The paper examines seven court cases involving charges of child molestation, and discusses the question of whether social study reports constitute competent evidence and may form the basis of jurisdictional determination. The author concludes that the California dependency process lacks procedural safeguards necessary to comport with due process. In large measure this is due to lower evidentiary standards (compared to other civil proceedings) in the admission of social study reports and the degree to which the dependency court is allowed to rely on them. He recommends that, to restore a modicum of procedural due process, California should enact Senate Bill 86, which gives a parent a more meaningful opportunity to refute child abuse allegations, and adopt a measure similar to a Washington, D.C. statute which compels the State to demonstrate that there is an available placement likely to be less damaging to the child than the child's own home before removal. Footnotes