Petition for "Caylee's Law"

[X-Era]

http://www.change.org/petitions/create-caylees-law

"Caylee's Law, contact your Senator and Representative: there should be a new federal law created called Caylee's Law that will make it a federal offense for a parent or guardian to not notify law enforcement of a child going missing in a timely manner.
Let's keep another case like Caylee Anthony out of the courts."

Interesting proposal.

But in all legal cases, you must prove the crime. How do you prove that someone knew their child was missing and didn't report it?

Yes, obviously, if you can establish time of death you can then show when a person called or didn't call. But we never knew the time of death with Caylee.

31 days is ridiculous. She was out partying and that should speak volumes about what she knew or didn't know. I think she's guilty as hell, but the evidence wasn't there for a conviction. But here were talking about a new law. And you still have to prove she knew and didn't call.

[rbochan]

Oh dear god.

[Mr. Miyagi]

Can't you claim that you didn't know your child was missing?

[Ebenezer]

Define timely manner. How long does a child have to be missing before police will accept a missing person's report? Does anybody think this will stop somebody from killing there kid? How many times does a kid go missing and the parents don't report it within 24-48 hours?

[Static]

isn't this a bit of a knee-jerk reaction? how long have they thought about this?

[X-Era]

Define timely manner. How long does a child have to be missing before police will accept a missing person's report? Does anybody think this will stop somebody from killing there kid? How many times does a kid go missing and the parents don't report it within 24-48 hours?Yeah. I think this really is someone trying to find a new way to punish someone like Casey.

[Ebenezer]

Yeah. I think this really is someone trying to find a new way to punish someone like Casey.
I think it's somebody with "blood-lust" that just can't accept that the prosecution couldn't prove their case.

[X-Era]

For the sake of discussion :D:

One philosophical question could arise. Does society have any responsibility for keeping children safe? I mean do we, as a society, have some responsibility to protect kids from negligence/abuse/or even death?

What are we, as citizens, and what should our laws cover on protecting childrens safety and proper treatment?

Because on the surface 31 days without caring for your child and (allegedly) not knowing where that child was, is or ought to be unacceptable... and why shouldn't it be punishable by the law?

[YardRat]

For the sake of discussion :D:

One philosophical question could arise. Does society have any responsibility for keeping children safe? I mean do we, as a society, have some responsibility to protect kids from negligence/abuse/or even death?

Because on the surface 31 days without caring for your child and (allegedly) not knowing where that child was is or ought to be unacceptable... and why shouldn't it be punishable by the law?

Obviously our society thinks so, otherwise child protection services wouldn't exist.

[Ebenezer]

For the sake of discussion :D:

One philosophical question could arise. Does society have any responsibility for keeping children safe? I mean do we, as a society, have some responsibility to protect kids from negligence/abuse/or even death?

What are we, as citizens, and what should our laws cover on protecting childrens safety and proper treatment?

Because on the surface 31 days without caring for your child and (allegedly) not knowing where that child was, is or ought to be unacceptable... and why shouldn't it be punishable by the law?
I think I already asked the more important question. How many times does a kid go missing without the child being reported as missing within 24-48 hours and do you think the law will stop the parent from killing the kid and not reporting it as missing?

[X-Era]

I think I already asked the more important question. How many times does a kid go missing without the child being reported as missing within 24-48 hours and do you think the law will stop the parent from killing the kid and not reporting it as missing?I get where you're coming from. Casey could have murdered the child regardless of this law. It's a separate issue I think. Yes, the person(s) proposing this are probably linking the two... I'm not.

a) I'm asking why a charge such as child neglect or abandonment could have not been applied to this case?

b) Should we have a law to prevent someone from ignoring that they have a child and are the primary caregiver for 31 days?

[Ebenezer]

I get where you're coming from. Casey could have murdered the child regardless of this law. It's a separate issue I think. Yes, the person(s) proposing this are probably linking the two... I'm not.

a) I'm asking why a charge such as child neglect or abandonment could have not been applied to this case?

b) Should we have a law to prevent someone from ignoring that they have a child and are the primary caregiver for 31 days?

a) it could have...the prosecution went for a home run.

b) how you going to enforce it? have a cop go door to door to make sure the kid still exists?

[X-Era]

a) it could have...the prosecution went for a home run.

b) how you going to enforce it? have a cop go door to door to make sure the kid still exists?I think I found my own answer:

http://www.wesh.com/r/17769226/detail.html

Yeah, that's kind of my point, how would you a) prove it and b) enforce it.

[X-Era]

But there should be something to prevent someone from hiding the fact that they:

a) Are causing harm to their child
b) Are neglecting their child
c) Are abandoning their child
d) Know that their child has deceased

I mean were talking about someone, who is the primary caregiver, not personally caring for their child or knowingly allowing someone else to care for their child for 31 days... basically, I'm the mom, the 2 year old is gone, and I'm not notifying the authorities for 31 days.

[Ebenezer]

But there should be something to prevent someone from hiding the fact that they:

a) Are causing harm to their child
b) Are neglecting their child
c) Are abandoning their child
d) Know that their child has deceased

I mean were talking about someone, who is the primary caregiver, not personally caring for their child or knowingly allowing someone else to care for their child for 31 days... basically, I'm the mom, the 2 year old is gone, and I'm not notifying the authorities for 31 days.
When they are under 5? No way. What are your choices? Have the pediatrician call if there is no check-up? Have the mother bring the child to town hall on its birthday? Have a cop tuck the kid in every night? Talk about getting the gov't involved in our personal lives. After they are five they have to be enrolled in a school (whether it be public, private or home school). At that point the school could, legally, report that the child has not been in school (a child does need a valid excuse to return to school). Other than that? Forget it.

[DraftBoy]

This law exists already, this is called redundancy, and pointless.

[YardRat]

But there should be something to prevent someone from hiding the fact that they:

a) Are causing harm to their child
b) Are neglecting their child
c) Are abandoning their child
d) Know that their child has deceased

I mean were talking about someone, who is the primary caregiver, not personally caring for their child or knowingly allowing someone else to care for their child for 31 days... basically, I'm the mom, the 2 year old is gone, and I'm not notifying the authorities for 31 days.

http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/

[OpIv37]

"something bad happened and no one was punished. Please, Big Government, step in and pass a feel-good law to give the illusion that something is being done to prevent it from ever happening again. More laws. MORE!!!!"

[Ebenezer]

This law exists already, this is called redundancy, and pointless.
Did not know that.

[Discotrish]

So she can kill the kid and report her missing the next day. It still took them months to find the body.

Patti

[X-Era]

"something bad happened and no one was punished. Please, Big Government, step in and pass a feel-good law to give the illusion that something is being done to prevent it from ever happening again. More laws. MORE!!!!"While I agree, I still will argue the point...

So we should allow a mother to hide that her 2 year old daughter is missing for 31 days?

[X-Era]

http://www.dcf.state.fl.us/What are you showing me?

I'm not a lawyer, but I haven't found a federal law that dictates how long a child can go missing until they must be reported to the authorities.

[X-Era]

When they are under 5? No way. What are your choices? Have the pediatrician call if there is no check-up? Have the mother bring the child to town hall on its birthday? Have a cop tuck the kid in every night? Talk about getting the gov't involved in our personal lives. After they are five they have to be enrolled in a school (whether it be public, private or home school). At that point the school could, legally, report that the child has not been in school (a child does need a valid excuse to return to school). Other than that? Forget it.As I said, I don't see anyway to proactively enforce it. But at the same time, you could potentially punish deadbeat parents/guardians who did nothing about a missing child... But you still have the burden of proof and have to show they knew and that the child was actually missing.

And that's where it gets dicey. I mean do you look at whether the parent was feeding the kid? changing the kid? whether they made dirty diapers during that period? dirty dishes? Do you rely on witnesses to provide evidence that the child was not present?

There may be a way to prove the parent knew the kid wasn't physically under their care.

And

This leads to a bigger difference I have with some folks around here. So often these discussions head down this road where we want to let people do whatever they want and at the same time not stand up for a principle. And in many cases I can agree with the logic when it doesn't hurt anyone else. But here we are talking about a child who cannot care for itself, and a parent who doesn't care for the child or report the child missing for 31 days. By not caring for that child for 31 days and assuming no one else is, they ought to also assume that the child has died... because unless someone else took over caring for the child, that would be true.

[X-Era]

http://www.wjhg.com/home/headlines/125184764.html

Looks like NY is also trying to start this legislation.

[DraftBoy]

What are you showing me?

I'm not a lawyer, but I haven't found a federal law that dictates how long a child can go missing until they must be reported to the authorities.

He's showing you what the federal definition of negligence is, and how those laws already more than cover what this redundant law proposes.

To try and say after X days a child missing must be reported is frankly dumb.

[OpIv37]

While I agree, I still will argue the point...

So we should allow a mother to hide that her 2 year old daughter is missing for 31 days?

First, how is the girl "missing" when the mother knew she was dead and knew where the body was?

Second, even if Caylee was legitimately missing and Casey didn't report it for 31 days, it's a one-off. This isn't a serious problem. It happened once because one mother was a deranged sociopath.

We don't need new laws for every one-time occurrence. We need laws to correct consistent, recurring problems.

[Valerie]

http://www.change.org/petitions/create-caylees-law

"Caylee's Law, contact your Senator and Representative: there should be a new federal law created called Caylee's Law that will make it a federal offense for a parent or guardian to not notify law enforcement of a child going missing in a timely manner.
Let's keep another case like Caylee Anthony out of the courts."

Interesting proposal.

But in all legal cases, you must prove the crime. How do you prove that someone knew their child was missing and didn't report it?

Yes, obviously, if you can establish time of death you can then show when a person called or didn't call. But we never knew the time of death with Caylee.

31 days is ridiculous. She was out partying and that should speak volumes about what she knew or didn't know. I think she's guilty as hell, but the evidence wasn't there for a conviction. But here were talking about a new law. And you still have to prove she knew and didn't call.
Are you really asking people how they would know if their child was missing?!?!?!?!? Really? I'm gonna go out on a wild limb here and say you'd know because usually a 2 year old lives with you and isn't out partying. I'm also gonna go out on a wild limb and say if your child goes away on a sleep over or vacation with someone other than you, you'd know it and you'd most likely as a parent, talk to your child every day they were gone. Some parents report their 22 year old kids missing after 2 hours. You really don't think a mother of an infant wouldn't know that her child was missing after say a day? Really?!?!?!??!

[X-Era]

He's showing you what the federal definition of negligence is, and how those laws already more than cover what this redundant law proposes.

To try and say after X days a child missing must be reported is frankly dumb.The link goes to Florida's Department of Children and Families.

Heres neglect to the fed's:

http://www.childwelfare.gov/can/defining/federal.cfm

As I already said, I have no idea why they didn't go after this charge. My guess, again not a lawyer, is that they didn't have the proof or as EB said went after the bigger charge.

But,

"Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation"

At least for that part, it would appear you could know your child is missing and as long as they are fine, there is no charge... It would appear that you can simply ignore your responsibility for a child for 31 days, have no idea where they are, and not be charged with neglect as long as they turn out to be fine.

"results in" seems to imply you have to then prove that the neglect caused death in Caylee's case... but the duct tape would seem to say she was murdered... Caseys defense attorney might argue that Caylee was murdered so therefore her not knowing where she was wouldn't constitute neglect.

Put it this way, neglect seems to be worded differently than what this proposal is looking at. This proposal is looking to make it a crime to simply not report a missing child... whether they end up harmed or not, regardless of where they are or whom they are with... It's to go after the thought that it's unacceptable to knowingly ignore contacting the authorities when you have a missing child.

[X-Era]

First, how is the girl "missing" when the mother knew she was dead and knew where the body was?

Second, even if Caylee was legitimately missing and Casey didn't report it for 31 days, it's a one-off. This isn't a serious problem. It happened once because one mother was a deranged sociopath.

We don't need new laws for every one-time occurrence. We need laws to correct consistent, recurring problems.How this may relate to this case is that you may be able to apply a more serious charge even if you can't get a conviction for murder. That seems to be one of the intents for this proposed law.

Because it's absolutely obscene to not be caring for your daughter for 31 days and not reporting it... You, I, and pretty much everyone is on the same page in that she knew the kid was dead because she killed her. But rather than let her walk with a ridiculous lying to police charge, she should be punished for not notifying police when she (supposedly) had no idea where her child was for 31 days.

Although no one can say it, a fringe benefit of this proposed law is to lock up people who commit murder that can't be proven and who tried to hide it.

[X-Era]

Are you really asking people how they would know if their child was missing?!?!?!?!? Really? I'm gonna go out on a wild limb here and say you'd know because usually a 2 year old lives with you and isn't out partying. I'm also gonna go out on a wild limb and say if your child goes away on a sleep over or vacation with someone other than you, you'd know it and you'd most likely as a parent, talk to your child every day they were gone. Some parents report their 22 year old kids missing after 2 hours. You really don't think a mother of an infant wouldn't know that her child was missing after say a day? Really?!?!?!??!Please re-read. Anyone person of sound mind will know whether their child is missing or not.

To charge someone with this proposed crime, you would have to prove that they knew the child was missing.

The law is not about what makes sense but what you can prove. To write a law like this you have to prove when the child went missing and then that the parent knew and didn't report it... you need proof of that.

[DraftBoy]

The link goes to Florida's Department of Children and Families.

Which outlines the definition of negligence which is taken from federal law.

[OpIv37]

How this may relate to this case is that you may be able to apply a more serious charge even if you can't get a conviction for murder. That seems to be one of the intents for this proposed law.

Because it's absolutely obscene to not be caring for your daughter for 31 days and not reporting it... You, I, and pretty much everyone is on the same page in that she knew the kid was dead because she killed her. But rather than let her walk with a ridiculous lying to police charge, she should be punished for not notifying police when she (supposedly) had no idea where her child was for 31 days.

Although no one can say it, a fringe benefit of this proposed law is to lock up people who commit murder that can't be proven and who tried to hide it.

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that most jurisdictions have child neglect/child endangerment laws that would already cover this.

And I know it's going to be very difficult to determine the appropriate length of time after which a child should be reported missing, and damn near impossible to prove when a parent actually knew that the child was missing.

[rbochan]

Given the speed at which knees jerk nowadays, I'm surprised there aren't more broken noses.

[X-Era]

I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that most jurisdictions have child neglect/child endangerment laws that would already cover this.

And I know it's going to be very difficult to determine the appropriate length of time after which a child should be reported missing, and damn near impossible to prove when a parent actually knew that the child was missing.I think the proposed law would cover a different angle than child negligence. When I took penal code forever ago, each crime has aspects that must be proven and conditions that must be met. In NY:

Failure to report something has a legal precedence. It is illegal to simply not report something:

<table id="crimelist"><tbody><tr><td>failing to report criminal communications </td><td>250.35</td><td>B misdemeanor</td></tr></tbody></table> <table id="crimelist"><tbody><tr><td>failure to report wiretapping </td><td>250.15</td><td>B misdemeanor </td></tr></tbody></table>
Laws that would seem to apply may not:

260.10 Endangering the welfare of a child. A person is guilty of endangering the welfare of a child when: 1. He knowingly acts in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a child less than seventeen years old or directs or authorizes such child to engage in an occupation involving a substantial risk of danger to his life or health; or 2. Being a parent, guardian or other person legally charged with the care or custody of a child less than eighteen years old, he fails or refuses to exercise reasonable diligence in the control of such child to prevent him from becoming an "abused child," a "neglected child," a "juvenile delinquent" or a "person in need of supervision," as those terms are defined in articles ten, three and seven of the family court act. Endangering the welfare of a child is a class A misdemeanor.

260.00 Abandonment of a child. A person is guilty of abandonment of a child when, being a parent, guardian or other person legally charged with the care or custody of a child less than fourteen years old, he deserts such child in any place with intent to wholly abandon it. Abandonment of a child is a class E felony.

Endangerment doesn't apply -Wouldn't apply because there is an injury piece which is not the same as simply neglecting your responsibility.

Abandonment doesn't apply- You have to desert your child, not have your child come up missing. "intent" is a critical word. In the case of a missing child, the parent does not intend to abandon the child.

There's others that also don't apply. Here's the link:

http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article260.htm

Really I don't see that it's illegal to not report a missing child. But by knowingly doing so, at some point since you are the primary caregiver, it should be assumed that your child would be harmed or die due to the lack of care... logically speaking. Age would play a part obviously. In this case a 2 year old left missing with no one even trying to find that child, would absolutely die in 31 days. To make one of these fit you have to show when the person knew the child was missing and then argue that because they knew the child would end up dead it constitutes intent to harm.

Again though, this is state law, not federal.

[X-Era]

Knee jerk?

Were talking about a parent with a 2 year old who comes up missing and he/she does nothing... Without the primary caregiver providing care a 2 year old will die.

It's not physically killing the child, but due to lack of action, that's what will happen.

It should be law that a primary caregiver does everything they can to keep their child alive, including notifying authorities if they cannot ascertain whether their child is being kept from harm/death.

That's like saying if a fire breaks out in my house, my kids are inside and I'm outside, and I just let it burn (didn't start it) and it kills my kids, it's not murder... I agree it's not... but it still is knowingly allowing my child to die by some other cause. In this case it could be exposure to the elements, starvation, dehydration, etc... 31 days would kill a 2 year old.

And no, so far from what I found, It does not appear to already be covered.

[Ebenezer]

I ask again. How many times has a kid been missing for more than 2 days without a parent calling them missing? In those cases, how many were killed by said parent? It's just something else to clog the law - it will not protect the child. It MIGHT help convict somebody. You are beating a dead horse.

[X-Era]

I ask again. How many times has a kid been missing for more than 2 days without a parent calling them missing? In those cases, how many were killed by said parent? It's just something else to clog the law - it will not protect the child. It MIGHT help convict somebody. You are beating a dead horse.No I'm not. What's wrong with convicting someone who won't report that the child that depends on them to stay alive is missing?

2 days may be a bad time frame, a child with no food or water can stay alive in two days. There are known time tables for how long people will stay alive based on environmental conditions, need for water, and food

Age and time matter I agree. There is an age where a human is capable of finding food, water, etc... No idea what it might be... 2 isn't it, I'm pretty sure.

[SaviorEdwards]

LOLOL What a useless law. Can we also have a law that mandates eating and breathing so our citizens don't start dropping dead. :tobykeith

[X-Era]

LOLOL What a useless law. Can we also have a law that mandates eating and breathing so our citizens don't start dropping dead. :tobykeithNo, I think we should just remove the government completely from taking responsibility to step in and care for those who cannot or choose not to care for themselves.

Should be a bunch of money back into the taxpayer pockets when we stop worrying about whether someone dies due to lack of food or water.

[SaviorEdwards]

No, I think we should just remove the government completely from taking responsibility to step in and care for those who cannot or choose not to care for themselves.

Should be a bunch of money back into the taxpayer pockets when we stop worrying about whether someone dies due to lack of food or water.

Able bodied welfare recipients = 1
Helpless children = 0

Parent knows their kid is missing and will die if left alone, but they choose to do nothing about it... Yep, useless to write law against that.

Some people can actually take care of themselves and they don't need the government for every little thing. :list:

I understand you want big government and need their leadership in telling you which light bulbs you're allowed to use though.

[X-Era]

Some people can actually take care of themselves and they don't need the government for every little thing. :list:

I understand you want big government and need their leadership in telling you which light bulbs you're allowed to use though.
I'm actually against big government and ridiculous spending... especially on social programs.

So were clear,

Who is the government responsible for the welfare of?

Able bodied people who choose not to work = 1
Helpless children with parents who choose not to report them missing = 0

[Ebenezer]

I'm actually against big government and ridiculous spending... especially on social programs.

So were clear,

Who is the government responsible for the welfare of?

Able bodied people who choose not to work = 1
Helpless children with parents who choose not to report them missing = 0
X, Making a law to enforce that the parent report that they are missing is not going to prevent the parent from harming or killing the kid.

[Mr. Pink]

Pointless law, waste of time, waste of taxpayer dollars to even consider it.

Caylee was never missing, she was dead, Casey knew it, her father knew it, her mother knew it. How she died is the problem which no one will ever know but I'm sure none of the three have clean hands in what occurred.

The three of them after finding out/killing Caylee, became scared and hid the body instead of reporting it.

How this is even getting a moniker of "Caylee's Law" is baffling, since the girl was never missing. Just as baffling was that Casey was charged with child neglect.

[X-Era]

X, Making a law to enforce that the parent report that they are missing is not going to prevent the parent from harming or killing the kid.I agree. A benefit of the law may be to punsih a parent who tried to hide the whereabouts of their child when there isn't adequate proof that they killed the child. You could charge them with this crime even if you can't prove murder.

Maybe this one is about punishment and not prevention. Failure to report is by nature in the past tense.

Murder charges don't prevent murder... That's also past tense.

[X-Era]

Pointless law, waste of time, waste of taxpayer dollars to even consider it.

Caylee was never missing, she was dead, Casey knew it, her father knew it, her mother knew it. How she died is the problem which no one will ever know but I'm sure none of the three have clean hands in what occurred.

The three of them after finding out/killing Caylee, became scared and hid the body instead of reporting it.

How this is even getting a moniker of "Caylee's Law" is baffling, since the girl was never missing. Just as baffling was that Casey was charged with child neglect.

Maybe it should be retitled to "Punish scum-bags like Casey Law"

Forget this case.

If you are in charge of keeping your child a live, and they go missing, you must immediately assume that no one is taking care of that child and that it will die.

If you contact the authorities you involve the government in finding the child and are doing due diligence to continue to keep the child alive. At that point its the best you can do. If you do not you are knowingly allowing that child to go uncared for which will lead to its death (based on age).

Anyone who has a child and knows the responsibility there does not think this is pointless. I'm shocked that it's not already illegal to go 31 days without notifying the authorities that your 2 year old is missing.

[Mr. Pink]

Maybe it should be retitled to "Punish scum-bags like Casey Law"

Forget this case.

If you are in charge of keeping your child a live, and they go missing, you must immediately assume that no one is taking care of that child and that it will die.

If you contact the authorities you involve the government in finding the child and are doing due diligence to continue to keep the child alive. At that point its the best you can do. If you do not you are knowingly allowing that child to go uncared for which will lead to its death (based on age).

Anyone who has a child and knows the responsibility there does not think this is pointless. I'm shocked that it's not already illegal to go 31 days without notifying the authorities that your 2 year old is missing.

A person could just do what the Anthony family did here and then lied on the initial phone call saying that the 2 year old had been gone for about 24 hours.

If a person dumps off a body in swamp somewhere to the point where it's next to impossible to find and then ravaged by elements, animals, etc...there is no way to prove the person reported it in 1 day or 30. Well unless the police somehow find the body a day or two after the initial call.

I don't really get how this law really does anything to a scumbag like Casey or the rest of her immediate family. The average sane family someone is contacting the authorities within 24 hours anyways.

[OpIv37]

I agree. A benefit of the law may be to punsih a parent who tried to hide the whereabouts of their child when there isn't adequate proof that they killed the child.

Here's the problem: how many times does this situation actually ever occur? It happened once. We don't need a new law every time something happens.

[X-Era]

A person could just do what the Anthony family did here and then lied on the initial phone call saying that the 2 year old had been gone for about 24 hours.

If a person dumps off a body in swamp somewhere to the point where it's next to impossible to find and then ravaged by elements, animals, etc...there is no way to prove the person reported it in 1 day or 30. Well unless the police somehow find the body a day or two after the initial call.

I don't really get how this law really does anything to a scumbag like Casey or the rest of her immediate family. The average sane family someone is contacting the authorities within 24 hours anyways.This law, potentially, punishes Casey for failing to report that her daughter was missing for 31 days. That is a charge that she could potentially be convicted on which in and of itself ought to be punishable. Whether it makes sense for her to do nothing, whether she committed something else, etc... doesn't matter for this charge. It's potentially a charge that may stick when other don't/can't.

And if you look at just that charge, we laugh it off like who in their right mind wouldn't do that... but maybe that means we ought to legally cover it... and that's why I'm shocked that it isn't already (by my assessment).

[X-Era]

Here's the problem: how many times does this situation actually ever occur? It happened once. We don't need a new law every time something happens.Please tell me you don't actually think a parent has never knowingly hidden the fact that their child is missing before.

The reason for concealing a missing child is likely something more sinister but even if you couldn't prove the worse act, you might still be able to prove that they didn't report their child missing.

The part that seems silly here is why exactly don't we want to insist that parents have to report their children as missing after X amount of time? I'm missing why that's a bad thing. We want people to be able to ignore that their 2 year old child is missing? Why is that again?

[OpIv37]

Please tell me you don't actually think a parent has never knowingly hidden the fact that their child is missing before.

The reason for concealing a missing child is likely something more sinister but even if you couldn't prove the worse act, you might still be able to prove that they didn't report their child missing.

The part that seems silly here is why exactly don't we want to insist that parents have to report their children as missing after X amount of time? I'm missing why that's a bad thing. We want people to be able to ignore that their 2 year old child is missing? Why is that again?
We don't want to insist on it because it's not a problem. No one would even be talking about this if it wasnt for this case. You don't need laws to correct problems that don't really exist..

If you show me proof that this is a real problem, I will change my mind. Until then it's just a knee-jerk emotional reaction to one tragedy.