Back to Arizona

SB1242 • 2026

mental health; hearings; audiovisual technology

SB1242 - mental health; hearings; audiovisual technology

Technology
Passed Legislature

This bill passed both chambers and reached final enrollment, even if later executive action is not shown here.

Sponsor
Hildy Angius, Carine Werner
Last action
2026-03-03
Official status
House minority caucus
Effective date
Not listed

Plain English Breakdown

The official source material does not provide specific details on cost implications or payment responsibilities, leaving these points as limits and unknowns.

Mental Health Hearings; Audiovisual Technology

This bill allows mental health hearings and evaluations to be conducted virtually using audiovisual technology if it does not unfairly harm anyone involved.

What This Bill Does

  • Allows courts to order mental health hearings or parts of them to happen online through phone, video calls, or other tech tools.
  • Requires the court to consider how hard it is for people to come in person and whether everyone can hear each other clearly when deciding if virtual hearings are okay.
  • Gives the Arizona Supreme Court permission to make rules on how these virtual hearings should work.

Who It Names or Affects

  • People who need mental health evaluations or treatment orders from a court.
  • Courts that handle mental health cases.
  • Doctors and other professionals involved in mental health evaluations.

Terms To Know

Audiovisual technology
Tools like phones, video calls, or webcams used to see and hear people during meetings or hearings.
Mental Health Evaluation
A process where doctors check if someone needs mental health treatment because they might hurt themselves or others, can't take care of themselves, or are very sick.

Limits and Unknowns

  • The bill does not specify how much it will cost to set up these virtual hearings.
  • It is unclear who will pay for the technology needed for virtual hearings.

Bill History

  1. 2026-03-03 House

    House minority caucus

  2. 2026-03-03 House

    House majority caucus

  3. 2026-03-03 House

    House consent calendar

  4. 2026-02-24 House

    House second read

  5. 2026-02-23 House

    House Rules: C&P

  6. 2026-02-23 House

    House Health & Human Services: DP

  7. 2026-02-23 House

    House first read

  8. 2026-02-19 House

    Transmitted to House

  9. 2026-02-19 Senate

    Senate third read passed

  10. 2026-02-03 Senate

    Senate minority caucus

  11. 2026-02-03 Senate

    Senate majority caucus

  12. 2026-02-02 Senate

    Senate consent calendar

  13. 2026-01-22 Senate

    Senate second read

  14. 2026-01-21 Senate

    Senate Rules: PFC

  15. 2026-01-21 Senate

    Senate Health and Human Services: DP

  16. 2026-01-21 Senate

    Senate first read

Official Summary Text

SB1242 - 572R - Senate Fact Sheet

Assigned to
HHS�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� FOR
COMMITTEE

ARIZONA STATE SENATE

Fifty-Seventh
Legislature, Second Regular Session

FACT SHEET FOR
S.B. 1242

mental health; hearings;
audiovisual technology

Purpose

Allows the court to order a mental health evaluation or treatment
hearing, or specified testimony during the hearing, to be conducted virtually
by way of telephone, videoconferencing or another audiovisual technology if the
court finds that this procedure will not unfairly prejudice a party or witness.

Background

Statute outlines processes by which individuals may, voluntarily or under
court order, be evaluated, admitted and treated by designated mental health
providers, including approved evaluation agencies and mental health treatment
agencies. Court-ordered evaluation is a process by which two behavioral health
medical professionals complete a detailed analysis of an individual to assess
whether the individual is: 1) a danger to self; 2) a danger to others; 3)
persistently or acutely disabled; or 4) gravely disabled. The evaluation
assesses the severity of the individual�s mental or behavioral health condition
and the individual�s ability to function and care for themself. If it is
determined that an individual meets one of the four outlined criteria, the
evaluators must submit the findings to the superior court in the county where
the individual resides for judicial consideration of whether the statutory
criteria for court-ordered treatment are met (
A.R.S. Title 36, Chapter 5
;

AHCCCS
).

There is no anticipated fiscal impact
to the state General Fund associated with this legislation.

Provisions

1.

Allows
the court, on its own motion or by request of a party, to order mental health
evaluation and treatment hearings, or specified testimony by a party or witness
during the hearing, to be conducted virtually by way of telephone,
videoconferencing or another audiovisual technology if the Court finds that
this procedure will not unfairly prejudice a party or witness.

2.

Requires
the court, in determining whether use of audiovisual technology is appropriate,
to consider the inconvenience to or burden on a party or witness to attend the
proceeding in person and the ability of all parties to be heard by other
parties in attendance, including the judicial officer and, if applicable, the
certified reporter or an electronic recording system.

3.

Allows
the Arizona Supreme Court to adopt procedures for conducting virtual mental
health hearings.

4.

Makes
technical and conforming changes.

5.

Becomes
effective on the general effective date.

Prepared by Senate Research

January 26, 2026

MM/hk

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text
SB1242 - 572R - S Ver

Senate Engrossed

mental health;
hearings; audiovisual technology

State of Arizona

Senate

Fifty-seventh Legislature

Second Regular Session

2026

SENATE BILL 1242

AN
ACT

Amending sections 36-505, 36-539
and 36-543, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to mental health services.

(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 36-505, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE
36-505.

Rights at hearing; use of audiovisual technology

A.
At all hearings conducted
pursuant to this chapter, persons shall have the right to an analysis of their
psychological condition by an independent evaluator.

B. In any proceeding held pursuant to
this chapter, the court, on its own or for good cause shown by a party, may
order the hearing to be conducted or a witness or party may be allowed to
appear and give testimony virtually through the use of telephone,
videoconferencing or other audiovisual technology if the court finds that this
procedure will not unfairly prejudice a party or witness. In
determining whether a proceeding should be conducted wholly or partially with
the use of telephone, videoconferencing or other audiovisual technology, the
court shall consider the inconvenience to or burden on a party or witness to
attend the proceeding in person and the ability of all parties to be heard by
other parties in attendance, including the judicial officer and, if applicable,
the certified reporter or an electronic recording system. The supreme court may
adopt rules to govern the procedures to be used in conducting proceedings
virtually pursuant to this chapter.
END_STATUTE

Sec. 2. Section 36-539, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE
36-539.

Conduct of hearing; record; transcript

A. The medical director of the evaluation agency
shall issue instructions to the physicians or the psychiatric and mental health
nurse practitioner of the evaluation agency who is treating the proposed
patient to take all reasonable precautions to ensure that at the time of the
hearing the proposed patient is not so under the influence of or does not so
suffer the effects of drugs, medication or other treatment as to be hampered in
preparing for or participating in the hearing. If the proposed
patient is being treated as an inpatient by the evaluation agency, the court at
the time of the hearing shall be presented a record of all drugs, medication or
other treatment that the person has received during the seventy-two hours
immediately before the hearing.

B. The patient and the patient's attorney shall be
present at all hearings, and the patient's attorney may subpoena and cross-examine
witnesses and present evidence.
The court, for good
cause shown, may allow the patient, the patient's attorney or any witness to
appear and present testimony in open court through the use of telephone,
videoconferencing or other audiovisual technology.
The
patient may choose to not attend the hearing or the patient's attorney may
waive the patient's presence. The evidence presented by the
petitioner or the patient shall include the testimony of two or more witnesses,
regardless of the witnesses' professional licensure, if any, who observed or
were acquainted with the patient at the time of the alleged mental disorder before
the submission of the current application for evaluation pursuant to section 36-520
or, if after the submission of the current application, who were not formal
participants in the evaluation process.� The testimony of the witnesses shall
be limited to observed facts and may not include expert opinion or
conclusions. The witness testimony may be satisfied by a statement
agreed on by the parties and testimony of the two physicians or other health
professionals who participated in the evaluation of the patient pursuant to
section 36-533, which may be satisfied by stipulating to the admission of
the affidavits as required pursuant to section 36-533, subsection
B. The evaluating physicians or other health professionals shall
testify as to their personal observations of the patient. They shall
also testify as to their opinions concerning whether the patient is, as a
result of mental disorder, a danger to self or to others or has a persistent or
acute disability or a grave disability and as to whether the patient requires
treatment. Such testimony shall state specifically the nature and
extent of the danger to self or to others, the persistent or acute disability
or the grave disability. If the patient has a grave disability, the
evaluating physicians or other health professionals shall testify concerning
the need for guardianship or conservatorship, or both, and whether or not the
need is for immediate appointment. Other persons who have
participated in the evaluation of the patient or, if further treatment was
requested by a mental health treatment agency, persons of that agency who are
directly involved in the care of the patient shall testify at the request of
the court or of the patient's attorney.� Witnesses shall testify as to
placement alternatives appropriate and available for the care and treatment of
the patient. The clinical record of the patient for the current
admission shall be available and may be presented in full or in part as
evidence at the request of the court, the county attorney or the patient's
attorney.

C. If the patient, for medical or psychiatric
reasons, is unable to be present at the hearing and cannot appear by other
reasonably feasible means, the court shall require clear and convincing
evidence that the patient is unable to be present at the hearing and on such a
finding may proceed with the hearing in the patient's absence.

D. The requirements of subsection B of this section
are in addition to all rules of evidence and the Arizona rules of civil
procedure, not inconsistent with subsection B of this section.

E. A verbatim record of all proceedings under this
section shall be made by stenographic means by a court reporter if a written
request for a court reporter is made by any party to the proceedings at least
twenty-four hours in advance of such proceedings. If
stenographic means are not requested in the manner provided by this subsection,
electronic means shall be directed by the presiding judge. The
stenographic notes or electronic tape shall be retained as provided by statute.

F. A patient who has been ordered to undergo
treatment may request a certified transcript of the hearing. To
obtain a copy, the patient shall pay for a transcript or shall file an
affidavit that the patient is without means to pay for a
transcript. If the affidavit is found true by the court, the expense
of the transcript is a charge on the county in which the proceedings were held,
or, if an intergovernmental agreement by the counties has required evaluation
in a county other than that of the patient's residence, such expense may be
charged to the county of the patient's residence or in which the patient was
found before evaluation.
END_STATUTE

Sec. 3. Section 36-543, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:

START_STATUTE
36-543.

Annual review; patients with a grave disability or a persistent
or acute disability; notice; court order for continued treatment; rules;
immunity

A. Within ninety days before the expiration of a
court order for treatment, the medical director of the mental health treatment
agency shall conduct an annual review of a patient who has been found to have a
grave disability or a persistent or acute disability and who is undergoing
court-ordered treatment to determine whether the continuation of court-ordered
treatment is appropriate and to assess the needs of the patient for
guardianship or conservatorship, or both. The annual review shall
consist of the mental health treatment and clinical records contained in the
patient's treatment file.� The mental health treatment agency shall keep a
record of the annual review. If the medical director

of the mental health treatment agency
believes that a continuation of
court-ordered treatment is appropriate, the medical director of the
mental health treatment agency shall appoint one or more psychiatrists to carry
out a psychiatric examination of the patient. In any proceeding
conducted pursuant to this section, a patient has the right to have an analysis
of the patient's mental condition by an independent evaluation pursuant to
section 36-538.

B. Each examiner participating in the psychiatric
examination of the patient shall submit a report to the medical director of the
mental health treatment agency that includes the following:

1. The examiner's opinions as to whether the patient
continues to have a grave disability or a persistent or acute disability as the
result of a mental disorder and be in need of continued court-ordered
treatment. In evaluating the patient's need for continued
court-ordered treatment, the examiner must consider, along with all other
evidence, the patient's history before and during the current period of court-ordered
treatment, the patient's compliance with recommended treatment and any other
evidence relevant to the patient's ability and willingness to follow
recommended treatment with or without a court order.

2. A statement as to whether suitable alternatives
to court-ordered treatment are available.

3. A statement as to whether voluntary treatment
would be appropriate.

4. A review of the patient's status as to
guardianship or conservatorship, or both, the adequacy of existing protections
of the patient and the continued need for guardianship or conservatorship, or
both. If the examiner concludes that the patient's needs in these
areas are not being adequately met, the examiner's report shall recommend that
the court order an investigation into the patient's needs.

5. If the patient has an existing guardian who does
not have the mental health powers authorized pursuant to section 14-5312.01,
a recommendation as to whether the additional mental health powers authorized
by section 14-5312.01 should be imposed on the existing guardian and
whether the patient's needs can be adequately addressed by a guardian with
mental health powers without the need for a court order for treatment or
whether the court order for treatment should continue regardless of the
additional mental health powers imposed on the guardian.

6. The results of any physical examination conducted
during the period of court-ordered treatment if relevant to the
psychiatric condition of the patient.

C. After conducting the annual review as prescribed
in this section, if the medical director
of the mental health
treatment agency
believes that continued court-ordered treatment
is necessary or appropriate, not later than thirty days before the expiration
of the court order for treatment, the medical director
of the
mental health treatment agency
shall file with the court an application
for continued court-ordered treatment alleging the basis for the
application and shall file simultaneously with the application any psychiatric
examination conducted as part of the annual review. If the patient
is under guardianship, the medical director
of the mental health
treatment agency
shall mail a copy of the application to the patient's
guardian.

D. If an application for continued court-ordered
treatment is filed, all of the following apply:

1. If the patient does not have an attorney, the
court shall appoint an attorney to represent the patient.

2. Within ten days after appointment, an attorney
appointed pursuant to this subsection, to the extent possible, shall fulfill
the duties imposed pursuant to section 36-537, review the
medical
director's
report
of the medical director of the mental
health treatment agency
and the patient's medical records, interview any
physician who prepared a report on the annual review and file a response
requesting a hearing or submitting the matter to the court for a ruling based
on the record without a hearing.

3. If a hearing is not requested, the court shall
rule on the application or set the matter for hearing.� If a hearing is
requested, the hearing shall be held within three weeks after the request for
hearing is filed.� The hearing may be continued for good cause on motion of a
party or on the court's own motion, and the expiration of the current court
order for treatment may be extended until a ruling by the court on an
application filed pursuant to this subsection.

4. The patient's attorney must be present at all
hearings and may subpoena and cross-examine witnesses and present
evidence. The patient has the right to attend all hearings, but may
choose not to attend a hearing.� The patient's attorney may waive the patient's
presence after speaking with the patient and confirming that the patient
understands the right to be present and does not desire to
attend. If the patient is unable to be present at the hearing for
medical or psychiatric reasons and the hearing cannot be conducted where the
patient is being treated or confined, or the patient cannot appear by another
reasonably feasible means, the court shall require clear and convincing
evidence that the patient is unable to be present at the hearing and on such a
finding may proceed with the hearing in the patient's absence.

5. The evidence presented by the applicant includes
the testimony of one or more witnesses acquainted with the patient during the
period of court-ordered treatment, which may be satisfied by a statement
agreed on by the parties, and the testimony of any physician who performed an
annual review of the patient, which may be satisfied by stipulating to the
admission of the examining physicians' written report prepared pursuant to
subsection B of this section. The court may waive the need for the
applicant to present the testimony of witnesses acquainted with the patient as
required by this subsection, if it finds that the need for a continued court
order for treatment has been established by clear and convincing evidence from
the other testimony and evidence presented at the hearing.
The
court, for good cause shown, may allow the patient, the patient's attorney or
any witness to appear and present testimony in open court through the use of
telephone, videoconferencing or other audiovisual technology.

6. At a hearing held pursuant to this subsection,
the court, with notice, may impose on an existing guardian additional powers
pursuant to section 14-5312.01. If the court finds that the
patient's needs can be adequately met by an existing guardian with the
additional powers pursuant to section 14-5312.01 and that a court order
for treatment is not necessary to ensure compliance with necessary treatment,
the court may terminate the court order for treatment or decline to issue an
order continuing court-ordered treatment. The court may also order
an investigation into the need for guardianship or conservatorship, or both,
and may appoint a suitable person or agency to conduct the investigation. The
appointee may include a court-appointed guardian ad litem, a court-appointed
investigator pursuant to section 14-5308 or the public fiduciary if there
is no person willing and qualified to act in that capacity. The
court shall give notice of the appointment to the appointee within three days
after the appointment. The appointee shall submit the report of the
investigation to the court within twenty-one days. The report
shall include recommendations as to who should be guardian or conservator, or
both, and the findings and reasons for the recommendation.� If the
investigation and report so indicate, the court may authorize an appropriate person
to file a petition for appointment of a guardian or conservator for the
patient.

E. If a hearing is held pursuant to subsection D of
this section, the party seeking the renewal of the court order must prove all
of the following by clear and convincing evidence:

1. The patient continues to have a mental disorder
and, as a result of that disorder, has either a persistent or acute disability
or a grave disability.

2. The patient is in need of continued court-ordered
treatment.

3. The patient is either unwilling or unable to
accept treatment voluntarily.

F. After a hearing held pursuant to subsection D of
this section, the court may order the patient to be released from court-ordered
treatment or to undergo continued court-ordered treatment for a period not to
exceed the time periods prescribed in section 36-540, subsection D.

G. The director shall create and operate a program
to ensure that the examination and review of persons with grave disabilities or
persistent or acute disabilities under court order are carried out in an
effective and timely manner. The director shall adopt rules needed
to operate this program.

H. The medical director of the mental health
treatment agency is not civilly liable for any acts committed by the released
patient if the medical director
of the mental health treatment
agency
has in good faith complied with the requirements of this article.

END_STATUTE