{"report_id":355,"form_id":"22","user_id":81,"organization_id":13,"question_id":"347","question_type":"Free_Text","text_answer":"1.) The staff's decision not to make a new report after observation of marks\/bruises on the 2 year old child was influenced by the staff's many years of experience working FA response cases, and the staff's perception that the marks\/bruises did not rise to the level of making a new CP report . \r\n\r\n2.) Guided by the staff's interpretation of 626.556 Reporting of Maltreatment of Minors definitions of \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcAccidental', \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcNeglect', \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcPhysical Abuse', and \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcThreatened Injury', along with 626.556 Subd. 3 \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcPersons mandated to report; persons voluntarily report', contributed to the staff's interpretation of the threshold to report or not report.  The staff's many years of experience working in child welfare, along with exercising ethical professional judgement about when mandated reporting is required influenced the staff to not make a new report. The staff did not have a reason to believe new allegations and\/or a new victim child existed based on the information known at the time.  \r\n3.)The family assessment response to the family's home was regarding allegations of neglect (inadequate supervision) involving the two older children, which the staff focused attention on during the initial face to face. The staff also focused attention on assessing immediate safety and future risk of maltreatment of all the children during the initial contact with the family. The staff observed and documented the marks and bruises on the 2 year old. The staff also took photos of the injuries and uploaded them to the case file as part of the staff's ongoing safety and risk assessments under the open family assessment.","created_by":81,"updated_by":81,"updated_at":"5\/26\/2021 2:05:36 pm","created_at":"5\/26\/2021 2:05:36 pm","id":35770}