Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Oh, fun story. No. No. You're fine.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Didn't even realize that anybody's behind me. Good morning, afternoon. It is afternoon. We spent so much time on the floor this morning that the whole day seems to have slipped by me. Good morning, or I have to say it twice. Hi, good afternoon. We're going to do a walk through and hear from the reporter of the bill on S-two 10, which is an act relating to autopsy reports and recent bill that was sent over from the Senate. And we have ledge counsel here. We have the report of the bill, Senator Cummings. So welcome to House Human Services, Senator Cummings. Thank you. The floor is yours.

[Senator Ann Cummings]: Thank you. My head from Yeah. Nobody can yeah. On the floor to autopsies. There's a difference. This was an interesting bill. It was brought to us by senator Hardy, and it reflected an issue that one of her constituents had. The constituent came in. She did not give her name, but her story was that her daughter had two children. The father of the two children had been absent for a number of years. The daughter died one night. The father of the children came back from out of state, picked up his kids, had himself declared guardian of the kids, took them out of state. So there was a lot of pain. And, again, I think we realized we're only hearing one side of this story. In the meantime, because he was because of the way the law works, only the daughter's immediate descendants, which would have been her children, and thus the ex partner as the guardian of those children could get the autopsy report. So this mother is left not knowing how her daughter died or why her daughter died. And it was very painful, you know, story to listen to. And so the bill basically said you could go to court and you could, you know, for good reason, get a copy of the autopsy. Sounded fine. Then we had judge Zonet come talk to us. And he put a little reality into the discussion. And the bill that is before you is the suggestion of the judge and has been run by the state's attorneys association so that it allows access, but with the ability to require confidentiality, the ability it gives them some flexibility, but also the ability to set limits on. You may not be able to get the entire autopsy report. Maybe the family the mother doesn't need to know that maybe the daughter was pregnant with somebody. You know? I mean, there are things that that that deceased person may not want to have come out, and that the legal process has the ability to limit the entire autopsy, you know, how much of the report you get, who gets it, to put disclosure requirements or nondisclosure requirements on it. So that we think these are probably rare circumstances. We think the bill keeps doesn't open the door a whole lot, but it does allow something for the rare times that somebody really does seem to have a right to know what happened to a loved one. The last time I heard stories like this was when we were doing civil unions, and somebody's parents came and had the partner's body removed from the grave and took it home to be with them in New Hampshire because the partner had no legal standing at that point. So that's the kind of, I think, we're hoping to prevent. Sure. Thank you. Are there questions for senator Cummings? Yes. Go ahead, Riff Donahue. I I was wondering about, you know, understanding the source, was wondering about the one of

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: the criteria and and source of that is whether the disclosure is necessary for the public evaluation of governmental performance.

[Senator Ann Cummings]: That's the one thing that I think we kinda got our attention. And this was suggested again by the state's attorneys work, and the closest I could come to wrapping my head around it was perhaps you have a law enforcement agency that wasn't reporting things, or perhaps there were more than a normal number of deaths among a certain group in a state facility, that that might be a reason where someone would want to investigate. Why is that happening? I thought it was an excellent

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: I thought that was a really good you know, it's very protective because it's through the judge and so forth, and the countervailing things that might mean forget it, but I think that's important. We shouldn't be

[Senator Ann Cummings]: shielding our bad actions or governmental bad actions from being exposed.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Any other questions? Thank you, senator Cummings. Appreciate it.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Thank you. You. I'm going home.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: A good weekend.

[Senator Ann Cummings]: But I was here until 06:00 a couple nights.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Oh, yeah. Have

[Senator Ann Cummings]: a good day.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: That's a good day.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Too. Katie, can you join us and just run through the bill with us?

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Good afternoon.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Good afternoon.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Hi, Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel. We have S210 from the Senate. Let me pull it up. As you know, this is a bill about autopsy reports. Under, really, federal law now, HIPAA governs who can get an autopsy report. And we don't have any language really in state statute that restates federal law as to who can access an autopsy report. This bill creates a secondary avenue that is HIPAA compliant that creates a court process for somebody to obtain an autopsy report who isn't otherwise authorized to get the report under HIPAA. So as I have structured other things, this bill has a new subsection b. B one restates federal law that you can obtain an autopsy report in compliance with HIPAA. And then the exception or the new path is created in b two, the court process. Before we look at the language, I'll say that the committee downstairs, I think the the witness that provided them the most guidance on this was judge Zonay, and he suggested that the committee look at Wyoming statute. And so, for example, the language you brought up was from the Wyoming statute. So some of the suggestions he gave around the court process was to provide parameters for the judge making the decision about how to make the determination to give the autopsy report, to allow for portions of the autopsy report to be redacted and to have some limitations on whether the autopsy report would be distributed. So that's where a lot of the changes came from. And at the end of this process, there is I was sort of acting as an intermediary to get the various parties on one page. So I think by the time it left the Senate at least, judge Zonay, the health department, and state's attorneys, everybody had ended up on an agreement on that subdivision too. I don't know if that has changed, but it was the case a couple weeks ago. I think that's all I have to tell you about that. So let's jump and look at the language. So B. One, again, this is sort of restating existing federal law that the office of the chief medical examiner shall disclose a decedent's autopsy report to the decedent's personal representative in compliance with HIPAA and its associated regulations, including to the court appointed executor or administrator of the decedent's estate and the decedent's law. Nothing in this subdivision is intended to preclude disclosure of a decedent's autopsy report to other individuals as authorized by federal law. So then we're creating this new path. Subdivision two is what is a new way for somebody to obtain an autopsy report if they can't otherwise get it under HIPAA. So in subdivision two, an individual who is not authorized to receive the report pursuant to one, may petition the probate division of the Superior Court for a copy of the autopsy report. The petition shall contain an affidavit attesting to the petitioner's relationship to the decedent and the reason the petitioner is seeking the autopsy report. The petitioner shall notify the office of the chief medical examiner and the state's attorney of the county in which the death occurred within five days after filing the petition. Then there's an opportunity for notice. The office of the chief medical examiner and the state's attorney have an opportunity to respond within fourteen days after that notice. If the Superior Court finds that the petitioner has demonstrated good cause for the petitioner to obtain the autopsy report and the state's attorney does not object, it shall order the office of the chief medical examiner to provide a copy to the petitioner in whole or in part, so that's the option to redact, and may place restrictions on the petitioner's dissemination of the copy provided. So that could be you may have it, but you may not distribute it to somebody else. And then in subsection b, we have a definition as to what is meant by good cause. The petitioner has to demonstrate good cause to obtain the report. So a court, in determining good cause, would consider the relationship of the petitioner to the decedent and decedent's family, whether the disclosure is necessary for the public evaluation of governmental performance, the seriousness of intrusion into the decedent and the decedent family's privacy. Top of page three, whether the disclosure is by the least intrusive means available, including whether and to what degree redaction of some portions of the autopsy report is appropriate, and the availability of similar information and other public records regardless of form. And then we have a July 1 effective date.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: So Katie, do all of those things have to be present? These are I

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: would guess Judge Leni would have a much better way to answer this. But when a judge is making a decision, they're balancing. So these are factors that are sort of part of that balance.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay. Representative Eastes and I

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: just simply don't know. Can you give me an example of what a small two is, public evaluation of governmental performance?

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Maybe the handling of a police investigation after a suspected murder. Something like that is what comes to mind.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: I'm sure there

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: are other examples.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Well, I would think it first went to taxes. But Oh.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: You never know?

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: No. It's almost April 15. Represent Donahue.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Yeah. I'm looking at lines on on page two, lines seven and eight. Oh, I'm sorry, no, line nine. If the Superior Court finds good cause and the state's attorney does not object, then there's no avenue of what happens if they do object. So does that imply if the state's attorney objects, it's in the water. Yeah. No matter how significant the good cause is.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. And that was So

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: it would

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: expose wrongdoing in the state's attorney's office.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Couldn't release it. That's how I would read it. It was added at the request of the state's attorney, so you may want to hear from them.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Well, another opportunity to have Tim in. Unless the state's attorneys have their own association that I'm not familiar with. Right. Okay. That's a good that's, I think, a good point to raise because it's like a veto power. Right. Right.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: And I could see it being a factor that the judge would know, if the state's attorney is is objecting, well, that's gotta be a significant factor as to why I'm in weighing it. But, yeah, it's an absolute veto power over the judge being able to even look at the evidence.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I get that. Yeah. Which seems like too much authority to me, I'm just going to say, at the reading of it. We'll hear from But I suspect it's with regard to aspects of a criminal case or something, but I think it's-

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Cause then they make the case to the court as to what shouldn't

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: be released because of- Because of. I can see them having an opportunity to review, I guess, and state the reasons. Then the judge should be the one making the determination, I think. Okay. Anybody have any other questions for Katie about, content of the language? Go ahead, representative Bishop. First question would be

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: autopsies. It says it's whether the superior judge or attorney general orders an autopsy. Do we have a sense as to

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Is this the existing language?

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Existing language. Sorry, line six.

[Senator Ann Cummings]: Thank you.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Are

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: they the only two entities that

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Yeah. And I'm just wondering in what is instances it so many criminal instances? Do we have don't know when autopsies come about?

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Yeah. I looked that up over the weekend. But you know, Katie probably answered better because I do not remember the date of What does

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: it say in section five zero four of the title?

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: I'll pull it up for you.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. I don't have a great answer.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: I bet the health department let me pull it up. 18504.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: The health

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: department The other one just gonna

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: mention the health department has provided written comments. I we asked them to testify, and they provided written comments.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: It includes unattended deaths. It does not have to be criminal if they think they you know, it was not a natural death. So there are various things, but it's the I didn't think it was just the attorney general as opposed to the state's attorneys also.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I have a four. When the state's attorney of a county on the order of a superior judge or the attorney general for use in criminal cause pending in the attorney's state attorney's office request an expert investigation, chemical or pathological of a substance. Such investigation shall immediately be made at a laboratory without charge to the state.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: There are other occasions that an autopsy can be addressed, so this section doesn't cover five zero four or not, which is interesting. Right.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay. Well, I think we'll have some questions for Judge Zonnay. We are trying to get him in next week.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: And second point, if I can, Madam Chair, is just to sort of reinforce your initial question about this list for things to consider, and it is listed as an and to all of them. I would think there would be in many, not most circumstances, whether the disclosure is necessary for the public evaluation of governmental performance, I would think would come up only in the rare instance. Is that already sort of a factor weighing against a request because that doesn't factor into it? I don't know. But I guess I raise that as something for maybe further Judge

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Zon East. Other questions. Yeah, if there isn't one, then that judge would say, no, this factor doesn't play in here if they're looking at all the factors.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Okay, any other questions for Katie? Okay, thank you. And we have Senator Hardy here because it was her constituent who this legislation is at the behest of, and she has a little bit more to the backstory. So welcome,

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: Senator

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Thank

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: you very much, Madam Chair and committee. Thank you for having me. I'm Senator Ruth Hardy. I represent the Addison District. And as the chair mentioned, this bill came about after talking with a constituent who was referred to me by our local domestic and sexual abuse prevention program, ATRIA. This is not my story to tell, but I think she will be happy to come in and testify in person to tell you the story about why she wanted this legislation. But suffice to say, it came about because of a family tragedy that resulted in the death of her daughter, her adult daughter, who had children, who the children of the daughter who died. And their father was not in the picture. But after the daughter's death, he came into the picture and proved his parentage and gained custody of the children. Prior to that, he had not been in their lives. And when that happened, the autopsy report there's a list of order of people who get an autopsy report. And when that happened, the mother of the woman who died who, at that time, had temporary custody of the two children. She would have been the one to get the autopsy report. And when the father came back into the picture, he bumped ahead. Technically, actually, the children bumped ahead. But because he was the legal guardian or parent of the minor children, he got the autopsy report, excuse me, and did not want to share it with the woman's mother. And it's a complicated and sad situation that may or may where there was a suspicion of domestic violence, and that's why Atria was involved. But I'd rather that she tell you what she feels comfortable telling you. But she came in and asked for a number of things that she was concerned about relating grandparents' rights and parental notification and lots of different things. But a lot of them were not, especially in the grandparents' rights realm, not possible because of constitutional decisions about parents' rights versus grandparents' rights. So this was one thing that felt possible so that there's an avenue for somebody who is not able to get an autopsy report for various reasons to have a way to go to a probate court and ask for the report with guardrails, etcetera. So I'm not on the Senate Health and Welfare Committee anymore, so I didn't work directly on the language. As you see it, I introduced the bill and worked on it initially. I know they made some tweaks to the language, I think, at the request of Judge Sone. And

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: am happy to

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: hear you're going to dig into all of those things, as you always do, because there are possible improvements that could be made to the bill. But that's the back story about why it happened. And it seems to me that there are other instances. You know, it's not gonna help my constituent, unfortunately, except for, I think, to give her a sense of feeling like she did something. Sorry. I'm gonna cheer up. I spent a lot of

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: time talking with her about it.

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: I'm feeling that she did something to honor her daughter and and made a change to the law. So I appreciate you taking it and taking it seriously. And but there are other instances that I think it could apply. I believe the chair, maybe the whole committee, got a note about it. So I do think there are other ways that would be relevant. So I just thank you for the good work that I'm sure you'll do on it.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Thank you, Senator Hardy. You're welcome. Is there any questions for the senator? Thanks very much.

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: Thank you very much. Have a great weekend. Get home safely.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Thank you.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Why is it sticking? Sure.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Yeah. Don't get me all nervous.

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: It's the first day of spring,

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: believe it or not.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I know. Do something like that. Okay, so let's do a couple of updates, and then we have something fun to do. Just looking for the, there we go. On H-six 57, after a lot of questions from one representative in particular, Yeah, representative. Now I'm going back and forth from the senators. Anyways, H-six 57 voted out eleven-zero out of appropriations. And on ninethirty eight, they voted it out to the bill, voted out ten-one. And the straw poll on the amendment that we passed this morning was eleven-zero. Both of our bills will be on notice on Tuesday and up for Wednesday. Okay, so Jubilee has double duty. So,

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Busy this weekend.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: So Rep. Dan McGuire Yeah, and Rep. Zonniel will be reporting on 09:38. And then, I'm not sure if Dan, are you participating in this or not?

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: You want me to do that section? Sure. We can talk.

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So the

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: the three folks there will be voting on that. I mean, reporting on that. I'll report on the amendment that we passed this morning. We are gonna continue our work on pre k next week. Still working with JFO to get them in. Have the principals association, superintendents, and school boards coming in on Wednesday. What are we doing on Tuesday? TBD. After I discussed it.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: What did say? I was distracted for a minute. So Amy already said this. We have an amendment on June.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: We do have an amendment on June. That's one thing we'll be doing on Tuesday.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Our own, I mean, possibly from the whole committee, it's not somebody else.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Is Terry going to do that or just put it in ours?

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: The only thing they want to do is meeting our intent, just fixing the legal language. So we're just going to put it in ours.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Yeah. I copy you, but Because

[Katie McLean (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: that's all

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: they want to do. It just made sense to provide it.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Yeah, perfect. No, that one was presented. And

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: then we had the ADA Coordinator Bill. They have passed that out of house appropriations with that sort of interesting language that says if money is appropriated. So what is the, we talked some about an amendment allowing them to apply for and receive grants to further their work. Is there any interest? Is there anybody who wants to take that on? Because it doesn't have to be a committee memo or a committee amendment.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Oh, awesome.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: No.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: I think good practice.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: I get

[Senator Ann Cummings]: that. Are

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: we assigning that to Doug? You can just assign it? Either one.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Doug's on here.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: So

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: we were just talking about the ADA amendment. Excuse me, the ADA coordinator bill that we have, it has now been voted out of appropriations with that sort of weird language. So it is possible that it will be funded. So we had talked about an amendment that enabled them to apply for grants and receive grants to further their work since it's a job that's bigger than one person. And so because you were absent, Representative Esme suggested that you would be the person to do the amendment.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: One of her friends.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Volunteered. I am not volunteering.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: I have

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: to work in a one pager for the other for the nine thirty eight.

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: Representative Noyes, because it was taking me a moment just to even know this was this week to catch up with what you were talking about. If you're feeling

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: or

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Breaking news. Can I

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: bring a copy We of have a new DCM? Oh,

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: is it? Thank you. Awesome. Oh. The current commissioner. I will

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: say some breaking news. I heard word on the streets is that starting, it's a topic and we cover it in this, the number of Human Service Board appeals that have happened around this when do days start over So and all of they've announced that they'll be restarting the clock on July 1, is my understanding. Took 400 appeals. Wow.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Yeah. Okay. I missed your the $9.38 was what? The Bolt, I missed Out of appropriations? Yeah. On the bill, was ten one on on our on our amendment that puts out the money. It was eleven zero. Reported it was supported by all on the committee. Okay. Wait. So nine thirty eight was eleven zero? On the amendment

[Doug Bishop (Member)]: With the dollar breakout.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: The one that we voted on this morning, Brenda, that you made the statement about, that would that was the adjustment zero.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: Appropriations with the dollar amount? Eleven zero.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: The amendment voted eleven zero on the bill itself. Was Ten

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: and one. The

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: no vote was from representative Yacoboni, because it reduces services. It doesn't reduce services, it reduces the number of people who

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: are responsible.

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: It 57 was voted out. Eleven-zero. Okay. So

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: we're gonna wrap up prepay next week. We are going to start to do some additional oversight and accountability stuff with Dale. We're gonna move off to this get for a little while. They'll be relieved. They'll be relieved.

[Senator Ruth Hardy]: Turning them over to the Senate.

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: Right. And then we're gonna be talking about recovery residences as well. And I don't really know what the S-two forty three one is all about yet. So language, justice.

[Anne B. Donahue (Ranking Member)]: Oh, I looked at that. Yeah, that's, it's pretty small, Bill, but it's about at times of a state emergency that we need to have several language. Oh, okay. Language, please.

[Senator Ann Cummings]: Yeah, Messages in So we'll take that up

[Theresa Wood (Chair)]: maybe before we do 01:57, which is gonna be a longer discussion. Yeah. Could I ask for Great. So it's been a long week. We've had a lot of floor time. And, Laurie, I think we can

[Laurie (Committee Assistant)]: go