The 2PS project (Prevent and Protect through Support) brings prevention to the forefront
aiming to prevent harm to children before it occurs. 2PS is offering a paradigm shift in the
approach to tackling child sexual abuse and exploitation (CSAE) across Europe.
2PS aims to foster a better understanding of the factors that lead to harmful behaviour,
informing and educating people who fear they might offend against children about the
support services and rehabilitation options they have, and sharing the best practices for
guidance, therapy and treatment methods with important stakeholders.
Legal landscape mapping applicable to Child Sexual Abuse
As part of the legal and ethical work package in 2PS, Timelex (a Brussels-based law firm
specialised in technology) undertook a large-scale research activity, aimed at mapping the
legal landscape applicable to people who fear they might offend against children,
including those with a sexual interest in children, in the EU and beyond.
The report focuses on two key areas:
- mandatory reporting obligations and their interaction with professional secrecy obligations of mental health service providers (further referred to as “practitioners”) on the one hand, and
- sex offender registries on the other, with a strong emphasis on how these frameworks affect individuals seeking help and the professionals supporting them.
In essence, it seeks to address the potential fear of individuals that they might “end up in the system” if seeking help, which could lead to individuals not engaging with mental support services that they could strongly benefit from.
At the same time, when a particular individual shows serious signs of increased risk of
offending against a child, it should be possible for the mental health service provider to take
action and breach of professional secrecy by reporting the situation to the relevant authorities (which might include law enforcement, but also child protective services and other relevant public services).
Often, the law will oblige such reporting in certain circumstances (i.e. make reporting mandatory, referred to as mandatory reporting laws). Clarity on the legal obligations is essential both for practitioners to know their obligations, and for them to be able to honestly inform potential patients about the level of confidentiality they can offer. A specific topic covered in the research is anonymous therapy, which may bypass some of the challenges.
Country-based analysis of the legal landscape
The report contains a comprehensive country-by-country legal analysis of every EU
Member State, as well as selected third countries, namely Australia, Canada,
Switzerland, Norway, the UK, and the US. Comparative tables allow easy comparison
between the various legal regimes, on a number of different topics, including:
- Professional confidentiality rules and exceptions
- Mandatory reporting obligations
- Anonymous reporting options
- Legal protections for reporters
- Sanctions for non-compliance
In addition, the Timelex team considered that input from practitioners would be important
to understand how the national rules are implemented in practice. This is because,
necessarily, the national rules on professional secrecy and mandatory reporting employ
broad and often vague concepts that need further interpretation.
Understanding how practitioners’ experience of their legal obligations is informative in understanding whether there is sufficient discretion with regard to reporting a given situation in order to allow for a productive therapeutic environment. Too little discretion will lead to very early reporting and breaking the therapeutic relationship too early, before any benefits can be achieved.
Too much discretion, on the other hand, might lead practitioners not to report dangerous
situations, as they would fear the consequences of breaching their professional secrecy
when they were not allowed to do so, which may include reputational damage, sanctions by
professional bodies, losing their license or criminal sanctions (including fines and prison
sentence, at least in theory).
Hence, an appropriate amount of discretion, as well as useful guidance on how to navigate the rules, seems essential to find an appropriate balance, allowing an open therapeutic relationship while ensuring that reporting happens in cases where a patient presents a real and present danger to a child.
The research
It was difficult to reach the necessary number of practitioners to be able to have a somewhat
representative sample of opinions from each country. In the end, sufficient responses for the practitioners’ survey were received for 12 countries: Belgium, Canada, Czechia, the US, the UK, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Lithuania, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Germany.
While not reaching the ambitious goal of covering all aforementioned countries, this allowed for comparisons between the legal framework of each country and the practical understanding of practitioners, between countries and between different approaches to the
topic.
The report
To sum up, the report contains:
1. A legal mapping of national rules on professional secrecy rules and mandatory
reporting obligations: a detailed country-by-country analysis of mandatory reporting
laws and professional confidentiality frameworks across all EU Member States, as well as Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Norway, the UK, and the US.
2. A legal mapping of national rules on Sex Offender Registries: a comparative
review of national registry systems, including inclusion criteria, access rights, and
cross-border information sharing.
3. Schematic Overviews: comparative legal tables summarising all the above.
4. The Practitioner Survey: a cross-national questionnaire distributed to mental health
and social care professionals to assess how legal frameworks are interpreted and
applied in practice. The survey included scenario-based questions to evaluate
discretion in reporting decisions.
Relevance to Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse
The report is highly relevant to CSAE prevention, particularly in its focus on early intervention. It addresses a critical tension in prevention work: the need to maintain
therapeutic confidentiality to encourage help-seeking, versus the obligation to report
potential risks to children.
The findings underscore that:
- Overly rigid reporting laws may leave too little discretion for practitioners and deter
individuals from seeking help, increasing long-term risk. - Excessive discretion can lead to underreporting, leaving children unprotected.
- Clear, balanced guidance is essential to support professionals in making informed,
ethical decisions. - The report also highlights the importance of anonymous therapy as a preventive tool, noting that while it can lower barriers to access, it also raises concerns about accountability and risk management.
The report aims to offer a robust evidence base for policy development and for organisations
to reflect on their own practices.
The emphasis on legal clarity, practitioner discretion, and cross-national comparison makes it a valuable tool for improving CSAE prevention strategies on the national as well as the EU
level.
The report, as part of its policy recommendations, calls for a more harmonised approach in
the EU, including EU-level guidance or coordination of efforts (e.g. a common protocol),
enhanced training and awareness, and a balanced approach that protects both children and
the therapeutic relationship.
