New York Assembly Bill A01391

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/25
• Refer: 1/9/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Provides that any person charged with enforcing laws prohibiting cruelty to animals shall cause a report to be made when, in the performance of their duties, such person has reasonable cause to believe that abuse or maltreatment of a child has also occurred; provides that a person charged with the responsibility of filing a report of child abuse or maltreatment shall also file a report of suspected animal cruelty.

Summary

This bill expands New York’s child abuse reporting framework to include suspected animal cruelty when there is reason to believe the same person may also have abused or maltreated a child. It amends the Social Services Law to define “animal” and “cruelty” by reference to the Agriculture and Markets Law, and it authorizes mandated reporters to make a report despite other confidentiality rules when they encounter evidence of both child maltreatment and animal cruelty. The bill also broadens who may report and how reports are made. It clarifies that any person may report suspected animal cruelty, not just those already required to report child abuse, and it requires immediate oral reporting by telephone or fax, followed by a written report within 48 hours. Reports would go to local peace officers, SPCA agents, or police officers with jurisdiction, and written reports may be submitted electronically and used in animal cruelty proceedings. The bill also extends immunity protections to people and institutions that report animal cruelty in good faith.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would amend multiple sections of the Social Services Law to integrate animal cruelty reporting into the existing child protective reporting system. It would create a new legal pathway for mandated reporters—such as teachers, medical professionals, and social service workers—to disclose suspected animal cruelty when it arises in the course of their duties and may be connected to child abuse or maltreatment. It would also expand immunity provisions to cover good-faith animal cruelty reports, and it would make electronically submitted written reports admissible in animal cruelty proceedings. The measure would affect mandated reporters, child protective reporting systems, and animal cruelty enforcement agencies, including police and SPCA-related investigators.

Sentiment

The available context suggests generally supportive sentiment toward the bill’s goal of linking animal cruelty and child abuse reporting, with the measure framed as a child protection and animal welfare tool rather than a punitive expansion. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented floor debate or recorded opposition in the supplied materials. The bill’s sponsors appear to be advancing a cross-reporting approach that treats animal cruelty as a potential indicator of broader household violence.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are likely to be confidentiality, reporting burdens, and the scope of mandated disclosure. The bill expressly overrides other confidentiality provisions for mandated reporters in these circumstances, which could raise concerns among professionals about privacy and the limits of their duties. Another possible issue is whether requiring or encouraging reports of animal cruelty in child abuse cases could increase administrative workload for reporters and enforcement agencies. The bill also concentrates reporting authority in local peace officers, SPCA agents, and police officers with jurisdiction, which could prompt questions about consistency of enforcement across municipalities.