HB2071

HB2071 strengthens family access to medical information and limits conflicts of interest in certain medical assessments during child-abuse or neglect investigations. It changes the existing specialist-consultation process involving the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS), the Forensic Assessment Center Network and the MEDCARES system. That process addresses conditions that may mimic maltreatment or raise the risk of a mistaken diagnosis, such as rickets, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and osteogenesis imperfecta. Final law; existing Family Code 261.3017.

Before referring a case for the specialty consultation, DFPS must give the parent or legal guardian—or their attorney if represented—all medical records, radiographs, images and other documents used by DFPS and the network during the investigation. When physicians disagree and the existing blind peer-review process resolves the case, DFPS must also provide the information used, including physicians’ names and opinions, possible conflicting conditions, assessments and related medical records. These are disclosures to the family or counsel, not publication of a child’s records to the general public. Final law, Section 1.

DFPS, referring providers—including hospitals—and the network may not obstruct access to records needed for an alternative opinion. The protection includes access to the child by a professional giving a second opinion or doing diagnostic testing for that purpose. The existing law already permits a family-initiated alternative opinion at its own expense and requires DFPS to consider it and document its analysis; HB2071 adds the non-obstruction protection rather than creating a promise that the state pays for every second opinion. Final law; Family Code 261.3017(e).

A required specialty consultant must now be someone who has not previously reviewed the case, as well as someone not involved in the original report. The parallel prohibition on providing forensic assessment services is extended to practitioners who reviewed the case, including on specified review or multidisciplinary teams. It applies whether or not the practitioner belongs to the network or system. DFPS may still interview the practitioner as an information source and conduct its investigation. Final law, Sections 1–2.

The act took effect September 1, 2025. It does not give a parent an absolute veto over the specialist: the unchanged referral process calls for good-faith collaboration but allows DFPS to refer over an objection. Nor does the act require an investigation to stop whenever a family disagrees with a diagnosis. Final law, Section 3; Family Code 261.3017(c-2) and 261.30175(d).