Requires hospital to install and operate electronic monitoring device at request of incapacitated patient or patient's legal representative.
Assembly Bill 1213 requires New Jersey hospitals to install and operate an electronic monitoring device in the room of an incapacitated patient when requested by the patient or the patient’s legal representative. The bill defines an incapacitated patient as one who is unconscious, immobile, or otherwise unable to verbally communicate with hospital staff, and defines an electronic monitoring device broadly to include a video surveillance camera, video telephone, or internet video surveillance device. Hospitals must inform the patient or representative of this right during admission, may require the request to be made in writing, and may not refuse admission or remove a patient because of the request.
The bill also requires hospitals to pay all costs associated with the device, including purchase and operation for the duration of the admission, and to retain recorded footage so it can be provided to the patient or representative through the 60th day after discharge. Monitoring must be conducted in plain view, must protect the privacy of other patients and visitors to the extent reasonably possible, and in shared rooms requires written consent from the other patient or that patient’s representative. The bill allows a notice to be posted on the room door and requires compliance with state and federal health information privacy laws. It also creates a third-degree crime for willfully tampering with, obstructing, or destroying the device or its footage without consent.
The bill would add a new chapter of hospital obligations under Title 26 of the Revised Statutes and directly regulate licensed hospitals in New Jersey. It would create enforceable patient and representative rights to request in-room electronic monitoring, impose notice, installation, cost, storage, and access requirements on hospitals, and establish criminal penalties for interference with the monitoring equipment or recordings. The Commissioner of Health would be required to adopt implementing regulations, and hospitals would need to adjust admission procedures, privacy practices, and record-retention systems to comply.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented legislative debate or vote history to gauge formal sentiment. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears framed as a patient-protection and transparency bill aimed at safeguarding incapacitated patients in hospitals. Its structure suggests support for monitoring as a voluntary option, while also trying to preserve privacy and health-information protections.
The main areas of potential contention are privacy, hospital burden, and shared-room consent. Hospitals would bear all costs of installation and operation and must retain footage for post-discharge access, which could raise operational and financial concerns. Privacy advocates or hospital stakeholders may also focus on the implications of video monitoring in patient rooms, especially in shared rooms where another patient or representative must consent. The bill attempts to address these concerns by making monitoring voluntary, requiring plain-view installation, limiting access to footage, and tying implementation to state and federal privacy laws.