that "a non-mandated system of reporting was generally regarded as a favourable solution".