Public Schools - Airway Clearing Device Availability and Use - Policy (Bowen Levy Airway Clearing Device Act)
HB0117, the Bowen Levy Airway Clearing Device Act, requires each county board of education to adopt a policy ensuring that every public school obtains at least one airway clearing device, commonly used in choking emergencies. The bill defines an airway clearing device as a portable medical device that uses manually created suction to remove an airway blockage, and it directs schools to make the device available in areas where students or school personnel primarily eat.
The bill also requires school policies to authorize school nurses and other school personnel to use the device in a choking emergency and to provide training on recognizing choking symptoms and using the device properly. In addition, the Maryland State Department of Education must create and distribute a standard reporting form so public schools can report each incident in which an airway clearing device is used at a school or related school event. The act is set to take effect July 1, 2026.
This bill would add a new section to the Education Article, Section 7-426.8, creating statewide requirements for local school systems to adopt airway clearing device policies, maintain devices on school premises, train staff, and report usage incidents to the State Department of Education. It also provides limited liability protection for school nurses and other school personnel acting in good faith during a choking emergency, except in cases of willful or grossly negligent conduct. The practical effect is to standardize emergency preparedness for choking incidents across Maryland public schools and impose new procurement, training, and reporting obligations on county boards and schools.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears preventive and safety-oriented, with the bill framed as a student health and emergency response measure. The title and structure suggest a supportive policy approach focused on improving school readiness for choking emergencies and reducing hesitation by staff to intervene. No formal opposition or recorded controversy is reflected in the available context.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the cost and administrative burden of requiring at least one airway clearing device per school, training staff, and submitting incident reports, which would fall on county boards and individual schools. Another possible issue is the scope of authorization for non-medical school personnel to use the device and the liability protections afforded to them, though the bill limits those protections to good-faith responses and excludes willful or grossly negligent acts. No specific opposing viewpoints are documented in the provided committee or voting records.