Authorizing the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to establish additional mandated reporters for the purpose of the protection and care of children
This bill would expand Massachusetts law governing mandated reporters of child abuse and neglect. It replaces the current statutory definition in chapter 119 with a broader definition that expressly authorizes the Commonwealth to designate additional categories of adults as mandated reporters, including paid and unpaid employees, volunteers, and contractors working in listed professions or roles. The bill retains many existing mandated reporter categories, such as medical professionals, educators, child care workers, law enforcement, clergy, social workers, foster parents, and recreational personnel, while also clarifying that the definition applies when the person resides in Massachusetts or performs the relevant role for someone in the Commonwealth.
The bill also amends section 51A of chapter 119 to require mandated reporters to complete evidence-based training within 180 days of being designated. The training must be approved by the Office of the Child Advocate and focus on preventing child sexual abuse, other abuse, neglect, and proper reporting obligations. The training may be delivered in person or online, and refresher training may be required by the employing or contracting entity.
The bill would change state child-protection law by broadening the pool of people who can be designated as mandated reporters and by imposing a training requirement tied to that designation. It would affect chapter 119 of the General Laws, especially the statutory definition of “mandated reporter” and the reporting/training provisions in section 51A. The practical effect would be to increase reporting obligations for additional workers, volunteers, and contractors in child-serving settings, and to require entities to ensure those individuals receive approved training.
The available materials suggest the bill is framed positively as a child-safety measure, with its stated purpose being the protection and care of children. There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided context, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from debate. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to be presented as a preventive and administrative child welfare reform rather than a controversial policy change.
The main potential point of contention is the breadth of the expanded mandated-reporter definition, which could impose new legal duties on a wide range of paid and unpaid workers, volunteers, and contractors in schools, camps, libraries, religious organizations, and other child-facing settings. Another possible issue is the administrative burden of required training and refresher training, particularly for smaller organizations or volunteer-based programs. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided legislative history, so these concerns are inferred from the bill’s structure rather than from recorded debate.