House committee refines S239 work group to examine mandatory-reporting statutes, sets April 1, 2027 interim presentation

The House Human Services Committee spent the second half of the session drafting and refining S239, a bill to create a work group charged with examining mandatory-reporting statutes and possible alternatives to reporting in situations where services or supports might better protect a child.

Committee members discussed language changes to the bill's purpose, emphasizing that the work group should consider "alternatives to reporting when it's in the best interest of the child" and should examine statutory provisions identified in the session as "49 12 and 13." Members agreed to add explicit statutory references in the bill text so the work group knows which sections to review.

The committee debated and adjusted the work group's composition. They moved some consulted stakeholders into voting roles, retained representatives from DCF and the Center for Crime Victim Services, and added two members with lived experience: one appointed by the Office of Child, Youth and Family Advocate (to represent someone who experienced abuse or neglect) and one appointed by the Parent Representation Center to represent those who were "wrongfully accused," as the committee described it.

Representative Doug Bishop and other members pressed for specificity in appointments and definitions, including who should be designated as mandatory reporters and whether exclusions (for religious professionals) should remain. Members also flagged concerns that changes in reporting practices had produced unintended consequences in the past — citing testimony that an educator who believed they had acted appropriately still faced prosecution when reporting pathways diverged — and emphasized the need for trauma-informed review.

On timing and logistics the committee agreed that the work group should present an interim status update by April 1, 2027 (presentation, not necessarily a written report) and deliver a final report by Oct. 1. The group will meet multiple times (members discussed 12 meetings) and committee staff said DCF agreed to pay per diems out of existing budget lines.

Committee staff will circulate revised bill text reflecting membership changes, statutory call-outs (the '49 12 and 13' reference), and draft questions to focus the work group's review. Members asked staff to scope statutory questions so the group addresses before-report decisions and definitions, not the post-report processes already covered under Act 154.

The committee did not take a final vote on S239 at this meeting; members anticipated circulating revised text for review and returning to continue the bill's drafting.