The decision to leave a case of child abuse in the hands of social services rather than to prosecute generally is based on several incorrect assumptions. A case example is presented to illustrate the mistaken bases of these assumptions and the way in which failing to prosecute can prove harmful. Several community interests are well-served by criminal prosecution of child abuse and include the fact that criminal prosecution gives an offender a criminal record that, in contrast with a social service record, follows the perpetrator from State to State. The results of a number of research studies dispute the notion that prosecution is necessarily and in all cases harmful to the child victim. Finally, in regard to treatment, an approach that can be effective in many child abuse cases, especially those in which a family member is the perpetrator, combines criminal prosecution and treatment and can include either imprisonment combined with a treatment program or probation with a jail sentence and completion of outpatient, community-based treatment for sexual deviancy. 28 footnotes