How would a new bill requiring parental consent for mental health emergencies impact child sex abuse victims? – News 5 Cleveland WEWS

Report on Ohio House Bill 172: Implications for Adolescent Well-being and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report analyzes proposed Ohio legislation, House Bill 172, which mandates parental consent for minors to receive temporary mental health services. The analysis focuses on the bill’s potential conflict with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning health, child protection, and justice. While proponents advocate for parental authority, opponents, including violence prevention advocates, warn that the bill could create insurmountable barriers for adolescent victims of abuse, thereby undermining progress on several key global development targets.

Legislative Context: House Bill 172

• The proposed legislation seeks to repeal an existing state law that permits minors aged 14 and older to access temporary mental health support, including up to six weeks of counseling, without parental consent.
• This provision is part of the state’s crisis mental health program, accessible via the 9-8-8 hotline.
• Sponsors of the bill argue that parents are an essential part of a student’s recovery and should not be excluded from decisions regarding their child’s mental health care.

Impact Assessment on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The legislation poses a direct challenge to the achievement of SDG Target 3.4, which aims to promote mental health and well-being.

• Barrier to Access: For adolescents experiencing sexual abuse where a parent or caregiver is the perpetrator, the requirement for parental consent effectively denies them access to essential mental health services.
• Increased Vulnerability: The inability to seek confidential help can exacerbate mental health crises among vulnerable youth, contradicting the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The bill’s provisions could weaken institutional protections for children, conflicting with SDG Target 16.2, which calls for an end to abuse, exploitation, and all forms of violence against children.

• Silencing Victims: The legislation may prevent children from disclosing abuse. Data indicates a high percentage of child sexual abuse perpetrators are parents or caregivers, making a consent requirement a direct impediment to reporting.
• Impeding Justice: While mandatory reporting laws require professionals to report abuse, these systems cannot be activated if a child is too fearful to initiate contact. The bill could inadvertently shield perpetrators and prevent the justice system from protecting child victims.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

The bill impacts progress toward SDG Target 5.2, focused on eliminating all forms of violence against all women and girls, as sexual violence disproportionately affects this demographic.

• Dismantling Support Systems: Confidential access to counseling is a critical component of support systems for victims of sexual and domestic violence.
• Risk of Further Harm: Requiring a victim to seek consent from an abusive parent could lead to punishment, threats, or further physical and sexual abuse, directly opposing the goal of creating safe environments for women and girls.

Stakeholder Analysis

1. Opponents of the Bill:
   • Organizations such as the Ohio Alliance to End Sexual Violence and the Ohio Domestic Violence Network argue that the bill closes a vital and safe door for teens to seek help.
   • They emphasize that in cases of intra-familial abuse, the bill would force a child to ask their abuser for permission to get help, creating an impossible and dangerous situation.
2. Proponents of the Bill:
   • Supporters, including State Representative Johnathan Newman and the organization Ohio Value Voters, frame the issue around parental rights and authority.
   • They maintain that parents must be notified and involved in their children’s mental health treatment and that existing mandatory reporting laws are sufficient to protect children from abusive parents.

Conclusion

House Bill 172, while intended to reinforce parental authority, presents a significant risk to the well-being and safety of vulnerable adolescents in Ohio. By restricting confidential access to mental health care, the legislation could directly hinder the state’s progress toward achieving Sustainable Development Goals 3, 5, and 16. The debate highlights a critical tension between parental rights and the state’s responsibility to provide robust, accessible, and effective institutions for child protection and health.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article’s central theme is the provision of and access to mental health services for teenagers, particularly those who are victims of sexual abuse. It discusses the importance of programs like the 9-8-8 crisis hotline and temporary counseling services for the well-being of minors.
• SDG 5: Gender Equality: This goal is relevant as it aims to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls. Child sexual abuse is a severe form of gender-based violence, and the article focuses on creating safe pathways for victims, a significant portion of whom are girls, to receive help.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article directly addresses the protection of children from abuse and violence. The debate over House Bill 172 is a discussion about the legal and institutional frameworks (strong institutions) designed to protect vulnerable children and provide them with access to support and justice, especially when the perpetrator may be a parent or caregiver.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.4: “By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.” The article directly relates to this target by discussing the promotion of mental health and well-being for adolescents. The expansion of the crisis mental health program and the 9-8-8 hotline are concrete actions to provide treatment and support, while the proposed bill is seen by advocates as a barrier to this goal.
2. Target 5.2: “Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.” The article’s focus on child sexual abuse victims directly aligns with this target. It highlights the prevalence of this violence (“Thousands of kids in Ohio are sexually abused per year”) and discusses the critical need for accessible support systems for victims to escape and recover from such exploitation.
3. Target 16.2: “End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.” This target is at the core of the article’s conflict. The debate is about the most effective legislative approach to protect children from sexual abuse and its aftermath. The concern that requiring parental consent could prevent a child from seeking help when the parent is the abuser is a direct engagement with the challenge of ending violence against children.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicator 3.4.2 (Suicide mortality rate): This indicator is implied through the explicit mention of the “national and statewide crisis and suicide hotline” (988). The existence and promotion of such a hotline are primary prevention strategies aimed at reducing suicide rates, which is a key measure of a population’s mental health status.
2. Indicator 16.2.3 (Proportion of young women and men aged 18-29 years who experienced sexual violence by age 18): The article provides data relevant to this indicator by stating, “State data shows the majority of all reported sexual assaults happened to children under 18.” This statistic is a direct measure of the prevalence of sexual violence experienced by individuals before reaching adulthood.
3. Indicator 16.2.1 (Proportion of children aged 1-17 years who experienced any physical punishment and/or psychological aggression by caregivers in the past month): This is implied in the article’s most critical argument against the proposed bill. The statistic that “anywhere from 35% to 93% of child victims… knew their perpetrator, and… that perpetrator was a parent or caregiver” directly points to violence inflicted by caregivers. The fear that a child asking for consent could lead to “punishment, there could be threats or more physical or sexual abuse” also relates to measuring violence from caregivers.

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: news5cleveland.com