N.M. Stat. Ann. § 32A-4-3
A. Every person, including a licensed physician; a resident or an intern examining, attending or treating a child; a law enforcement officer; a judge presiding during a proceeding; a registered nurse; a visiting nurse; a school employee; a social worker acting in an official capacity; or a member of the clergy who has information that is not privileged as a matter of law, who knows or has a reasonable suspicion that a child is an abused or a neglected child shall report the matter immediately to:
H. A contractor or staff of a hospital, freestanding birthing center or clinic that provides prenatal or perinatal care shall:
History: 1978 Comp., § 32A-4-3, enacted by Laws 1993, ch. 77, § 97; 1997, ch. 34, § 2; 2003, ch. 189, § 1; 2005, ch. 189, § 38; 2019, ch. 190, § 2; 2021, ch. 94, § 10; 2025, ch. 156, § 8.
The 2025 amendment, effective June 20, 2025, provided that the health care authority is responsible for ensuring compliance with federal reporting requirements related to plans of safe care, and made technical amendments; in Subsection H, in the introductory clause, after "birthing center" added "or clinic that provides prenatal or perinatal care", in Paragraph H(1), after "substance-exposed newborn" added "or a pregnant person who agrees to creating a plan of safe care", in Paragraph H(2), after "notification to the" deleted "department" and added "health care authority"; and in Subsection I, after "informing the" deleted "department" and added "health care authority", and after "report of child abuse or neglect" added "The health care authority shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with federal reporting requirements related to plans of safe care.".
The 2021 amendment, effective June 18, 2021, defined "school employee" as used in this section; in Subsection A, after "visiting nurse; a", deleted "schoolteacher; a school official" and added "school employee"; and added Subsection J.
The 2019 amendment, effective June 14, 2019, provided that a finding that a pregnant woman is using or abusing drugs shall not alone form a sufficient basis to report child abuse or neglect, required volunteers, contractors or staff of a hospital or freestanding birthing center to complete a written plan of care for a substance-exposed newborn and to provide notification to the children, youth and families department that a substance-exposed newborn was born; in the section heading, after "penalty", added "notification of plan of care"; and added Subsections G through I.
The 2005 amendment, effective June 17, 2005, deleted the requirement in Subsections A and B that reports be made to the department office in the county where the child resides; and provided in Subsections C and D that a law enforcement officer trained in the investigation of child abuse and neglect is responsible for investigating reports of abuse and neglect.
The 2003 amendment, effective July 1, 2003, in Subsection A, deleted "but not limited to" near the beginning, inserted "or a member of the clergy who has information that is not privileged as a matter of law" following "an official capacity"; substituted "agency" for "agencies" in Paragaraph A(3); substituted "A department office" for "Any office of the department" preceding "receiving a report" in Subsection B.
The 1997 amendment, effective July 1, 1997, inserted "responsibility to investigate child abuse or neglect" in the section heading, deleted "or persons" following "person" in the next-to-last sentence in Subsection B, substituted "alleged abused" for "abused" in the second sentence in Subsection C and in the second sentence in Subsection D, added the third sentence in Subsection C, deleted former Subsection D relating to abuse or neglect of a child while in the care of a child care facility or family day care home, redesignated former Subsections E to G as Subsections D to F, and substituted "by local law enforcement" for "through the office of the district attorney" at the end of the first sentence in Subsection D.
Decisions under prior law. — In light of the similarity of the provisions, annotations decided under former Section 32-1-15 NMSA 1978 have been included in the annotations to this section.
Scope of duty to report child abuse. — The child abuse reporting requirement of this section expressly applies to "every person," and although the statute lists specific occupational groups, the language of the statute expressly emphasizes that the list is not exclusive. State v. Strauch, 2015-NMSC-009, rev’g 2014-NMCA-020.
Statements made by an alleged child abuser to his social worker therapist, a mandated reporter under the Abuse and Neglect Act, are not protected from disclosure in a court proceeding as a result of the specific exception to the physician-patient and psychotherapist-patient evidentiary privilege in Rule 11-504(D)(4) NMRA, which provides that no privilege shall apply for confidential communications concerning any material that a social worker is required by law to report to a public employee or public agency. State v. Strauch, 2015-NMSC-009, rev’g 2014-NMCA-020.
"Official capacity" defined. — The language "acting in an official capacity" as set forth in Subsection A of this section is synonymous with acting in a "professional capacity", and is used to distinguish between child abuse knowledge gained through activities in the listed occupations and knowledge gained in other capacities. State v. Strauch, 2015-NMSC-009, rev’g 2014-NMCA-020.
Scope of duty to report child abuse. — The statutory requirement to report child abuse does not apply to every person, but instead applies to the categories of people listed in Section 32A-4-3(A) NMSA 1979 and other professionals or government officials who are likely to come into contact with abused and neglected children during the course of their professional work. State v. Strauch, 2014-NMCA-020, cert. granted, 2014-NMCERT-001.
Duty of social workers to report child abuse. — The mandatory reporting requirement set forth in Section 32A-4-3(A) NMSA 1978 applies principally to social workers in school and other governmental settings. State v. Strauch, 2014-NMCA-020, cert. granted, 2014-NMCERT-001.
Social worker acting as a private mental health provider. — Where defendant, who was charged with criminal sexual penetration of a minor, made confidential communications to a licensed social worker during private counseling sessions for the purpose of diagnosis and treatment; and defendant’s ex-spouse participated in the counseling sessions, defendant had the privilege pursuant to Rule 11-504 NMRA to refuse to disclose and to prevent the social worker and defendant’s ex-spouse from disclosing information defendant communicated during the counseling sessions because the mandatory reporting requirement in Section 32A-4-3(A) NMSA did not apply to the social worker or to defendant’s ex-spouse. State v. Strauch, 2014-NMCA-020, cert. granted, 2014-NMCERT-001.
Dismissals from human services department [health care authority department] were in accordance with law and supported by substantial evidence, which included the failure to promptly report the alleged sexual abuse of a child to the proper authorities. Perkins v. Dep't of Human Servs., 1987-NMCA-148, 106 N.M. 651, 748 P.2d 24.
Requirement of "consultation" in Section 32-1-15 NMSA 1978 is not due process pre-deprivation hearing requirement, and plaintiff day-care center operator's constitutional right to due process was not violated by the human services department's [health care authority department's] transfer of state subsidized children to other facilities and suspension of federal funds pending completion of an investigation. Rice v. Vigil, 642 F. Supp. 212 (D.N.M. 1986), aff'd sub nom. Rice v. N. M., 854 F.2d 1323 (10th Cir. 1988).
Law reviews. — For comment, "The Freedom of the Press vs. The Confidentiality Provisions in the New Mexico Children's Code," see 4 N.M.L. Rev. 119 (1973).
For article, "Salt in the Wounds: Why Attorneys Should Not be Mandated Reporters of Child Abuse", see 36 N.M. L. Rev. 125 (2006).
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 42 Am. Jur. 2d Infants § 16.
Criminal liability for excessive or improper punishment inflicted on child by parent, teacher, or one in loco parentis, 89 A.L.R.2d 396.
Sexual abuse of child by parent as ground for termination of parent's right to child, 58 A.L.R.3d 1074.
Parent's involuntary confinement, or failure to care for child as result thereof, as evincing neglect, unfitness or the like in dependency or divestiture proceeding, 79 A.L.R.3d 417.
Admissibility of expert medical testimony on battered child syndrome, 98 A.L.R.3d 306.
Validity and construction of penal statute prohibiting child abuse, 1 A.L.R.4th 38.
Validity, construction, and application of state statute requiring doctor or other person to report child abuse, 73 A.L.R.4th 782.
Physical examination of child's body for evidence of abuse as violative of Fourth Amendment or as raising Fourth Amendment issue, 93 A.L.R. Fed. 530.
43 C.J.S. Infants § 14.