Idaho committee backs bill allowing family-installed cameras in long‑term care facilities

BOISE — The Idaho House Health and Welfare Committee voted to send House Bill 337 to the House floor with a “do pass” recommendation after a roughly 40‑minute discussion on whether residents and their families should be allowed to install electronic monitoring devices in long‑term care facilities.

Representative Lori Healy, sponsor of the bill and a clinician by background, told the committee the measure would “allow electronic monitoring in care facilities” and give residents and their families a tool to oversee care without costing the state. “This legislation does not require government funding; it simply grants residents and their family the right to install monitoring devices at their own expense,” Healy said.

The bill would, among other provisions discussed in committee, allow residents or their authorized family members to install cameras in rooms if certain privacy protections are met; require notice where monitoring is in use; bar facilities from viewing footage without family permission; and include criminal or civil prohibitions for intentionally obstructing or tampering with devices. Healy told lawmakers the measure is modeled on laws adopted in other states — citing “Esther’s Law” in Ohio and about 10 other states — and aims to increase accountability and reduce underreported abuse in facilities.

Why it matters

Supporters and family members said cameras can provide oversight in situations where relatives cannot be onsite. Monte Morland, who testified he installed cameras while caring for his elderly parents and then brought some into a memory care room, said the devices gave him crucial sight into his parents’ daily care. “This law here in Idaho is for precious mothers like Esther and for all like my parents who need the ones who love them most to watch out for them,” Morland said. “A simple device can provide the means to accountability and most of all, understanding. So let’s be a voice for our voiceless loved ones. Let’s shine a light into their final days.”

Questions and concerns

Representatives and witnesses pressed on privacy, liability and practical details. Robert Vandermer, executive director of the Idaho Health Care Association, said the association could not support the bill “as written.” He expressed concerns about footage showing intimate body parts, how facilities would meet federal privacy and survey requirements, and potential liability if recordings are leaked. “The federal regulations are if any kind of abuse takes place in the facility ... the facility is accountable,” Vandermer said. He also noted the difficulty of requiring families to use specific technology to blur or obscure sensitive images, even if that would address facility concerns.

Committee members asked about technical logistics, including who would pay for Wi‑Fi or troubleshooting; Healy and witnesses said families would be responsible for cost and maintenance of devices and connectivity. Lawmakers also discussed language in the bill that uses the word “intentionally” when describing tampering with devices; some members worried that the word could allow bad actors to claim accidental interference, while the sponsor said legal counsel advised keeping the intentionality language.

Other bill provisions discussed include a requirement that residents who opt for monitoring be moved to single rooms and an option for facilities to post conspicuous notice at the entrance to a monitored room (the bill text references such notice). Committee members also discussed that the bill prevents facilities from unilaterally viewing footage unless the family grants permission, and that families may be able to share footage later for training or legal purposes.

Vote and next steps

Representative Wheeler moved that the committee send House Bill 337 to the House floor with a due‑pass recommendation. The motion passed on a voice vote; the chair recorded an aye and the motion was declared passed. Committee members who spoke in favor during the hearing included Representatives Furman, Kaler and Levitt; the Idaho Health Care Association said it wanted more time to negotiate technical and liability issues before supporting final language.

What remains unresolved

Witnesses and lawmakers acknowledged several open issues that could be addressed with amendments on the floor or in subsequent committee work: how to require or incentivize use of technology that obscures intimate images, whether facilities should have any responsibility for connectivity or equipment, how to handle footage ownership and subpoena powers in litigation, and how federal surveyors will treat incidents captured on family‑owned cameras. Vandermer suggested signage, technology standards and clearer liability language as possible paths forward.

The committee record shows testimony from two public witnesses and more than a half dozen lawmakers who questioned or commented during the discussion. House Bill 337 will move to the full House for further consideration.