AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 33; Title 63 and Title 68, relative to suicide.
Summary
HB1400 requires the Tennessee Department to develop and implement a statewide suicide prevention program. The program must focus on upstream, community-based prevention; positive interventions for people who have threatened or attempted suicide; partnerships with local organizations; research on suicide rates among diverse populations; research on reducing access to lethal means for people at risk; and postvention support for suicide attempt survivors and their families. The bill also encourages collaboration with qualified mental health professionals in designing and carrying out the program.
The measure directs the department to report annually by January 1 to the relevant Senate and House health committees on the program and on any recommendations based on the prior year’s research. It also authorizes the department to adopt rules under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act to implement the new requirements. The act takes effect immediately for rulemaking purposes and on July 1, 2025 for all other purposes.
Impact
HB1400 would add a new suicide prevention mandate to Tennessee law, creating a formal state program within the department and requiring ongoing reporting to legislative health committees. It would affect state public health policy under Titles 33, 63, and 68 by directing agency action on prevention, intervention, research, and postvention services, while also authorizing rulemaking to define implementation details. The bill would primarily affect the department, local partner organizations, mental health professionals, and individuals and families impacted by suicide risk or attempts.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears supportive and policy-oriented, with the bill framed as a public health response to suicide prevention. The language emphasizes collaboration, research, and community-based intervention rather than controversy or restriction. No opposition, amendments, or divided votes are reflected in the available context.
Contention
No specific points of contention are shown in the provided transcripts or voting history because none were included. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill’s contents, could include the scope of the department’s new responsibilities, the cost and staffing needed to run a statewide prevention program, the use of research on diverse populations, and the policy implications of efforts to reduce access to lethal means. However, the available record does not identify any member, committee, or stakeholder as taking a contrary position.