AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 37-11-85, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO DEFINE THE TERM "HIGH-NEEDS SCHOOLS" FOR THE PURPOSE OF CARDIAC EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANS FOR PUBLIC AND CHARTER SCHOOLS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-11-87, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO REQUIRE SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL-SPONSORED ATHLETIC EVENTS TO ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT A CARDIAC EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN THAT INTEGRATES EVIDENCE-BASED CORE ELEMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION GUIDELINES OR ANOTHER NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED, EVIDENCE-BASED STANDARD; TO REQUIRE ALL SCHOOL-SPONSORED ATHLETICS TO PROVIDE AN AED ON SITE AT OR THAT IS RETRIEVABLE AND ABLE TO BE PLACED ON A VICTIM WITHIN THREE MINUTES OF EACH ATHLETE VENUE FOR PRACTICES, GAMES OR OTHER ATHLETIC EVENTS; TO BRING FORWARD SECTIONS 73-25-37 AND 41-60-33, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, FOR THE PURPOSE OF POSSIBLE OF AMENDMENTS; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
Impact
Starting from the 2024-2025 academic year, both public and charter schools will have to implement these cancer emergency response plans, including training staff in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs). Schools must provide an AED that can be accessed within three minutes at any athletic venue where students participate. This initiative is expected to lead to improved survival rates in cases of sudden cardiac arrest, particularly in schools where students may be at greater risk due to socioeconomic factors.
Summary
House Bill 633 aims to enhance cardiac emergency response plans (CERPs) in public and charter schools across Mississippi. The bill mandates the development of these plans, which must incorporate evidence-based guidelines from recognized organizations such as the American Heart Association. A significant aspect of the legislation is the definition of 'high-needs schools' that requires these institutions to have protocols and resources specifically tailored to their unique circumstances, particularly in areas where a majority of students are eligible for free or reduced-price meals.
Contention
Notable points of contention surrounding the bill may emerge regarding the financial implications for schools, particularly those classified as high-needs. Some stakeholders may argue that while the intent is to protect student health, the requirements could impose additional burdens on already strained school budgets. The legislation also brings forth new training requirements and accountability measures that some educators may find challenging amidst existing responsibilities.