Plan would allow monitoring by cameras in Arizona nursing homes

SB 1041 would override any rules or practices in nursing homes and assisted living facilities that bar such live cameras, as long as they were placed in a resident's own room. If a resident was unable to consent, that right would belong to the person with the legal right to act on the resident's behalf.

This week's 16-1 bipartisan approval of the measure by the House Appropriations Committee came over the objections of lobbyists who represent the facilities. They say such monitoring could invade the privacy of others who happened to be in the resident's room.

But lawmakers said they were swayed by a belief that a resident's room is no different than a private home, where people are now free to monitor.

"It's all about public safety to me,'' said Rep. Quang Nguyen, the Prescott Valley Republican who is the bill's sponsor. He said statistics show an increased number of reports of abuse of vulnerable adults in these facilities.

"Is this a perfect solution?'' Nguyen asked rhetorically. "I don't know. But we need to do something about it" and that something is to allow monitoring, he said.

For some lawmakers on the panel, the issue was more personal than the statistics cited by Nguyen.

"I truly wish we had the ability to put a camera in my grandmother's room during COVID,'' said Rep. Nancy Gutierrez, a Tucson Democrat. Facilities were pretty much off limits to regular visitors at that time, including family members.

She said her grandmother's case didn't involve abuse by staff in what she called a "very highly rated, very expensive'' facility in Scottsdale, at least not in the way many people define abuse.

"She was absolutely neglected,'' Gutierrez said. "And we have no proof they were doing that, other than she was fine before COVID and went downhill because they literally ignored her and abandoned her.''

Gutierrez said if there had been a camera, she would have been able to monitor what was happening in real time — and to dispute claims by staff that they were tending to her grandmother and ensuring she was being fed. Her grandmother died in 2020 while still in the facility.

"That's exactly why this type of camera should be available,'' Gutierrez said.

Jake Hindman, who represents the Assisted Living Federation of America, said his clients who operate such facilities have objections to the proposal.  

"A number of them have to do with private property rights and the sanctity of those rights, and the ability to manage and control your property with your customers,'' he told lawmakers.

Hinman also said there is a possible "loss of dignity for people who may not want to be filmed or are aware they are being filmed in some of the most intimate acts, including being changed.''

There are residents who don't want to live in a facility where they might be filmed, he said.

But Brendan Blake, representing AARP Arizona, said "choice is at the center of this bill as it relates to the residents and the ability to monitor the care that they receive."

Blake also told lawmakers that he and other proponents of monitoring have worked for years to overcome industry objections.

For example, he said, SB 1041 includes giving someone who shares the same room the power to veto monitoring. The measure also spells out that if a live feed requires WiFi or an internet connection, it is the responsibility of the resident or the family, he said.

Blake countered Hinman's claim that monitoring would impair the dignity of those being monitored by saying: "We cannot find anything else that is more undignified than being abused or neglected at the hands, in your own room, of the people you have trusted to provide care for you."

He also noted that the monitoring would be limited to a resident's room and would not cover areas of a facility where there are other people. 

Eighteen other states already offer similar monitoring rights to residents of nursing homes and assisted living facilities, Blake said.

Marie Isaacson, who lobbies for LeadingAge, which is comprised of nonprofit facilities, questioned the need for such legislation. 

She told lawmakers there are more than 2,000 such facilities. Isaacson said a voluntary survey by the Department of Health Services found that, of those that responded, half already allow electronic monitoring.

Nguyen said he doesn't understand the objections by the owners and operators of assisted living facilities and nursing homes to allowing residents the right to cameras to monitor their own rooms. He said it's no more of an imposition on their property rights than requiring things like a fire alarm or a ramp for access.

Yet, Nguyen said, they seem adamant that a mandate to permit monitoring and leave the decision up to residents is somehow a more intrusive form of state interference.

He has a theory about why a camera causes concern. "It captures people who are doing bad things that they shouldn't do,'' Nguyen said. "And it also captures people not doing the things that they also should be doing.''

The measure now goes to the full House. If approved there, it still must go to the Senate, which has not had a chance to review this version of SB 1041.