Beth McGilley is a clinical psychologist and eating disorders specialist in Wichita, Kansas. Beth was a plaintiff represented by the Center in Aid for Women v. Foulston.
Background
In 2003, Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline issued a new interpretation of the state’s child-abuse reporting law requiring that doctors, school counselors, and psychotherapists, among others, report sexual activity involving a teen younger than 16 as evidence of child abuse. The law is so broad it would even require a psychologist to report a teen who disclosed that she was "making out" with her boyfriend.
On October 3, 2003, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit challenging the attorney general’s opinion on behalf of a group of health-care providers and counseling professionals. The plaintiffs argue that the attorney general’s interpretation violates adolescents’ right to informational privacy and deters adolescents from seeking confidential health care or counseling. On April 18, 2006 Judge J. Thomas Marten permanently blocked enforcement of Phill Kline’s legal opinion, declaring it irreparably harmful and recognizing that minors have a right to informational privacy concerning sexual activity.
"We are extremely pleased that, for the first time, a federal court has protected young people from a state’s attempt to intrude in the private communications between teens and health-care providers. Any threat to that privacy will drive teens away from health-care services, endangering their well-being instead of protecting it," said Bonnie Scott Jones, lead attorney in the case and staff attorney at the Center. "States cannot be allowed to simply pull up a chair in every doctor’s office in the state and listen in on teenagers seeking health services." On May 16, 2006 Kline appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals for the 10th circuit.
Senior Editor Dara Mayers spoke with Beth McGilley in September 2005 about the case.
What are the implications of enacting Kline’s interpretation
of the statute on your clients?
They’re huge. If young people come to my office, they
come because they are in need. Otherwise they would
not be in a therapist’s office. I’ll have to tell them: "If
you tell me anything that makes me suspect that
you are being sexually active, then I will have to
report you to the Kansas Department of Social and
Rehabilitation Services." I am going to silence them at
the front door.
How will your practice be affected?
Therapy is private and confidential space. I take the
sanctity of the therapeutic relationship very seriously.
This interpretation threatens the most basic element of
that relationship—the confidentiality and trust established
between client and therapist. Having talked
to my clients, I know that sexuality is an issue that
young people have shame about anyway—if they know
they are going to be reported to the state, they simply
will not talk.
On a personal level, it will make my job almost impossible
to carry out. If the mother of a teenager comes in
and says "my daughter came home after the prom and
said she and Johnny got caught kissing in the parking
lot," that’s reportable! It doesn’t just silence folks under
the age of 16. Theoretically I’d have to report virtually
all of my clients. On a purely practical level, it takes
between 30 to 45 minutes to make one abuse report—
under this statute I would have to report 98 percent of
my clients.
Is underreporting of sexual abuse a problem in Kansas?
We are already legally and ethically required to report
suspected or known abuse. There are no data to show
that underreporting is a problem. In fact, the system
is already inundated with cases, and is already overextended
in attempting to address children in need of
care. To further burden the system with reports of normal
sexual behavior among teenagers is unnecessary,
and will create situations where teens who actually
need care are overlooked.
Why did you become a plaintiff in this case?
Both for my clients, and because I am disturbed by
the implications of Kline’s actions. The traditions of
therapy and medicine have always been couched in
the right to privacy. It is most disturbing and insulting
as a professional who spent years in training to have
this privilege and right questioned or denied.
I am all for providing better support to families and
kids who are traumatized. There are so many ways we
can help abused children. The problem is not identifying
them, it is helping them once they’re identified. I
am more than happy to help Kline in that effort. But
that does not seem to be his goal here.
Plaintiff Profile: Aid for Women v. Foulston