Texas Senate Bill SB256

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Filed: 12/10/10
• Out of Senate Committee: 3/14/11
• Voted on by Senate: 3/24/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/11/11
• Voted on by House: 5/20/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Enrolled: 5/21/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to requiring a private autopsy facility to post a notice for filing a complaint against a physician; providing a penalty.

Impact

The bill, upon implementation, will amend the Health and Safety Code by adding a new chapter specifically addressing the requirements for private autopsy facilities. One key aspect is the requirement for these facilities to display notices in both English and Spanish, which reinforces the bill's objective of making complaint procedures accessible to a wider demographic. The goal of these provisions is not just regulatory compliance but also protecting public interest and fostering trust in the medical examination and autopsy processes.

Summary

SB256 introduces requirements for private autopsy facilities in Texas, mandating that they post notices regarding how complaints against physicians can be filed. This legislation aims to increase accountability within private autopsy services, ensuring that adequate information is made available to the public about the process for registering complaints. It emphasizes transparency between service providers and the families seeking these services, creating a formalized channel for addressing grievances related to autopsy procedures and physician conduct.

Contention

Supporters of SB256 argue that the bill enhances the rights of individuals and families by providing them with clear information about how to voice concerns regarding physician performance. Conversely, opponents may express apprehensions about the potential implications for the operations of private autopsy facilities, including possible increased bureaucracy and penalties for non-compliance. The prescribed penalties for failing to post the required notice are classified as Class C misdemeanors, which proponents believe will serve as a sufficient deterrent but may raise concerns about operational burdens for smaller facilities.