Senate committee advances bill letting residents or families install cameras in care apartments

The Idaho Senate Health and Welfare Committee voted to send House Bill 337 to the Senate floor with a "do pass" recommendation after a lengthy hearing that split providers and family advocates over allowing cameras in long-term care resident apartments.

Representative Dory Healy, the bill's sponsor, told the committee the measure responds to constituent concerns and research about abuse in long-term care. "It came from constituents, and it's really that simple," Healy said, noting national statistics she cited to illustrate the problem.

The bill would let "a resident or resident guardian or health care agent" authorize installation and use of an electronic monitoring device in a resident's apartment, with conditions intended to protect privacy. Healy pointed the bill requires the device be "installed in a location that meets facility standards and allows facility staff to assist the residents while maintaining the privacy of the residents' sensitive and intimate body areas," and she said the law would require residents to have a private room when a device is used.

Supporters and family advocates at the hearing said cameras can document suspected abuse and give families peace of mind. Healy closed the hearing by framing the debate as a question of whom the law protects: "Who are we protecting? Are we protecting staff or are we protecting our most at risk adults?" she asked.

Industry groups and facility representatives strongly opposed the proposal or urged changes. Elizabeth Sonnichsen, deputy general counsel for Pinnacle Senior Living, said the bill is "overbroad" and expressed particular concern that the draft could prevent facilities from viewing footage that might show staff misconduct. "I believe that this bill is so overbroad that it disallows our care staff from viewing the footage and potentially making changes to it," Sonnichsen said.

Cody Bennett, regional administrator for Grace Assisted Living, said the bill leaves key terms unclear and could lead to improper or unauthorized recordings. "This lack of definitive language will result in unauthorized use of recording devices, which will in turn result in rights violations and potential emotional and psychological trauma for residents," Bennett said, arguing the bill could also increase operational costs that would be passed on to residents.

Monica Heath, executive regional nurse for Grace Assisted Living, described dignity and staffing concerns: "How many people are going to want to work underneath a camera? This is going to negatively impact our staffing for our care staff," she said, adding that some families already bring hidden cameras and the bill would make camera use more transparent but also raise new problems around access to footage and litigation.

Robert Van der Merwey, executive director of the Idaho Healthcare Association, argued the privacy and practical issues around intimate care are difficult to resolve. "If you've changed a baby, it's hard to cover them while you're changing, and I've helped change a 200‑pound resident — even harder," Van der Merwey said, urging caution and noting some facilities already use cameras with reduced-detail imaging to protect dignity.

Colter Camo, an owner of Grace Assisted Living, said facilities and families already negotiate camera use through admission agreements and internal review processes. "If you're unhappy that a building doesn't offer camera services, they can go next door to somewhere that does," Camo said, warning the bill could remove the ability of providers to set policies tailored to their operations.

Committee members pressed on specifics the bill leaves to facility policy. Healy said the bill was drafted broadly on purpose to allow facilities to write standards — for example, methods to avoid showing intimate body areas during routine care — and said families typically pay for the cameras. The draft also states that a resident must have a private room when a device is used and that facilities must make "every effort" to ensure sensitive areas remain covered while the monitor is active.

After question-and-answer and public testimony, Senator Blaylock moved to send the bill to the floor with a due‑pass recommendation; Senator Kaiser seconded. The motion passed on a voice vote; Senator Harris, Senator Shippey and Senator Wintrow were recorded as opposed. The committee did not record a roll-call tally of all yes votes during the voice vote.

The bill will next be considered by the full Senate. If advanced by the Senate, the measure would change state law to permit resident- or guardian-authorized electronic monitoring devices in private resident apartments, subject to facility-written placement and privacy standards.

Votes at a glance: the committee voted to send House Bill 337 to the Senate floor with a "do pass" recommendation; Senators Harris, Shippey and Wintrow recorded "no."