Relating to the certificate of medical examination for chemical dependency and the duration of court-ordered treatment for a person with a chemical dependency.
ModeratePlan for compliance
Low Cost
Effective:2025-06-20
Enforcing Agencies
Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) • Texas Judicial System (Civil, Criminal, and Juvenile Courts)
01
Compliance Analysis
Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation
Implementation Timeline
Effective Date: September 1, 2025
Compliance Deadline: September 1, 2025 (Applies strictly to applications filed on or after this date; no phase-in).
Agency Rulemaking: While HHSC enforces standards, the statute is self-executing. Do not wait for agency guidance to update your medical certification forms.
Immediate Action Plan
1.Redline Forms: Legal counsel must finalize the revised *Certificate of Medical Examination* template by July 1, 2025.
2.Judicial Outreach: Administrators should proactively meet with local probate and criminal judges to explain that early discharge (pre-30 days) is a statutory compliance requirement, not defiance of the court order.
3.Update Protocols: Revise intake policies to reject applications where the medical certificate fails to establish the specific causal link between dependency and harm.
4.Review Pipeline: Ensure any applications filed before September 1 are flagged to proceed under old rules, even if the hearing occurs later.
Operational Changes Required
Contracts
Facility Acceptance Agreements: Amend standard acceptance letters provided to the court. Remove any language guaranteeing a fixed length of stay. Insert clauses stating admission is "subject to ongoing clinical evaluation and statutory discharge authority under Section 462.080(b)," protecting the facility if early discharge is medically necessary.
Physician Agreements: Update agreements for psychiatrists and addiction specialists to require adherence to the new "causal nexus" documentation standard in medical certifications.
Hiring/Training
Physician Training: Medical staff must be trained on the new "Nexus Requirement." It is no longer sufficient to list dependency and harm separately. The physician must document that the patient meets harm criteria *specifically as a result of* the chemical dependency.
Administrator Training: Facility administrators must be trained on the "Clinical Override" workflow—invoking statutory authority to discharge a patient prior to the court-ordered 30-day minimum if clinical stabilization occurs.
Reporting & Record-Keeping
Certificate of Medical Examination:Immediate Redline Required. Create a new template with mandatory fields/checkboxes forcing the physician to identify which statutory prong (harm to self, harm to others, or deterioration) is caused by the dependency.
Discharge Documentation: Create a specific discharge form for patients released before the 30-day minimum. It must explicitly state: "Patient no longer meets criteria for court-ordered treatment," to serve as a defense against potential contempt of court citations.
Fees & Costs
Insurance Risk: There is a high risk of revenue loss if facilities hold patients for the full 30-day mandatory minimum solely to satisfy the court order. Commercial payers and Medicaid will deny claims lacking medical necessity. Facilities must discharge based on clinical criteria, not the judicial clock.
Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations
The "30-Day" Conflict: The law mandates the *Court* order a minimum of 30 days, but allows the *Facility* to discharge earlier. This creates potential friction with the judiciary. Expect judges to question early releases.
"Serious Harm" Threshold: The statute requires a causal link to "serious harm" but does not define the threshold. Until case law settles this, facilities should apply existing mental health commitment standards (Chapter 574) but document the "nexus" aggressively to survive legal challenges.
Need Help Understanding Implementation?
Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.
Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.
Under current law, an individual with a chemical dependency may be subject to court-ordered treatment at an applicable facility for no more than 90 days. However, there is no statutory requirement for the minimum number of days the individual must attend the treatment facility, which can lead to inconsistencies in the evaluation process and treatment timelines. H.B. 171, the Anell Borrego Act, seeks to address this issue by setting a minimum duration for court‑ordered treatment for chemical dependency and standardizing medical examination criteria to ensure that treatment recommendations are based on clear and consistent evaluations.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 171 amends the Health and Safety Code to set 60 days as the minimum duration of an order for court-ordered treatment of a qualifying person with a chemical dependency and, if applicable, a renewal of such an order. The bill expands the grounds on which a treatment facility administrator may discharge a patient before the court order for the treatment expires to include a determination by the physician treating the patient that the patient no longer meets the criteria for court-ordered treatment.
H.B. 171 changes the requirement that a certificate of medical examination for chemical dependency include the examining physician's opinions as to whether the proposed patient is a person with a chemical dependency and whether certain conditions specified in current law regarding the proposed patient apply. The bill retains those specified conditions but provides that the opinion must instead:
·state that the proposed patient is a person with a chemical dependency; and
·state that any of the specified conditions is a result of the chemical dependency.
H.B. 171 applies only to an application for court-ordered treatment for chemical dependency that is filed on or after the bill's effective date. An application that is filed before that effective date is governed by the law as it existed immediately before that date, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose.
Honorable Jeff Leach, Chair, House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence
FROM:
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB171 by Guillen (Relating to the certificate of medical examination for chemical dependency and the duration of court-ordered treatment for a person with a chemical dependency.), As Introduced
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
It is assumed that any costs associated with the bill could be absorbed using existing resources.
Local Government Impact
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.
Source Agencies:
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council, 529 Health and Human Services Commission
LBB Staff:
JMc, KDw, DA, JPa
Related Legislation
Explore more bills from this author and on related topics
The Anell Borrego Act (HB171) fundamentally alters involuntary commitment standards for chemical dependency by mandating a 30-day minimum court-ordered treatment period and requiring a stricter medical certification that establishes a causal link between dependency and potential harm. This legislation impacts all HHSC-licensed inpatient treatment facilities, requiring immediate updates to intake certifications and discharge protocols to balance the new judicial mandate against insurance-based medical necessity standards. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: September 1, 2025 Compliance Deadline: September 1, 2025 (Applies strictly to applications filed on or after this date; no phase-in).
Q
Who authored HB171?
HB171 was authored by Texas Representative Ryan Guillen during the Regular Session.
Q
When was HB171 signed into law?
HB171 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.
Q
Which agencies enforce HB171?
HB171 is enforced by Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) and Texas Judicial System (Civil, Criminal, and Juvenile Courts).
Q
How urgent is compliance with HB171?
The compliance urgency for HB171 is rated as "moderate". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.
Q
What is the cost impact of HB171?
The cost impact of HB171 is estimated as "low". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.
Q
What topics does HB171 address?
HB171 addresses topics including alcoholism & drug abuse, crimes, crimes--drugs, mental health & substance abuse and anell borrego act.
Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025
Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?
Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.
