Four ways the legislature can fix Pa.’s ChildLine registry

Every year, thousands of Pennsylvanians are placed on the child abuse registry for alleged abuse or neglect. Some of them shouldn’t be.

The process works like this: Anyone can allege child abuse on a hotline. After initial investigations, caseworkers can place people on the registry without first holding hearings. People are placed on the registry for life, with no right to a hearing or meaningful opportunity to defend themselves. As a result, many people are unfairly turned down from employment, fired, or barred from volunteering for their children’s school functions.

Instead of protecting children, Pennsylvania’s ChildLine registry unfairly blocks a large segment of workers from getting jobs in their chosen fields, trapping children and families in poverty. To break this cycle of poverty and strengthen Pennsylvania’s workforce, the Pennsylvania legislature must fix the ChildLine registry by protecting people’s right to due process and correcting inequities within this system.

Most of the clients we see at Community Legal Services are placed on the registry because of accidental injuries, if the child has a medical condition with an unknown cause, or for brief lapses in supervision. These people are placed on the registry indefinitely, the same as people accused of intentionally inflicting physical or sexual harm on a child. This one-size-fits-all approach unfairly stigmatizes people alleged to have committed minor infractions.

Individuals accused of minor, nonintentional conduct should not be reported on ChildLine clearances at all.

» READ MORE: Pa.’s ChildLine abuse registry violates the state constitution, a new lawsuit alleges

In order to get off the registry, Pennsylvanians must navigate a complex appeal process within 90 days, and very few have access to an attorney. Additionally, many people do not receive or do not understand the appeal notices. As a result, they are stuck on the registry for life. For those who do obtain a hearing, over 90% successfully clear their names.

When child welfare investigators label parents experiencing poverty as child abusers, they perpetuate a cycle of economic instability that harms children. Being placed on the registry precludes parents from ever working in fast-growing fields like child care, education, or home health care, permanently shutting the door to job opportunities that would otherwise allow families to escape poverty. Although the goal of protecting children from abuse is an important one, the registry ultimately harms children by preventing their parents from accessing jobs.

“Although the goal of protecting children from abuse is an important one, the registry ultimately harms children by preventing their parents from accessing jobs.”

The state legislature can fix the ChildLine registry to both protect children from abuse and protect people’s rights at the same time. Here are four steps that would reform the system:

The state legislature can amend the law to restore due process rights for individuals facing accusations of abuse or neglect. In order to restore these rights, the legislature should mandate that a hearing take place within a short period of time after an investigator enters a case and before an individual is placed on the registry.

Community Legal Services, in partnership with attorney Tad LeVan of Levan Stapleton Segal Cochran and Penn law professor Seth Kreimer, filed a lawsuit last month to challenge the ChildLine registry and the child protective services law as unconstitutional. The petition for review was filed on Aug. 11 and moved forward on Sept. 7.

To ensure that justice is fairly served on an individualized and equitable basis, the legislature should implement a tiered structure that considers the nature and severity of the alleged abuse or neglect. Missing a child’s doctor’s appointment and sexual assault of a child, for example, should not be on the same tier.

For each tier, the time periods for remaining on the registry should be limited so that anyone placed on the registry is afforded a meaningful way to be removed for good cause, or after a certain number of years has passed. In a tiered scheme, serious cases of abuse would remain on the registry for a significant number of years while minor cases would be eligible for removal after a few years.

The legislature should clarify and limit which employers can request ChildLine clearances. Only employers or jobs that are substantially “child-facing” should be allowed to request clearances.

For example, a janitor in a hospital should not be required to have a clearance because there is a possibility he could bump into a child in the hallway. It would be appropriate, however, for a classroom teacher to have to obtain a ChildLine clearance.

To ensure that the ChildLine registry and the child protective services law are equitably enforced, the legislature must mandate that county and state child welfare agencies collect and release data on the racial impact of the registry. Agencies must routinely capture data such as the race, age, gender, income levels, and zip codes of alleged perpetrators to make sure that no community is systematically targeted. The legislature should also mandate that investigators be trained on implicit bias and provide specific criteria designed to mitigate such bias and eliminate disparities.

We call on the legislature to take action on these recommendations to uphold the constitutional rights of hardworking Pennsylvanians, help families access economic opportunity, and strengthen Pennsylvania’s workforce.

Brandon DeShields is a staff attorney in the employment unit at Community Legal Services of Philadelphia.