A BILL to amend and reenact § 32.1-264 of the Code of Virginia, relating to reports of fetal death; miscarriage; personally identifiable information not required.
HB822 amends Virginia’s fetal death reporting law to clarify that when a fetal death report is filed in cases of induced abortion or miscarriage, the form may not identify the patient by name and may not include any other personally identifiable information. The bill keeps the existing framework for filing fetal death reports within three days, identifying who is responsible for filing the report, and requiring medical certification of cause of death, but narrows the information that can be collected in sensitive pregnancy-loss cases.
The bill also preserves the role of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner when a fetal death occurs without medical attendance or when an investigation is required, and it leaves in place the rule that these reports are statistical records used for medical and health purposes rather than permanent vital records. It further requires the attending physician or facility to keep a copy of the report for one year and provide a copy to the individual upon written request and payment of a fee. The Department of Health would be required to conform its regulation, 12VAC5-550-120, to the amended statute.
If enacted, HB822 would change § 32.1-264 of the Code of Virginia by limiting the collection of personally identifiable information in fetal death reports tied to induced abortion or miscarriage. The practical effect would be to increase privacy protections for patients experiencing pregnancy loss while leaving the state’s fetal death reporting and public health data collection system otherwise intact. It would also require an administrative update to the Department of Health’s regulations to match the statutory change.
The available record suggests the bill did not advance out of committee, as it was stricken from the docket by the House Health and Human Services Committee on a 22-0 vote. That outcome indicates unanimous committee opposition or, at minimum, unanimous support for removing the bill from consideration at that stage. No committee transcript is available, so the specific arguments made in discussion are not recorded here.
The central point of contention is likely the balance between patient privacy and state reporting requirements in cases of miscarriage and abortion. Supporters would view the bill as a privacy measure that prevents the collection of identifying information in highly sensitive circumstances, while opponents may have been concerned about limiting data available to public health officials or about the policy implications of treating miscarriage and abortion reporting differently. Because there are no transcripts, the precise positions of individual members or outside stakeholders are not documented in the provided materials.