Georgia 2023-2024 Regular Session

Georgia Senate Bill SB348

Introduced
1/10/24  
Refer
1/11/24  
Introduced
1/10/24  
Report Pass
1/23/24  
Refer
1/11/24  
Engrossed
1/30/24  
Report Pass
1/23/24  
Report Pass
2/13/24  
Engrossed
1/30/24  
Enrolled
4/2/24  
Report Pass
2/13/24  
Chaptered
4/23/24  
Enrolled
4/2/24  
Chaptered
4/23/24  

Caption

Notification of Suspicious or Unusual Deaths; individual had not been seen by a physician prior to death; revise the period

Impact

This legislation seeks to streamline the process of reporting and investigating unusual deaths by establishing clearer guidelines. By redefining what constitutes an unattended death, SB348 could simplify responses from law enforcement and medical examiners. The amendments could lead to more efficient handling of cases that require investigation, thereby enhancing the state’s ability to monitor and manage such incidents effectively.

Summary

Senate Bill 348 aims to amend the regulations surrounding the notification of suspicious or unusual deaths in Georgia. The bill revises the existing Code Section 45-16-24, originally detailing the criteria under which a death is classified as unattended. Notably, it changes the timeframe in which an individual must have seen a physician prior to death to avoid being labeled as unattended from 180 days to 60 days. Additionally, it clarifies that deaths occurring in long-term care facilities will not be considered unattended if appropriate medical oversight was provided within the preceding 90 days.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around SB348 appears to support the revisions, as many stakeholders see the potential benefits of reducing bureaucratic hurdles in the investigation of deaths. However, some apprehensions exist regarding the implications for accountability if the definitions facilitate leniencies around medical oversight and reporting.

Contention

Notable points of contention center on how the redefined criteria may impact the oversight of medical procedures and the protection of vulnerable populations, particularly in long-term care facilities. Critics of the bill might argue that the new deadlines could result in a lack of thorough examinations of certain cases that would previously have benefitted from extended scrutiny when a longer timeframe was in effect.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.