Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Support PBS Shop PBS Search PBS
Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly -- An online companion to the weekly television news program
Keyword Search
Topic Index Stories by Week
Home
Current Stories

Perspectives
Profile
Web Exclusive
Survey

Headlines
Election Coverage
Special Issues
TV Schedule
Calendar
Newsletter
Subscribe or unsubscribe to the E-mail Newsletter, or edit your preferences.
The Series
About the Series
Funding
Biographies
Awards
Credits
For Teachers
Overview
Lesson Plan List
Tips
Teacher Resources
Resources
Viewer's Guides
Videotapes
Featured Sites
Feedback
Contact Us
Story Suggestions

FEATURE:
Kansas 'Kiss and Tell' Law
February 10, 2006    Episode no. 924
Read This Week's November 7, 2008
Go
BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: Now, a special report on a federal trial in Kansas over how much doctors, psychologists, and social workers should have to tell the state about the sexual activity of minor children they treat or counsel. Kansas law requires enough reporting to help protect children from abusers and predators. But Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline has interpreted that law to require therapists to report many kinds of sexual activity by minors. He argues that some of those practices could be criminal. Therapists sued, saying the A.G.'s interpretation could violate children's privacy and may be so broad it could discourage children from talking honestly with therapists.

Tim O'Brien has more.

TIM O'BRIEN: Protecting children is one of society's most challenging responsibilities. Every state has laws requiring health care providers to report the suspected abuse of children. But the attorney general in Kansas, Phill Kline, has given a new interpretation to that state's law, requiring providers to start reporting a wide range of sexual activity, not just intercourse, even when it's consensual between young people of the same age

Photo of Phill Kline PHILL KLINE (Attorney General, Kansas): If it is two age-mates engaging in sexual exploration and there's no force, we do not prosecute. But let us know so that we can figure out the truth. That's what the law says; that's the position of our office.

O'BRIEN: That's an expansive view of the Kansas law which has infuriated health care professionals. They say the requirements violate the privacy rights of children, compromise the professional responsibilities of caregivers, and in the end will do more harm than good.

Dr. ROBERT BLUM (Chair, Department of Population Family Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health): The harm is there because it will keep people, young people, from getting services that they need. You, as a 15-year-old, have now been advised that anything you tell me about your sexual behavior will be reported to Child Protection Services or the equivalent in the state. Are you going to tell me much of anything? Am I going to be able to understand what your sexual behaviors are that might put you at risk for pregnancy or STDs or HIV?

Photo of Dr. Robert Blum O'BRIEN: Dr. Robert Blum is a pediatrician who chairs the family health sciences department at Johns Hopkins University. Called as an expert witness by health care professionals, Blum testified the law is so vague it leaves social workers in a quandary over what to report.

Dr. BLUM: There's really a very wide range.

O'BRIEN (To Dr. Blum): What about making out in the back seat of a car?

Dr. BLUM: Well, that's very questionable of whether that would be included as well. Most likely it would fall under the state law for mandatory reporting, yes.

Dr. BETH HARTMAN MCGILLEY (Psychologist): It could definitely be implied. And that's been our position all along, is that you are implicating normative, healthy, natural sexual behavior between consensual age-mates.

O'BRIEN: Beth McGilley, who specializes in adolescent psychology, also testified against the Kansas reporting requirements, telling the court that she and most therapists already tend to over-report possible abuse, not under-report it.

Photo of Dr. beth Hartman McGilley Dr. MCGILLEY: If you are in a quandary, if it seems ambiguous, which side do you err on? Always on the side of reporting, because I would rather be wrong and have to undo whatever damage might be done. And I'm here to tell you that when you make reports, it does sometimes threaten, if not sever, the therapeutic relationship.

O'BRIEN: McGilley and Blum both insist that what constitutes sex abuse should be left to the judgment of health care professionals rather than to politicians drawing arbitrary age distinctions.

Dr. BLUM: The reality is people develop at different ages, and the risk and harm to a person is far more dependent on their maturation and the contexts than on the age that they are in.

Continue to top of next colum
Watch This Report
Requires Real Player or Windows Media Player
Tools:
E-Mail this article
Resources
O'BRIEN: No one disputes that the state has a great interest in protecting its children or that the privacy rights of children, unlike adults, are limited. But the Kansas Department of Social Services says it doesn't even investigate cases of consensual sex involving juveniles absent a showing of "demonstrable harm." That begs the question: if Social Services doesn't even investigate it, what interest does the state have in requiring health care professionals to report it? None, says Bonnie Scott Jones, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs:

Photo of Bonnie Scott Jones BONNIE SCOTT JONES (Attorney, Center for Reproductive Rights): They're intruding on privacy rights, amassing the information, and then not doing anything with it. So they're not serving a state interest. They're not protecting minors. They're not protecting public health. In fact, they're doing the exact opposite.

O'BRIEN: Attorney General Kline insists reporting even consensual sexual activity by young people to the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitative Services -- SRS -- still serves a purpose.

Mr. KLINE: There's no criticism that I have for the medical community. I would just say that there are tools in law enforcement and within SRS -- legal tools as well as training tools -- to be able to determine whether the representation that it was consensual is true.

O'BRIEN: Kline not only refused to discuss the case any further, he also instructed lawyers defending the state not to comment. He did allow one of the state's expert witnesses to respond to the complaints from health care providers that the reporting requirements might discourage youngsters from seeking help.

Photo of Dr. Elizabeth Shadigian Dr. ELIZABETH SHADIGIAN (Clinical Associate Professor, University of Michigan): That is theoretical. It has not been proven. And with child abuse laws, we still see children and their parents going to pediatricians' offices, getting reported, and still getting medical care.

O'BRIEN: And Dr. Shadigian defends the Kansas requirement that any genital contact involving juveniles be reported.

Dr. SHADIGIAN: In fact, sexually transmitted diseases such as viruses or bacteria can be transmitted in that kind of contact and because even sperm can be transmitted, even without full penetration, and young girls can get pregnant.

O'BRIEN: Under cross examination, however, Dr. Shadigian acknowledged that in her own practice in Michigan, she herself does not report many of the incidents that the Kansas law would cover.

Photo of kids exting a bus Children do need protection, and even the sharpest critics of the Kansas system say reporting suspected abuse is essential in many cases.

Ms. JONES: We do not oppose application of the reporting statute to situations where there is reason to suspect coercion, power differential, force. Any sort of nonconsensual sexual activity absolutely should be reported here. That is not at issue here. But ...

O'BRIEN: But how far can Kansas and other states go? Might a good faith demand for information actually end up hurting the children it is aimed at helping, as the plaintiffs contend here? Although the Kansas reporting law is unusually strict, the interests the law seeks to balance are not new to the federal courts -- a child's right to privacy and confidentiality against the state's right, its duty, to protect its children. The court's decision here is all but certain to be appealed, with at least the potential to set a national precedent.

For RELIGION & ETHICS NEWSWEEKLY, I'm Tim O'Brien at Federal District Court in Wichita.

ABERNETHY: A ruling in that case is expected this coming week.

Did you like this story? How can we improve our program or Web site?
Resources






TOP