AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 63, Chapter 11, relative to psychological materials.
SB0786 amends Tennessee law governing psychological and neuropsychological testing materials. The bill creates a new section in Title 63, Chapter 11 establishing that test materials and test data must be kept secure because disclosure can compromise the validity of testing and pose risks to public safety. It defines test materials and test data to include specific test items, manuals, instruments, protocols, and applicable stimuli used in testing.
The bill allows a patient to access test responses in the patient’s record, but not the underlying test materials and test data. Those materials may be released only to licensed psychologists, senior psychological examiners, or other properly trained experts who have legal and ethical duties to protect test security. If the materials were prepared for or in anticipation of civil, criminal, forensic, or administrative proceedings, release is limited to similarly qualified professionals.
The bill also prohibits third-party observers during psychological or neuropsychological testing, including family members, attorneys, and insurance representatives, and bars audio or video recording of the examination. It creates limited exceptions for individuals with documented disabilities needing an aide, those requiring a professional language interpreter, minors when the examiner deems an observer necessary and appropriate, and supervised trainee settings involving a qualified licensed professional.
The bill’s impact is to strengthen confidentiality and security rules around psychological assessment materials in Tennessee and to limit who may access or observe testing. It would affect psychologists, senior psychological examiners, patients, attorneys, insurers, interpreters, aides, and parties involved in litigation or administrative proceedings by restricting disclosure and observation practices that could otherwise be used in evaluations, custody disputes, competency proceedings, disability determinations, and other high-stakes contexts.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of test security, public safety, and the integrity of psychological evaluations. The stated rationale emphasizes that standardized tests are often used in consequential decisions and that improper disclosure can undermine validity. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no additional evidence of opposition or debate in the available record.
This bill adds Tennessee Code Annotated section 63-11-227 to regulate the handling of psychological and neuropsychological test materials and test data. It limits patient access to test responses while restricting release of test materials to qualified psychologists, senior psychological examiners, or similarly trained experts, especially in litigation or administrative contexts. It also prohibits third-party observers and recording during testing, subject to narrow exceptions, thereby changing confidentiality and administration practices for psychological assessments in Tennessee.
The bill appears to have a protective, pro-security orientation, with the stated purpose of preserving the validity of psychological testing and safeguarding public safety. The text frames the measure as necessary to prevent misuse of test materials and to ensure standardized administration. No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no documented evidence of opposition, amendments, or divided sentiment in the available materials.
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s restrictions on access and observation. Patients may object to being denied the underlying test materials, and attorneys, insurers, or litigants may view the limits on third-party observers and recordings as making it harder to challenge or verify psychological evaluations in custody, competency, disability, or forensic cases. The bill anticipates some of these concerns by allowing release to qualified experts and by creating exceptions for interpreters, aides, minors, and supervised trainees, but the core tension remains between test security and transparency in adversarial or clinical settings.