BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 1189 (Pan) - Postmortem examinations or autopsies: forensic
pathologists
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: April 26, 2016 |Policy Vote: HEALTH 6 - 2 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: May 23, 2016 |Consultant: Brendan McCarthy |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill
Summary: SB 1189 would require a forensic autopsy to be
conducted by a licensed physician and require the results of the
forensic autopsy and the cause and manner of death to be
determined by a licensed physician. The bill would place
restrictions on who could be present for an autopsy.
Fiscal
Impact: Potentially significant state reimbursement costs, due
to the requirement in the bill that a licensed physician
determine the cause and manner of death (General Fund).
By requiring a physician to determine the manner of death in
cases where there is a forensic autopsy, the bill may impose
additional costs on coroner's offices to have physicians review
information developed by investigators and make the final
determination of the manner of death. Whether the Commission on
state mandates would rule that this requirement imposes a higher
level of service (and is therefore reimbursable by the state) is
unknown. If the Commission did rule that the bill imposes a
SB 1189 (Pan) Page 1 of
?
reimbursable mandate, the costs to the state could be
considerable. The hourly rate to employ or contract with
pathologists is significantly higher than the costs for
investigators. The statewide costs to require pathologists to
make the determination of the manner of death could be in the
millions per year.
Background: Under current law, a coroner is required to determine the
cause and manner of death under certain circumstances. In a
minority of deaths, coroners offices conduct a forensic autopsy
to determine the cause of death. Under current practice, most
coroner's offices employ or contract with forensic pathologists
to conduct autopsies. When there is an autopsy, the pathologist
determines the cause of death. The manner of death is determined
by the coroner from the autopsy report (if there is one) and
from information developed by investigators in the coroner's
office. The bill would require a licensed physician to perform
the autopsy and to determine both the cause and manner of death.
Proposed Law:
SB 1189 would require a forensic autopsy to be conducted by a
licensed physician and require the results of the forensic
autopsy and the cause and manner of death to be determined by a
licensed physician.
The bill would require that all persons in the autopsy suite
have specified training and authorize certain law enforcement
personnel to be in the autopsy suite, at the discretion of the
pathologist. The bill would prohibit law enforcement personnel
directly involved with a death related to law enforcement
activity from being involved in a postmortem exam or autopsy.
Staff
Comments: The bill requires forensic autopsies to be conducted
by a physician, whereas current law makes autopsies the
responsibility of coroners. In theory, this change in law
imposes a new mandate on coroners offices. Under current
practice, coroners offices currently use physicians to conduct
forensic autopsies, either by employing physicians directly of
SB 1189 (Pan) Page 2 of
?
contracting for their services. Given that the use of physicians
is standard practice, it is unlikely that the Commission on
State Mandates would rule that the requirement to use a
physician requires a new or higher level of service by coroners
offices. Therefore, it is not likely that the state would be
required to reimburse local governments for those costs.
The requirements in the bill regarding who is allowed to be
present for an autopsy are not likely to be ruled reimbursable
state mandates.The bill generally prohibits people who have not
had certain training from being present for an autopsy, rather
than requiring all law enforcement personnel to have such
training. The Commission is not likely to rule that these
requirements require a new or higher level of service from law
enforcement agencies or coroners offices. Therefore, it is not
likely that the state would be required to reimburse local
governments for those costs.
-- END --