Oh please. It's not the legislature's conclusions; it's the attorney general's conclusion.
The law requires reporting when a person "has reason to suspect that a child has been injured as a result of...sexual abuse".
The attorney general recently decided that "any pregnant female under the age of 16 has been injured as a result of sexual abuse" and therefore needs to be reported under the statute.
His opinion is ridiculous and deserves to be rejected.
Actually it is the legislatures conclusion. The legislature has seen fit to criminalize sexual relations with a person under the age of 16. Presumably they passed that law because they see sexual relations at that age as harmful to those under 16.
Thus, any evidence of sexual relations in that group of folks requires reporting. The reasonable would seem to only come in to play when deciding whether or not sexual realtions indeed happened. Pregnancy (read abortion), the root of the opinion and the court case would seem to be pretty solid evidence that sexual relations had happened. Since sexual relations under the age of 16 is criminal, the reporting of those relations is madatory.
The Attorney General's opinion is just that and the Tenth Circuit has already found his basis rational and overturned this Judges injunction.