2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills and search results

2025 · Regular session · Senate bill

SB1044

SB1044 adds Duchenne muscular dystrophy to Texas’s newborn screening law, but implementation depends on laboratory capacity and funding.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to newborn screening tests for Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists Senate author(s): Parker. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

SB1044 adds Duchenne muscular dystrophy to Texas’s newborn screening law, but implementation depends on laboratory capacity and funding. The act defines the condition as a progressive muscle-degeneration disorder caused by alterations of the protein dystrophin. It expressly adds the disease to the Department of State Health Services’ screening, laboratory-development and follow-up program. Physicians attending newborns, or people attending deliveries without a physician, are responsible for arranging department-approved screening under that program. Final law, sections 1–4.

The effective date is not a promise that testing was available that day. Signed May 19, 2025, the law took effect September 1, 2025. Section 9 ties implementation to completion of the specified laboratory. Section 10 requires the department to implement a provision only if the legislature specifically appropriates money for it; without that appropriation, the department may use other available money but is not required to do so. This explanation does not establish the laboratory’s current completion status or whether a later appropriation or rollout has satisfied those conditions. Official history; Final law, sections 9–11.

The act adds Duchenne muscular dystrophy to existing procedures, rather than making every screening result a diagnosis. If the department reasonably suspects the disease, it must tell the specimen submitter that the result is abnormal and provide the result. It may also notify the physician, delivery attendant, parents, local health authority or cooperating pediatric specialists and recommend further testing when necessary. Existing law defines screening as determining the need for further diagnostic evaluation and requires a physician-care recommendation for a high-risk result. Final law, section 5; Existing HS 33.001; Existing HS 33.014.

Presumptively positive newborns and other people under 21 who may qualify financially can be referred to the children-with-special-health-care-needs program. Separately, people of any age with a confirmed positive test may receive newborn-screening program services, subject to available funds, department eligibility rules and cooperation with their physician. This is not an unconditional guarantee of treatment or payment for everyone. The act also adds Duchenne screening specimen collection to laboratory support services for midwives’ clients. Final law, sections 6–8; Existing HS 33.031; Existing HS 33.032; Existing OC 203.355.

The existing religious-objection exemption remains: screening may not be administered when a parent, managing conservator or guardian objects because it conflicts with the religious tenets or practices of an organized church to which they adhere. The objection must be entered in the child’s medical record and signed. SB1044 does not create a general opt-out for any reason. Existing HS 33.012; Final law.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill would have required implementation by September 1, 2027. The Senate committee substitute removed that calendar deadline, substituted implementation upon laboratory completion, and added the specific-appropriation condition. Those limitations survived: the substitute, engrossed, House committee and enrolled operative texts match. The official index lists no amendments, so these changes came through the committee substitute rather than an indexed floor amendment. Introduced text; Committee substitute; All text versions; Amendment index; Final law.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

The intended benefit is earlier identification and follow-up for children who may have Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Families, newborn-care professionals, midwives and the state laboratory are affected. Screening can identify who needs diagnostic evaluation; the statute does not establish a cure, a guaranteed health outcome or immediate statewide testing. Its service provisions retain funding and eligibility limits. Final law, sections 3–10; Existing HS 33.001; Existing HS 33.032.

The March 30 introduced fiscal note could not determine the cost of meeting the proposed deadline because the existing laboratory was full. It estimated two to four years of ramp-up after additional space was constructed. The April 12 substitute and May 2 engrossed notes instead anticipated no significant state or local fiscal implication under the conditional funding language. That is not a finding that screening is free: the later notes illustrate $710,320 of first-year and $2,937,025 of second-year General Revenue ramp-up costs once additional space is operational, with nine and 12 full-time-equivalent staff respectively, and about two years before testing could begin. They also describe later Medicaid and private-pay revenue and Medicaid/CHIP costs only after testing starts. Those are conditional planning estimates, not an appropriation, an actual launch date or a demonstrated net saving. Introduced fiscal note; Substitute fiscal note; Engrossed fiscal note.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.