This bill amends both the Evidence Code and the Health and Safety Code to reflect its stance on excited delirium. It expressly states that any evidence related to a person experiencing excited delirium will not be admissible in civil actions. However, other descriptive aspects of a person’s behavior can still be discussed in court, provided they do not attribute those behaviors to the term excited delirium. This provision attempts to balance recognition of factual circumstances surrounding cases while restricting potential misuse of this term in legal judgments.
Summary
Assembly Bill 360 addresses the concept of excited delirium, which has been a controversial term in medical and legal discussions. The bill specifically prohibits the recognition of excited delirium as a valid medical diagnosis or cause of death within the state of California. Consequently, coroners, medical examiners, and other healthcare professionals are barred from documenting this term on a death certificate or in any related reports. The legislation aims to standardize the criteria for what constitutes a legitimate medical diagnosis, ultimately removing a term viewed by many as scientifically unsupported from official documentation and legal considerations.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding AB 360 appears to be mixed. Proponents argue that it serves to protect the integrity of medical diagnoses and prevent potential overuse of the term excited delirium, which they believe lacks sufficient clinical validation. Conversely, critics of the bill express concern that this legislation undermines important discussions around psychiatric and physiological states that may arise during encounters with law enforcement or in emergency situations. This tension highlights the ongoing debate regarding definitions of medical conditions and the implications for both patients and healthcare providers.
Contention
Notable points of contention regarding AB 360 involve the potential consequences for law enforcement and forensic assessments. By disallowing the use of excited delirium in incident reports and legal documentation, opponents argue that vital information regarding individuals' behaviors in critical situations may be lost, thereby affecting the context in which events are interpreted. Additionally, some fear that the bill may set a precedent that limits the ability of professionals to fully discuss mental conditions in the legal context, which could have broader implications for justice and health policy.
Peace Officer Standards and Training Board prohibited from certifying a continuing education course that includes training on "excited delirium" or similar terms.
Peace Officer Standards and Training Board prohibited from certifying a continuing education course that includes training on "excited delirium" or similar terms.
An Act Concerning Intimate Examinations, Continuing Medical Education In Screening For Endometriosis And The Effects Of Systemic Racism, Bias, Racial Disparities, And Experiences Of Transgender And Gender Diverse Persons On Patient Diagnosis, Care And Treatment, The Establishment Of An Endometriosis Data And Biorepository Program, And The Breast And Cervical Cancer Early Detection And Treatment Referral Program.