Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-101
(February, 1965, P.A. 580, S. 1-3; 1967, P.A. 317; 1969, P.A. 25; 1971, P.A. 216; P.A. 73-205, S. 1; P.A. 74-293, S. 1-3; P.A. 75-270; 75-384, S. 1-6, 9; 75-420, S. 4, 6; P.A. 76-27, S. 1, 2; 76-436, S. 586, 681; P.A. 77-308, S. 1, 4; 77-614, S. 486, 521, 587, 610; P.A. 78-303, S. 85, 136; P.A. 79-631, S. 60, 111; P.A. 80-190, S. 4; P.A. 81-91, S. 2; 81-472, S. 29, 159; P.A. 82-203; P.A. 86-337, S. 6; P.A. 88-218; 88-333; P.A. 89-160, S. 1, 2; 89-168, S. 1; P.A. 92-76 , S. 1 ; P.A. 93-91 , S. 1 , 2 ; 93-340 , S. 4 , 19 ; P.A. 94-221 , S. 21 ; P.A. 95-103 ; 95-289 , S. 7 ; P.A. 96-246 , S. 1 ; P.A. 99-102 , S. 13 ; P.A. 00-49 , S. 6 , 7 ; P.A. 02-106 , S. 3 ; 02-138 , S. 12 ; P.A. 09-185 , S. 8 ; 09-242 , S. 2 ; P.A. 10-43 , S. 12 ; P.A. 11-93 , S. 3 ; P.A. 12-82 , S. 8 ; 12-119 , S. 7 ; P.A. 13-214 , S. 7 ; P.A. 14-39 , S. 63 ; 14-186 , S. 6 ; P.A. 15-143 , S. 9 ; 15-205 , S. 1 ; 15-227 , S. 25 ; P.A. 16-163 , S. 16 ; P.A. 17-81 , S. 7 ; P.A. 18-17 , S. 1 .)
Annotations to former section 17-38a: Cited. 165 C. 288 ; 177 C. 648 ; 179 C. 155 ; 187 C. 431 ; 189 C. 276; 192 C. 254 ; 195 C. 344 ; 214 C. 256 ; 217 C. 459 . Cited. 6 CA 7 ; Id., 360; 8 CA 656 ; 12 CA 585 ; 23 CA 410 ; 25 Conn.App. 586 ; judgment reversed, see 223 Conn. 492 ; 30 CA 794 ; 31 CA 400 ; judgment reversed, see 230 C. 459 . Cited. 35 CS 241 ; 41 CS 23 . Annotations to present section: Cited. 224 C. 29 ; 240 C. 549 ; 242 C. 1 . Class of persons protected by statute is limited to those children who have been abused or neglected and are, or should have been, the subject of a mandated report; thus, trial court properly concluded that defendant did not owe a duty of care to child who sustained head injury while attending a licensed day care facility because child was not within the class of persons protected by statute. 267 C. 539. Cited. 25 Conn.App. 586 ; judgment reversed, see 223 Conn. 492 ; 26 CA 58 ; 30 Conn.App. 794 ; 40 Conn.App. 233 . In second proceeding re determination of abuse and neglect of a child, no collateral estoppel where issue is termination of parental rights. 50 CA 805 . Arbitration award reinstating driver of children for department who was guilty of drug charges under Secs. 21a-277 and 21a-278 violates public policy of protecting children of the state. 59 CA 793 . Doctrine of predictive neglect; sufficient evidence found for court to determine child was neglected by reason of being permitted to live under conditions, circumstances or associations injurious to her well-being. 105 CA 502 . Act of triggering the limitation on constancy of accusation testimony is the filing of a complaint by the victim with the police, not the filing of a complaint by a mandated reporter with department. 140 CA 241 . Subsec. (a): Cited. 224 C. 263 . Section does not expressly obligate employer to accommodate an employee's work-at-home requests or to refrain from taking adverse action against an employee who persists in efforts to secure such arrangement. 249 C. 766 . Adjudication of neglect may be based on potential risk of harm. 58 CA 119 .
See Sec. 10-145b re revocation of certificates issued by the State Board of Education. See Sec. 17a-49 re grants for programs for treatment and prevention of child abuse and neglect.