Judicial Facilities - Stops, Detentions, and Arrests - Limitations
HB0309 establishes confidentiality rules for peer support counseling programs used by law enforcement agencies and the Fraternal Order of Police. It defines a “peer support program” and “peer support specialist,” covering counseling and emotional or moral support provided to officers who have experienced traumatic events in the line of duty.
The bill generally prohibits peer support specialists and participants from disclosing written or oral communications made during a peer support interaction. It creates exceptions for communications involving an explicit suicide threat, an explicit threat of imminent serious bodily harm or death, abuse or neglect of a child or vulnerable adult, admissions of criminal conduct, disclosures authorized by all participants, or disclosures required by a court order or subpoena. The bill also requires peer support specialists to give participants written notice of these confidentiality rules before the first interaction, and it takes effect October 1, 2025.
The bill adds a new section to the Public Safety Article, Section 3-534, creating a statutory confidentiality framework for law enforcement peer support programs in Maryland. It affects law enforcement agencies and FOP-affiliated peer support services by protecting communications in those programs while preserving mandatory reporting obligations and court-ordered disclosure requirements. The law does not create an evidentiary privilege as broad as attorney-client or therapist-patient confidentiality, but it does impose a specific statutory nondisclosure rule with defined exceptions.
The available record suggests the bill was treated as a public safety and officer wellness measure, with no recorded committee transcript or vote history indicating significant opposition. Its structure reflects a generally supportive approach toward encouraging officers to seek help after traumatic incidents by providing confidentiality protections. The absence of recorded debate or votes in the provided materials makes the overall sentiment appear favorable or at least noncontroversial.
The main points of potential contention are the scope of confidentiality and the exceptions that preserve disclosure for suicide risk, threats of serious harm, child or vulnerable adult abuse, criminal admissions, and court process. Supporters would likely view these exceptions as necessary safeguards, while critics could argue they narrow confidentiality too much or, conversely, that the bill goes too far in limiting disclosure and could complicate investigations. Another possible issue is that the bill applies to programs provided by law enforcement agencies or the Fraternal Order of Police, which may raise questions about consistency across agencies and the training and designation of peer support specialists.