Texas Senate Bill SB562

Texas 2013 - 83rd Regular

Caption

Relating to the license qualifications and continuing education requirements for polygraph examiners.

Impact

The bill's changes are significant in that they aim to enhance the standards of practice within the field of polygraphy. By mandating rigorous educational and competency assessments, SB562 can lead to more reliable usage of polygraphs in investigations, thereby potentially impacting the criminal justice system's handling of cases that rely on such evidence. Moreover, it ensures that only qualified individuals can practice, which could raise public trust in polygraph results. The bill provides an out-of-state licensing waiver for applicants with equivalent qualifications, which could streamline the licensing process for experienced examiners moving to Texas.

Summary

Senate Bill 562 seeks to revise the licensing qualifications and continuing education requirements for polygraph examiners in Texas. The bill amends various sections of the Occupations Code to establish clearer standards for those wishing to obtain or maintain licensure as polygraph examiners. It introduces a definition for the polygraph instrument and specifies the qualifications necessary for a person to be licensed to use such devices for compensation. Among these qualifications are the completion of an approved course of study and an examination to assess the individual's competency.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB562 revolve around the effectiveness and ethical considerations of polygraph testing. While supporters argue that tightened qualifications will increase the professionalism of the field, opponents may raise concerns regarding the scientific reliability of the polygraph itself. Questions may also be raised about the adequacy of training programs and the standards used to assess competency, especially regarding how these may vary between states. Furthermore, the potential for misuse of polygraphs in legal settings and their impact on defendants' rights could prompt debate among legal scholars and practitioners.