In a move that has sparked significant debate, the Hawaii House of Representatives introduced House Bill 36 (HB36) on February 11, 2025, aiming to prohibit the recognition of "excited delirium" as a valid medical diagnosis or cause of death within the state. This controversial bill seeks to amend Chapter 327C of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, effectively banning medical examiners, coroners, and healthcare providers from documenting or testifying about excited delirium in any official capacity.

Under the proposed legislation, excited delirium would not only be excluded from death certificates but also from any official reports or communications related to medical examinations. The bill stipulates that while contributing causes of death may be listed, excited delirium cannot be cited as an underlying cause. This prohibition extends to all state and county government entities, including employees and contractors.

The introduction of HB36 comes amid growing scrutiny over the use of excited delirium in cases involving police encounters and deaths in custody. Critics argue that the term has been misused to justify excessive force and has disproportionately affected marginalized communities. Proponents of the bill assert that the diagnosis lacks scientific validity and can lead to harmful consequences in legal and medical contexts.

As discussions around the bill unfold, experts in the fields of medicine and law are weighing in. Some medical professionals support the bill, citing a lack of consensus in the medical community regarding excited delirium as a legitimate diagnosis. Others express concern that banning the term could hinder the understanding of certain medical conditions and their implications in law enforcement scenarios.

The implications of HB36 are far-reaching. If passed, it could reshape how medical professionals approach cases of sudden death, particularly those involving police interactions. The bill also raises questions about accountability and transparency in the medical and legal systems, as it challenges long-standing practices surrounding the documentation of causes of death.

As the legislative session progresses, the fate of HB36 remains uncertain. Advocates on both sides are preparing for a contentious debate, with the potential for amendments and further discussions that could redefine the parameters of medical diagnosis in Hawaii. The outcome of this bill could set a precedent not only in Hawaii but also influence similar legislative efforts across the nation, as states grapple with the complexities of medical terminology and its implications in law enforcement and public health.