Skip to main content

HB 1002

In Committee

House

PTSD/coroners & examiners

Recognizing posttraumatic stress disorder as an occupational disease for county coroners, examiners, and investigative personnel.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 12, 2025
Last Action: March 12, 2026
Status: H Rules 3C

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill adds county coroners and medical examiner personnel to the list of workers who can claim posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as an occupational disease under Washington’s workers’ compensation system. It also updates eligibility rules for other first responders and includes safeguards to prevent claims based on routine personnel decisions.

  • Amends existing law to explicitly include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as an occupational disease for county coroners and medical examiner personnel, allowing them to seek workers' compensation for job-related PTSD.
  • Expands existing PTSD occupational disease protections (already covering firefighters, law enforcement, and telecommunicators) to include county coroners and medical examiner personnel.
  • Requires that for coroners/examiners hired after January 1, 2026, a preemployment psychological exam must be conducted to rule out preexisting PTSD—unless the employer does not provide the exam, in which case coverage applies regardless.
  • Clarifies that PTSD is not considered an occupational disease if it results from good-faith employer actions like disciplinary measures, demotions, or terminations.
  • Defines key terms: 'county coroner and medical examiner personnel' (those who investigate deaths, handle evidence, or perform autopsies) and 'public safety telecommunicators' (those who receive and dispatch emergency calls).

Who is affected

  • County coroners and medical examiner personnelCounty coroners and medical examiner personnel who investigate deaths, handle evidence, or perform autopsies may now qualify for workers' compensation if they develop PTSD directly related to their job duties, provided they meet eligibility criteria.
  • Firefighters, law enforcement officers, and public safety telecommunicatorsFirefighters (including supervisors in private departments with 50+ firefighters), law enforcement officers, and public safety telecommunicators who develop PTSD may continue to be covered under existing occupational disease rules, with new hires subject to additional requirements.
  • Direct care registered nursesDirect care registered nurses in Washington who work at least 90 consecutive days may qualify for workers' compensation for job-related PTSD, following similar rules to other first responders.
Effective: July 28, 2025Fiscal impact: The bill may increase state workers' compensation costs by expanding eligibility for PTSD-related claims among first responders and coroners/examiners, though the exact cost is not specified in the text.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 6:25 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Potential Benefits (5)
  • Corrects a long-standing gap in coverage: coroners and medical examiners—despite routinely encountering graphic death, decomposition, and violent trauma—were previously excluded from PTSD occupational disease protections available to firefighters and police. This aligns their legal standing with their actual job hazards.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (e)
  • The preemployment psychological exam requirement for new hires after 2026, while imperfect, creates an objective baseline and may reduce disputes over preexisting conditions—potentially improving claim accuracy and long-term care continuity if paired with strong privacy protections.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (b)
  • Extends similar PTSD occupational disease protections to direct care registered nurses, recognizing the trauma inherent in high-stakes, high-mortality healthcare settings (e.g., ICU, hospice, trauma units).

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(a), (c)
  • Clarifies definitions of covered roles (e.g., coroner personnel, telecommunicators), reducing ambiguity for local governments and workers’ compensation boards in determining eligibility—potentially speeding claim processing.

    Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(d), (e)
  • The exclusion of PTSD stemming from *good-faith* employer actions prevents abuse of the system while preserving the legitimacy of occupational disease claims—balancing worker protections with employer fairness.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(2)(c)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • Expands access to workers’ compensation for PTSD for county coroners and medical examiners—professionals regularly exposed to traumatic death scenes, autopsies, and violent crime evidence—reducing out-of-pocket mental health costs and improving treatment access.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (e)
  • Protects workers from being denied PTSD claims due to routine personnel actions (e.g., discipline, demotion), reinforcing that mental health injuries from *job-related trauma* are distinct from workplace stress unrelated to core duties.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(c)
  • Strengthens support for first responders’ mental health infrastructure, potentially reducing long-term disability, suicide risk, and workforce turnover among high-risk occupations.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (c)
  • Mandates preemployment psychological screening for new coroner/examiner hires to rule out preexisting PTSD—though this may improve claim integrity, it risks stigmatization, privacy concerns, and could deter applicants if not implemented with strong safeguards.

    HealthcareLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a), (b)
  • Clarifies that PTSD claims are not compensable if caused by *good-faith* employer actions (e.g., termination, discipline), protecting employers from frivolous claims while preserving legitimate occupational disease claims.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(2)(c)

Who Is Most Affected

County coroners and medical examiner personnelPositive Impact

County coroners and medical examiners—often working with limited mental health resources and high exposure to traumatic death—gain explicit eligibility for PTSD benefits, potentially improving mental health outcomes and job retention. Impact: positive.

Firefighters, law enforcement officers, and public safety telecommunicatorsMixed Impact

Firefighters, police, and telecommunicators retain existing PTSD coverage, with added clarity on preemployment exams for new hires. No rollback in benefits; minor administrative adjustments. Impact: neutral to slightly positive.

Direct care registered nursesPositive Impact

Direct care nurses in Washington gain new PTSD coverage eligibility after 90 days—addressing high rates of burnout and trauma in frontline nursing. Impact: positive.

Washington State Department of Labor & Industries / Workers’ Compensation FundNegative Impact

State Workers’ Compensation Fund may see a modest increase in claims and costs, but the bill does not specify funding mechanisms—potentially straining the system if claim volume rises significantly. Impact: negative (fiscal risk), though not severe given current uncertainty.

Local governments and healthcare employersMixed Impact

Employers (especially counties and private hospitals) face potential increases in workers’ compensation premiums, though the bill’s safeguards (e.g., preemployment exams, good-faith exclusion) may limit frivolous claims. Impact: mixed (small net negative due to administrative burden and premium risk).

Sponsors

Representative Abbarno(Republican)District 20Primary
Representative Rude(Republican)District 16Secondary
Representative Marshall(Republican)District 2Secondary
Representative Callan(Democrat)District 5Secondary
Representative Doglio(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Representative Timmons(Democrat)District 42Secondary
Representative Goodman(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Representative Pollet(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Representative Davis(Democrat)District 32Secondary
Representative Scott(Democrat)District 43Secondary