Death Certificates - Fees - First Responders Killed in the Line of Duty
The impact of HB 900 on state laws is significant as it creates a clear exemption in the existing fee structure for death certificates in cases involving first responders. This legislation modifies sections of the Health-General Article in the Annotated Code of Maryland, ensuring that families entitled to such certificates for benefit claims do not incur unnecessary costs. This change not only reflects a commitment to honor first responders but also addresses the pressing needs of their families in the aftermath of tragic events.
House Bill 900 aims to amend the regulations surrounding the fees charged for certified or abridged copies of death certificates, specifically for first responders who have been killed in the line of duty. The bill prohibits the Maryland Department of Health and local health departments from collecting any fees for these death certificates when they are issued to the surviving spouse or child of the first responder, provided that the certificate will be used for a claim related to benefits. This legislative change is positioned as a support mechanism for families of fallen first responders, alleviating some of the financial burdens they face during an already difficult time.
Overall sentiment around HB 900 appears positive, with widespread support recognized for its intent to honor those who serve their communities. Lawmakers generally expressed their appreciation for first responders and aimed to provide tangible benefits to their families. While there didn't seem to be significant opposition to the bill, discussions may reflect varying opinions on the adequacy of the support provided to families of first responders in general.
While the bill passed unanimously with a vote of 46-0, it did highlight broader issues concerning the treatment of first responders and the adequacy of benefits provided to their families. The lack of contention in the vote shows a consensus on the need for support for families of first responders; however, it raises questions about whether additional measures should also be considered to further assist these families in times of need.