SB619 would create a new “Stop the Bleed Act” in West Virginia law and require county boards of education to implement bleeding-control programs in schools beginning with the 2026-2027 school year. The bill defines a “bleeding control kit” as a first-aid response kit containing items such as a tourniquet, compression bandage, gauze for wound packing, gloves, scissors, and instructional materials from recognized trauma and emergency-response organizations. It also allows similar medical materials to be included if they can adequately treat traumatic injuries and be stored in a readily available kit.
Under the bill, schools would need to place bleeding control kits in classrooms and common areas, incorporate the kits into emergency plans and drills, train faculty and staff every other year, and add bleeding-control instruction to the curriculum for students in grades 9-12. The bill also requires annual inspection of kits and restocking after use. County boards of education would work with county boards of health and county Homeland Security to develop and provide training, and they could use training from the American College of Surgeons or a similar organization. School personnel would receive civil immunity for actions taken in using a kit unless their conduct amounts to gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct. Funding could come from private donations, gifts, or a legislative appropriation.
Impact
The bill would add a new article to Chapter 18 of the West Virginia Code and impose new operational, training, inventory, and emergency-preparedness duties on county boards of education and school personnel. It would also create a limited civil-liability protection for school employees involved in bleeding-control response and authorize schools to seek outside donations or state funding to purchase kits. In practice, the measure would affect school safety policies, emergency planning, staff professional development, and student health/safety instruction statewide.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcripts, recorded votes, or other discussion, so there is no documented public sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to be framed as a school-safety and emergency-response measure intended to improve preparedness for traumatic bleeding incidents in schools. Because there is no voting history or debate excerpt, support or opposition cannot be reliably inferred from the record provided.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the mandate on county school systems to implement and maintain bleeding-control programs, the requirement to train staff and incorporate instruction into grades 9-12, and the cost of purchasing and restocking kits. Another possible issue is the scope of civil immunity for school personnel, which is broad but not absolute because it excludes gross negligence and willful or wanton misconduct. The bill’s funding approach—permitting donations and legislative appropriations rather than guaranteeing a dedicated funding source—could also be a concern for school districts and policymakers.