Introduction: Mandatory reporting laws aim to strengthen identification and intervention in cases of child abuse and maltreatment. However, research consistently shows that practitioners do not always report suspected abuse to child protection services, even when abuse is recognized. This thesis aims to synthesize review-level literature on barriers to mandatory child abuse reporting and to analyze the findings through the theoretical lens of Street-Level Bureaucracy.

Methods: A systematic search strategy identified relevant reviews on barriers to mandatory child abuse reporting. Recurring barriers were categorized through thematic analysis and organized into professional, organizational, and case-related categories, containing 18 sub-themes. The findings were thereafter analyzed through Street-Level Bureaucracy, focusing on professional discretion using the theoretical variables of constraint, ambiguity, and competing demands.

Results: The findings showed that several barriers recurred consistently across professions and geographical contexts. Several barriers aligned closely with the theoretical variables of professional discretion, particularly to organizational constraints. Ambiguity also aligned with the identified barriers, including uncertainty about roles, evidence of abuse, and type of abuse. Finally, competing demands also aligned with barriers related to organizational norms, fear of consequences and concerns that intervention may harm the child or family.

Discussion: Street-Level Bureaucracy was particularly useful for understanding how organizational constraint, uncertainty in reporting situations, and competing professional demands may inhibit or delay reporting decisions in practice. At the same time, some identified barriers extended beyond the explanatory scope of the framework, particularly barriers related to professional competence, child characteristics, and broader cultural influences.