The Georgia

Supreme Court by a 4-3 margin has ruled that a local doctor acted appropriately

in reporting a case of suspected child abuse that led to a suit against

her for overstepping her bounds under Georgia's law that requires doctors

and others to make such reports.

Dr. Sara O'Heron

and her then-employer, The Emory Clinic, were sued by Thomas Blaney and

his wife, Jean Blaney, after O'Heron's report from an exam of the Blaney's

two granddaughters in 1997 led to criminal charges being filed against

them.

The Blaneys

were charged with child molestation, sodomy, incest and contributing to

the deprivation of a minor but the charges were later dropped after a

grand jury heard the evidence in the case in 1999 and declined to indict

the Blaneys.

The Blaneys

later sued O'Heron and The Emory Clinic, alleging that O'Heron acted in

bad faith in making the allegation of child abuse.

But "because

the children's allegations are sufficient to cause a reasonable person

to suspect that child abuse has occurred," O'Heron qualifies for

immunity from prosecution, the court ruled.

The dissenting

opinion, written by Justice George H. Carley, asserts that the statute

requires "good faith" on behalf of the person reporting the

abuse, and the suit filed by the Blaneys "raises material issues

of motive, intent, honesty and 'moral obliquity'" on O'Heron's part

in reference to her testimony and actions in the case.

"... It

is certainly possible for a reporter of child abuse to have an objectively

reasonable cause to make the report, and at the same time, have a subjective,

honest belief that abuse has not occurred," Carley wrote in his opinion.

He was joined in his dissent by Presiding Justice Leah Ward Sears and

Justice Robert Benham.

The opinion

for the majority of the court indicates that the legislature has made

it clear "that reporting is essential to protecting innocent children

from abuse."

Requiring that

the report be made on good faith "chills the reporting requirement

and fails to honor the legislative goal of protecting children by encouraging

the reporting of suspected child abuse," the majority wrote.

In court documents,

the Blaneys accused O'Heron of trying to justify her original findings,

which were contradicted by an exam of the victims that was performed by

another doctor two weeks prior.

Other medical

experts indicated that O'Heron erred in saying she could pinpoint the

time of the abuse to the weekend the victims spent with the Blaneys, according

to court documents.

The Blaneys

were represented by Atlanta attorney Albert M. Pearson III.