## Facts

- DSHS placed Tyler DeLeon and other foster children with Carole DeLeon and later assisted in Tyler’s adoption.
- Over several years, CPS received 23 referrals alleging abuse and neglect in the home, including multiple incidents involving Tyler’s injuries.
- Tyler’s health deteriorated significantly while in the home; he died at age seven from dehydration and starvation attributed to neglect and abuse by his adoptive mother.
- The State paid substantial foster-care and adoption support to Carole DeLeon for the children in her home, including payments for Tyler.
- Tyler’s estate representative and guardians for other children sued DSHS and employees and also sued Tyler’s physicians and a clinic for (1) wrongful death and survival damages and (2) medical malpractice and failure to report suspected child abuse under RCW 26.44.030.

## Issues

1. Whether RCW 26.44.030 (mandatory child-abuse reporting) implies a private civil cause of action against health-care providers who fail to report.
2. Whether a physician’s statutory duty to report suspected child abuse constitutes “health care” under ch. 7.70 RCW, making ch. 7.70 the exclusive remedy.
3. Whether Tyler’s siblings were qualified beneficiaries entitled to recover under the asserted wrongful-death-related theories.

## Decision

- The court held RCW 26.44.030 implies a civil cause of action against mandatory reporters, including health-care providers, for failure to report suspected child abuse.
- The court held a physician’s statutory duty to report suspected abuse is not “health care” under ch. 7.70 RCW; ch. 7.70’s exclusive-remedy provisions therefore did not preclude a separate claim based on RCW 26.44.030.
- The court held Tyler’s siblings were not qualified beneficiaries under the relevant beneficiary statutes.
- The court affirmed the challenged partial summary judgment orders in result and remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- A private civil remedy may be implied from a mandatory child-abuse reporting statute when doing so is consistent with the statute’s protective purpose and enforcement scheme, even if the statute expressly provides criminal penalties.
- A mandatory reporter’s statutory duty to report suspected child abuse can be treated as a duty independent of the provision of medical treatment.
- A physician’s failure to report suspected child abuse is not necessarily an injury “resulting from health care” within the meaning of ch. 7.70 RCW; thus, ch. 7.70 may not be the exclusive avenue for relief.
- Eligibility to recover under wrongful-death-related statutes depends on statutory beneficiary definitions; siblings may be excluded if they do not meet the statutory criteria.

## Conclusion

The court recognized an implied civil claim against health-care providers for failing to report suspected child abuse under RCW 26.44.030, treated the reporting duty as outside ch. 7.70 RCW’s “health care” exclusivity, and limited recovery by holding the child’s siblings were not qualified beneficiaries.


Beggs v. State, Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 171 Wash. 2d 69, 247 P.3d 421 (2011)