[cge]

The bill is SB 5375 [1]; it's frustrating that the text of the article does not mention that. The relevant part appears to be narrowly written to cover only privileged communication with clergy. All other privileged communication is excluded from this specific reporting requirement.

The article also doesn't seem to accurately represent what confessions would be covered. The reporting requirement is not just for child abuse, but instead appears to be more broadly for abuse, maltreatment or neglect. Depending on how the law views neglect, that could be quite broad, eg, if one thinks about the occasional claims in parts of the US of things like allowing children to walk places on their own being neglect.

[1]: https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Se...

[nabla9]

You read it wrong. Here is who it applies to:

>(a) When any member of the clergy, practitioner, county coroner or medical examiner, law enforcement officer, professional school personnel, registered or licensed nurse, social service counselor, psychologist, pharmacist, employee of the department of children, youth, and families, licensed or certified child care providers or their employees, employee of the department of social and health services, juvenile probation officer, diversion unit staff, placement and liaison specialist, responsible living skills program staff, HOPE center staff, state family and children's ombuds or any volunteer in the ombuds' office, or host home program has reasonable cause to believe that a child has suffered abuse or neglect, he or she shall report such incident, or cause a report to be made, to the proper law enforcement agency or to the department as provided ...

>(b) When any person, in his or her official supervisory capacity with a nonprofit or for-profit organization, has reasonable cause to believe that a child has suffered abuse or neglect caused by a person over whom he or she regularly exercises supervisory authority, he or she shall report such incident, or cause a report to be made, to the proper law enforcement agency, provided that the person alleged to have caused the abuse or neglect is employed by, contracted by, or volunteers with the organization and coaches, trains, educates, or counsels a child or children or regularly has unsupervised access to a child or children as part of the employment, contract, or voluntary service. ....

[cge]

You are referring to the applicability in general for reporting. I was referring specifically to the change in the exception for privileged communication:

> Except for members of the clergy, no one shall be required to report under this section when he or she obtains the information solely as a result of a privileged communication as provided in RCW 5.60.060.14.

Here, the change in this bill specifically was to add the “except for members of the clergy“.

The tendency on this site to immediately leap toward assuming someone is simply wrong, without first considering that they may be saying something different, is rather dismaying.

[TheNewsIsHere]

> The tendency on this site to immediately leap toward assuming someone is simply wrong, without first considering that they may be saying something different, is rather dismaying.

While I agree with you, it’s also in keeping with typical Silicon Valley behavior. Edit: which isn’t a defense of that tendency by any means.