Cardiac Emergency Response Plan; revise to include airway clearance devices.
SB 2162 revises Mississippi’s school emergency response law to expand cardiac emergency planning into a combined cardiac and choking emergency response plan. The bill requires public schools, including schools with athletic programs, to develop plans beginning with the 2025-2026 school year that address sudden cardiac arrest, choking-related airway obstruction, and similar life-threatening emergencies on school grounds and at school athletic activities.
The bill defines an “airway clearance device” as a portable suction-based medical device cleared by the FDA for acute upper airway obstruction, and it adds that device to the list of equipment schools should plan for alongside automated external defibrillators. It also requires schools to coordinate with local emergency medical services, designate response teams, provide staff training in CPR, AED, and ACD use, conduct annual drills, and review plans annually. Schools and local boards may accept gifts, grants, and donations to help purchase, maintain, and train staff on these devices.
The bill amends Sections 37-11-85 and 37-11-87 of the Mississippi Code to broaden existing cardiac emergency response requirements into cardiac and choking emergency response plans for public schools and charter schools. It creates new statutory definitions for choking response planning and airway clearance devices, and it imposes planning, training, placement, maintenance, and coordination requirements tied to AEDs and ACDs. The measure primarily affects public schools, school athletic programs, school personnel, local and regional boards of education, and local EMS providers.
The available voting history suggests strong support for the bill: the Mississippi Senate passed SB 2162 unanimously, 51-0, with no recorded opposition. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into debate, but the vote indicates broad agreement with the bill’s school safety and emergency preparedness goals.
No specific committee objections or floor debate are provided, so there is no documented controversy in the available record. Potential points of practical concern implied by the bill include the cost of purchasing, maintaining, and training staff on airway clearance devices, the logistics of implementing and updating emergency response plans, and ensuring compliance with evidence-based standards from the American Heart Association, the FDA, or similar authorities. However, the bill’s text also allows schools to seek donations and grants, which may reduce fiscal concerns.