Tennessee Senate Bill SB1986

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 38, Chapter 7 and Title 68, Chapter 30, relative to anatomical gifts.

Impact

One significant impact of SB1986 is the clarification of roles and responsibilities for medical examiners and procurement organizations in the context of anatomical gifts. It outlines the necessary procedures and documentation required from the procurement organization to ensure that removal of anatomical gifts does not interfere with autopsy procedures. The bill aims to streamline the process for recovering anatomical gifts while ensuring that forensic investigations remain intact. This change is expected to alleviate potential conflicts between medical examiners and procurement teams.

Summary

Senate Bill 1986 amends Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically Title 38, Chapter 7 and Title 68, Chapter 30, to address the regulation surrounding anatomical gifts. The bill outlines the conditions under which anatomical gifts can be procured if a body is under post-mortem examination. It emphasizes that a medical examiner retains authority to deny procurement if it jeopardizes the forensic investigation or conflicts with their statutory duties. The amendment aims to protect the integrity of both medical investigations and the rights of those donating their bodies or organs for use after death.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB1986 may arise regarding the balance of authority between medical examiners and procurement organizations. While the intent is to provide protection for forensic investigations, some stakeholders may perceive that it places undue limitations on the procurement of anatomical gifts. This aspect may lead to discussions about the adequacy of oversight by medical examiners and potential delays in organ procurement, which could affect the timeliness of transplants. Additionally, concerns related to liability protections for medical examiners and other personnel involved in the process might raise debates about accountability and ethical considerations in cases of contested anatomical donations.