There’s an important error on the California Department of Social Services form for reporting suspected elder and dependent adult abuse. The form misquotes the statute that defines an “elder” for mandated reporting purposes. It may lead therapists, teachers and others to report instances of abuse that they don’t actually have the obligation — or even legal authority — to report.
The issue is with form SOC 341. Mandated reporters complete this state-issued form in the process of reporting suspected elder abuse or dependent adult abuse. Form fields include information about the suspected victim, perpetrator, and context. It’s all pretty standard stuff.
The form includes instructions for its completion. The instructions intend to aid those mandated reporters who, absent clearly-defined exceptions, are legally obligated to maintain client confidentiality.
The instructions say that “For purposes of mandatory reporting, elder means any person residing in this state who is 60 years of age or older (WIC Section 15610.27).“ It cites section 15610.27 of California’s Welfare and Institutions Code. Okay, so let’s look at that section, shall we?
That exact statute clearly defines an elder, for mandated reporting purposes, as any California resident age 65 or older. (You can see it in fuller context here.)
So what gives? In 2021, the Governor signed Assembly Bill 135. It took effect the following year. That bill allows local Adult Protective Service agencies to get involved in many situations where the victim of potential abuse is 60 or older, down from 65. However, that definition specifically says it is “for the purposes of [APS] investigating or providing services.” And the 60-year-old definition of an elder applies to a different chapter of law from where the mandated reporting definition is located.
Put differently, the 2021 bill clearly did not alter the statute that defines an elder for mandated reporting purposes. Mandated reporters still appear to only have legal authorization to report when a victim is 65 or older, based on that statute.
Why it matters
This is no trivial issue for therapists and other mandated reporters otherwise legally bound to confidentiality. Suppose a therapist comes to believe their 62-year-old client is the victim of abuse. The therapist reports the suspected elder abuse, following the instructions on the form, and the local APS agency gets involved. The client, angry that the therapist shared information about them without the client’s permission, sues the therapist.
The therapist might lose. They broke confidentiality without appropriate legal basis to do so.
Obviously, I’m not a lawyer. I would encourage any therapist with reporting questions, especially when it comes to this specific issue, to consult with a qualified attorney. The law does grant mandated reporters broad protection from liability for the mandated reporting of suspected elder abuse even when the report turns out to be wrong. But it’s not at all clear to me whether that protection would apply for the reporting of something that, based on the victim’s age, is not actually a mandated report — that is, it would not qualify as elder abuse as the law defines it — even if it happened just as the therapist described.
While it’s a bit tangential to the issue here, it’s worth adding that trying to get anyone at CDSS to respond to inquiries about this has been an adventure. For more than four years now, I’ve tried myself, I’ve tried through organizations, and I’ve tried through state government agencies. All of those efforts have failed, leaving mandated reporters (and even a lot of APS employees) confused and too often incorrect about what must be reported.
For a state agency that’s supposed to be responsive to the needs of vulnerable populations, that shouldn’t be acceptable. CDSS should be more responsive. Most importantly, their elder abuse reporting form should accurately reflect the law it cites.