## Facts

- Mr. and Mrs. Pitts were the parents of four children, including an infant and three surviving children (one of whom was Jennifer Pitts).
- The infant died under circumstances that raised suspicion of abuse.
- The Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) investigated the family following the infant’s death.
- After its investigation, DCFS filed a juvenile-court neglect petition concerning the surviving children, alleging (among other things) that Jennifer Pitts was a “neglected minor” under the Illinois Juvenile Court Act.
- At the neglect hearing, DCFS called **Mary Bullock**, a DCFS child-abuse investigator whose investigation led to the filing of the neglect petition.
- DCFS also called **Linda Darr**, a DCFS social worker who counseled the Pitts family during the investigation.
- The Pittses objected to Bullock’s and Darr’s testimony to the extent it related to their conversations with the parents and information obtained in the course of DCFS contacts.
- The Pittses relied on an Illinois statute creating a **social worker-client privilege**, which generally barred a social worker from disclosing information acquired from a person who consulted the social worker in a professional capacity, subject to statutory exceptions.
- The trial court denied the motion to exclude the testimony, permitted Bullock and Darr to testify, and the Pittses sought interlocutory review under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308.

## Issues

1. Whether the Illinois social worker-client privilege barred DCFS’s child-abuse investigator and DCFS social worker from testifying in a juvenile neglect proceeding about the parents’ communications and related information obtained during DCFS’s investigation and counseling contacts.

## Decision

- The appellate court held the social worker-client privilege did **not** bar the testimony of the DCFS investigator and DCFS social worker in this juvenile neglect proceeding.
- The court **affirmed** the trial court’s ruling allowing the testimony.
- The cause was **remanded** for further proceedings in the juvenile court.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory privileges are exceptions to the general rule that relevant evidence is admissible; they are construed narrowly rather than expansively.
- A social worker-client privilege protects only the type of confidential relationship and communications the legislature intended; it does not automatically attach to every interaction with a social worker.
- In a juvenile neglect case, the State’s child-protection framework and DCFS’s statutory duties to investigate suspected abuse/neglect inform the scope of any claimed confidentiality.
- Communications made to DCFS personnel acting in an investigative and child-protection role are not treated the same as confidential communications made for private therapeutic treatment.
- Privilege provisions are read in harmony with the Juvenile Court Act and related child-protection statutes so that the privilege does not prevent the juvenile court from receiving evidence needed to decide whether children require protection.
- Interlocutory review under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 308 allows appellate resolution of a controlling legal question (here, the admissibility of testimony in light of the asserted privilege) before final judgment.

## Conclusion

In re Pitts held that Illinois’s social worker-client privilege did not prevent DCFS’s child-abuse investigator and DCFS social worker from testifying in a juvenile neglect proceeding about information obtained through their work with the family during a suspected abuse investigation, and the appellate court affirmed the admission of the testimony and remanded for the neglect case to continue.


In re Pitts, 44 Ill. App. 3d 46, 357 N.E.2d 872 (1976)