Enacts the "Lieutenant Joseph Banish mental health act" which establishes a law enforcement peer support program to provide confidentiality for communications arising out of law enforcement peer support counseling; defines terms; provides exceptions for when a peer support communication may be disclosed.
A06721, titled the "Lieutenant Joseph Banish mental health act," creates a new section of the Executive Law establishing a law enforcement peer support program confidentiality framework. The bill applies to peer support counseling provided by a law enforcement agency to police officers, and it defines key terms such as law enforcement agency, peer support specialist, peer support participant, and peer support communication. Under the bill, communications made in the course of peer support counseling sessions, along with related notes, reports, and records, are generally confidential and may not be disclosed to non-parties.
The bill also sets out specific exceptions to confidentiality. Disclosure is permitted or required when the communication reveals a specific threat of suicide, suicidal ideation, self-harm, a threat of bodily harm or death, or child abuse or neglect. Disclosure is also required when mandated by law, when the communication includes an admission of criminal conduct, or when ordered by a court. Before the first counseling session, the peer support specialist must give written notice explaining the confidentiality rule and its exceptions. The Division is authorized to adopt rules on minimum certifications, approved training, recordkeeping, and retraining requirements.
The bill would amend the Executive Law by adding a new section governing confidentiality for police peer support counseling statewide. It would create a statutory privilege-like protection for communications in law enforcement peer support programs, while preserving mandatory reporting and court-order exceptions, and it would direct the Division to establish implementing regulations and training standards. The measure primarily affects police officers, peer support specialists, and law enforcement agencies that operate or designate peer support programs.
The available voting history shows strong bipartisan and institutional support for the bill. It passed the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Assembly Rules Committee, Assembly floor, and Senate floor unanimously or near-unanimously, with no recorded opposition in any of the listed votes. That pattern suggests broad agreement that protecting confidential mental health communications for police peer support is a worthwhile policy goal.
There is little evidence of major controversy in the available record, but the bill’s main policy balance is between confidentiality and public-safety reporting obligations. Supporters appear to favor encouraging officers to seek help by protecting peer support conversations, while the exceptions reflect concern that confidentiality should not block disclosure of suicide risk, threats of violence, child abuse, criminal admissions, or legally required reporting. The bill also leaves implementation details to the Division, including training and recordkeeping standards, which could be a point of administrative interest even though no opposition is shown in the votes.