Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-601 (2026)
Prevention of child sexual abuse deemed priority of state - Comprehensive approach - Purpose and construction of part
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) The general assembly finds and declares that:
- (1) The incidence of child sexual abuse has a tremendous impact on the victimized child, siblings, family structure, and inevitably on all citizens of this state;
- (2) The detection, intervention, prevention and treatment of child sexual abuse, including a focus on the sexual abuse that occurs within the home, shall be a priority of this state;
- (3) Sexual abuse in any form is destructive to the physical and mental health of a child;
- (4) Ninety-three percent (93%) of all sexual abuse is inflicted by a family member or acquaintance in the child's home environment;
- (5) It is necessary that curriculum addressing sexual abuse include a focus on the in-home abuse; and
- (6) A comprehensive approach for the detection, intervention, prevention and treatment of child sexual abuse, including such abuse that may occur in the home, should be developed for the state and that this planned, comprehensive approach should be used as a basis for funding.
- (b) The purpose of this part shall be the same as that of part 4 of this chapter, and, except as may be expressly herein provided, the provisions of this part shall not be construed as repealing any provisions of part 4 of this chapter or of any other statute, but shall be supplementary thereto and cumulative thereof.
Amended by 2014 Tenn. Acts, ch. 706,s 2, eff. 7/1/2014.
Acts 1985, ch. 478, § 2; 1987, ch. 145, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2022 · leading case: Keisling v. Keisling, 196 S.W.3d 703 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).
Keisling v. Keisling, 196 S.W.3d 703 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “In this connection, it is pertinent to note that the prevention of child abuse is a priority of this State, Tennessee Code Annotated § 37-1-601. Further, it is pertinent to note that false accusations of sexual abuse have become a reprehensible tool, of sorts, and treated as de…”
Munke v. Munke, 882 S.W.2d 803 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “City of Bartlett asserts that under the provisions of T.C.A. § 37-1-601 to § 37-1-616 (1991 & Supp.”
Lopez Ex Rel. Lopez v. Metro. Gov't, 594 F. Supp. 2d 862 (M.D. Tenn. 2009). “Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 37-1-601 et seq. provides a “comprehensive approach for the detection, intervention, prevention and treatment of child sexual abuse,” Tenn.”
Stanley Green v. Nashville & Davidson Cnty. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-601 affirms the same purpose for the section on child sexual abuse.”
Boyd v. Youth Opportunity Investments, LLC (TV1) (E.D. Tenn. 2022). “§ 37-1-601 , et. seq . . . .” See First Amended Complaint at ¶ 16, Llana, No.”
Cassandra Lynn Rudd v. Howard Thomas Rudd (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “§ 37-1-601. As a result of this abuse, the trial court found that daughter is afraid of Father and does not want to live with or visit him.”
Sharon Marcel Keisling v. Daniel Kerry Keisling v. Francisco (Frank) Huberto Guzman & wife, Billie Ann Guzman (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). “In this connection, it is pertinent to note that the prevention of child abuse is a priority of this State, Tennessee Code Annotated § 37-1-601. Further, it is pertinent to note that false accusations of sexual abuse have become a reprehensible tool, of sorts, and treated as de…”
State v. Brooks (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). “Need for Deterrence Ordinarily, the denial of probation based on the need for deterrence of other potential offenders must be supported by specific evidence of the ne ed in the comm unity for deterrence in the commission of crimes like those committed 2 The State cites in its…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 37-1-601(a) — 1 case
State v. Brooks (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). “Need for Deterrence Ordinarily, the denial of probation based on the need for deterrence of other potential offenders must be supported by specific evidence of the ne ed in the comm unity for deterrence in the commission of crimes like those committed 2 The State cites in its…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.