Hawaii
Hawaii Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent Rules (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Hawaii's one-party consent law, HRS Section 803-42, allows patients to record their own medical appointments without notifying the doctor or staff. HIPAA does not restrict patients from recording their own visits; it governs how providers handle your health information, not your own recordings.
Hawaii's medical recording laws involve an intersection of state recording statutes, federal HIPAA privacy rules, and healthcare provider policies. Patients in Hawaii have broad rights to record their own medical appointments under the state's one-party consent framework, but the specific circumstances matter.
This guide covers when patients can legally record medical visits, how healthcare providers can respond, how HIPAA interacts with recording rights, and what protections exist for medical audio recordings.
One-Party Consent in Medical Settings
Yes. Under HRS 803-42, you can record any medical appointment you attend. Your consent as a participant in the conversation is sufficient, since the statute exempts a person who "is a party to the communication." You do not need to inform your doctor, nurse, or other staff.

This covers primary care visits, specialist consultations, emergency room visits, dental appointments, mental health sessions, and rehabilitation visits.
Why Patients Record Medical Appointments
Patients often record medical visits for legitimate reasons:
- Memory and reference: Medical visits can involve complex information that is difficult to retain
- Second opinions: Recordings allow patients to share provider statements with other physicians
- Caregiver assistance: Family members who could not attend can review what was discussed
- Documentation of informed consent discussions
- Evidence of medical errors or miscommunications
- Disability accommodations: Patients with cognitive or hearing disabilities may need recordings to process medical information

The Private Places Exception
Does HRS 711-1111 Apply to Medical Settings?
HRS 711-1111 makes it a misdemeanor to install or use a recording device in a private place without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there. A medical examination room could qualify as a private place under this statute.
However, the statute is primarily aimed at recording other people in private places without their consent. When a patient records their own medical appointment, the patient is a participant in the conversation and is also present in the space. The private places exception is most relevant when:
- A third party installs recording devices in a medical office without the knowledge of patients or staff
- A staff member records patients without their knowledge in examination rooms
- Someone places a device in a changing area or other private medical space without the consent of the people entitled to privacy there (a device that observes or records a patient undressed is the separate Class C felony in HRS 711-1110.9)
For a patient recording their own consultation with their own doctor, the private-place law is unlikely to apply, though no Hawaii court has decided the question. The one-party rule in HRS 803-42 answers only the wiretap law; the better support is State v. Lee, 67 Haw. 307 (1984), where the Hawaii Supreme Court held that a recorder worn into a private office was not a prohibited installation under the wiretap law as then written.

HIPAA and Medical Recording
What HIPAA Does and Does Not Cover
HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) limits how covered entities (healthcare providers, insurers, and their business associates) may use and disclose patients' protected health information. HIPAA does not:
- Prohibit patients from recording their own medical visits
- Apply to recordings made by patients themselves
- Give healthcare providers the right to confiscate or destroy patient recordings
- Create criminal liability for patients who record their own appointments
HIPAA's privacy protections flow in one direction: from covered entities toward patients. The statute was designed to protect patients from unauthorized disclosure of their health information by healthcare organizations, not to restrict patients' own conduct during their appointments.
When HIPAA Becomes Relevant
HIPAA becomes relevant to recordings in specific circumstances:
- Provider-made recordings: If a healthcare provider records a patient encounter, those recordings become part of the medical record and are subject to HIPAA privacy rules
- Third-party disclosures: HIPAA does not apply to a patient's own recording, but sharing a recording that captures other patients (for example, in a shared waiting area) could expose you to a privacy claim, so edit them out before sharing
- Research uses: Recordings made in clinical research settings are subject to specific research privacy protections

Healthcare Provider Rights and Limitations
Can Providers Prohibit Recording?
Healthcare providers can implement facility policies that restrict recording in their facilities. These policies may:
- Require patients to notify providers before recording
- Restrict recording in waiting areas or shared spaces
- Require patients to obtain consent from all healthcare workers present
A provider's policy cannot make your recording a crime, because Hawaii's one-party consent law allows it. But the law does not force a provider to let you record: a practice can ask you to stop, set rules for its offices, or decline a non-emergency visit, so it is worth asking at the start of the appointment.
Refusal of Treatment
Refusing care solely because a patient wants to record raises ethical concerns, but no Hawaii law specifically bars a practice from requiring that visits not be recorded. If you need a recording because of a disability, ask for it as an accommodation.
What Providers Can Do
Healthcare providers can reasonably:
- Ask patients to stop recording in shared spaces where other patients may be captured
- Request that recordings not include other patients or staff members not involved in the patient's care
- Inform patients about the facility's recording policies at check-in
- Include recording policies in patient intake paperwork
Protecting Your Medical Recordings
Storage and Security
Medical recordings may contain sensitive personal health information. Best practices include:
- Storing recordings with strong password protection
- Keeping recordings on personal devices rather than sharing to cloud services without reviewing privacy settings
- Being careful about sharing recordings with others, as they may contain sensitive third-party information
Using Recordings in Disputes
If you need to use a recording in a medical malpractice or billing dispute:
- Consult an attorney before sharing recordings with insurance companies or opposing counsel
- Preserve originals and only share copies
- Understand that recordings made in violation of state law may be inadmissible or create liability
Telehealth and Video Medical Consultations
Recording Telehealth Appointments
Telehealth visits are electronic communications covered by HRS 803-42. Under one-party consent, you can record your own telehealth appointment without informing the provider. The same one-party consent principles apply whether the appointment is in person or via video.
Platform Recording Features
Many telehealth platforms include built-in recording features. Using the platform's own recording function may trigger notifications to providers. Even if the platform sends a notification, your own recording of the visit is still lawful under one-party consent.
Federal Developments
Hawaii's election deepfake law, Act 191 SLH 2024, was permanently enjoined as facially unconstitutional in Babylon Bee LLC v. Lopez, No. 1:25-cv-00234 (D. Haw. Jan. 30, 2026) (Park, J.). The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act (2025) addresses nonconsensual intimate images; its platform takedown duties took effect May 19, 2026. Healthcare providers and patients using recordings should continue to follow HIPAA privacy rules and Hawaii's one-party consent framework when recording medical encounters.
More Hawaii Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
More Hawaii Recording Topics
More Hawaii Laws
- Hawaii AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Hawaii Dashcam Laws
- Hawaii Data Privacy Laws
- Hawaii Deepfake Laws
- Hawaii Employee Monitoring Laws
- Hawaii GPS Tracking Laws
- Hawaii Police Bodycam Laws
- Hawaii Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record my doctor's appointment in Hawaii?
Yes. Hawaii's one-party consent law (HRS 803-42) allows you to record any medical appointment you attend as a patient. Your own consent as a participant is sufficient. You do not need to inform your doctor or healthcare provider. However, facility policies may request that you notify staff or limit recording in shared areas.
Does HIPAA prevent me from recording my medical visit?
No. HIPAA does not prohibit patients from recording their own medical visits. HIPAA regulates how covered entities (healthcare providers and insurers) handle your health information, not what you can record yourself.
Can my doctor refuse to see me if I want to record the visit?
A doctor can have a facility policy about recording, and no Hawaii law specifically bars a practice from declining a non-emergency visit over recording, though refusing care solely for that reason raises ethical concerns. Providers can ask that you not record in shared areas where other patients may be captured.
Are there limitations on recording in medical settings in Hawaii?
Yes. Hawaii's private places exception (HRS 711-1111) could apply in theory, but it is unlikely to restrict a patient's recording of their own appointment since you are a participant in the conversation. The exception is more relevant to covert recording of other people in private medical spaces.
Can I record a telehealth appointment in Hawaii?
Yes. Telehealth appointments are electronic communications covered by Hawaii's one-party consent law. As a participant, you can record the appointment without informing the provider, though platform features may send notifications.
Updates
Pointed hidden cameras that capture patients undressing to the HRS 711-1110.9 felony and stopped describing one-party consent as a right that overrides a provider's policy.
We corrected this page to say that Hawaii law makes a patient's own recording legal but does not force a provider to allow it, fixed how HIPAA is described (it limits providers, not patients), removed an unsupported claim about abandonment liability, explained the private-place law's uncertain reach more accurately, and clarified the TAKE IT DOWN Act dates.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Removed a case citation, State v. Okubo, that was used to vouch for a patient's right to record their own appointment; the case is a 1980s criminal evidence-suppression appeal about government monitoring, not a citizen-recording-rights ruling, so the one-party rule is now grounded directly in the statute's text.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 803: ARRESTS, SEARCHES, SEARCH WARRANTS
§ 803-42Interception, access, and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications, use of pen register, trap and trace device, and mobile tracking device prohibitedIn forcecited in 21 of our articles
(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this part, any person who: (1) Intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; (2) Intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication when: (A) Such a device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other similar connection used in wire communication; or (B) Such a device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; (3) Intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this part; (4) Intentionally uses, or endeavors to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-23 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 14 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State v. Lo (1983) held HRS 803-42(b)(3) barred police from secretly installing recording devices in a hotel room even though one participant consented, and suppressed the evidence. State v. Lee (1984) held a recorder worn by a consenting participant is not an installation in a private place, so no violation.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Lo (Hawaii Supreme Court 1983, 66 Haw. 653)✓Agents wired a hotel room and recorded a doctor lured there by a cooperating patient; the Hawaii Supreme Court held the statute bars installing a recording device in any private place without the consent of those entitled to privacy, and affirmed suppression.
- State v. Okubo (Hawaii Supreme Court 1984, 67 Haw. 197)✓Police recorded roughly forty bribery conversations using body recorders and phone taps with the participating officers' consent; the Hawaii Supreme Court found the consensual monitoring valid under the statute and the state constitution.
- State v. Lee (Hawaii Supreme Court 1984, 67 Haw. 307)✓An officer posing as a patient wore a recorder into a doctor's private office; the Hawaii Supreme Court held a device worn on a participant's body is not an installation in a private place, so the statute was not violated, distinguishing Lo.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii Smart Glasses Recording Laws (2026), Hawaii Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Hawaii Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties
§ 803-48Recovery of civil damages authorizedIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
Any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is accessed, intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this part shall[:] (1) Have a civil cause of action against any person who accesses, intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to access, intercept, disclose, or use the communications[;] and (2) Be entitled to recover from any such person: (A) The greater of[:] (i) The sum of the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation[;] or (ii) Statutory damages of the greater of $100 a day for each day of violation or $10,000; (B) Punitive damages, where appropriate; and (C) A reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. The aggrieved person may also seek and be awarded such preliminary, and other equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate. A good faith reliance on a court order shall constitute a complete defense to any civil action brought under this part. [L 1978, c 218, pt of §2; am L 1986, c 303, §8; am L 1989, c 164, §10; am L 2006, c 200, pt of §4]
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-30 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Also relied on in: Hawaii Security Camera Laws: Residential and Business Surveillance Rules, Hawaii Video Recording Laws: Privacy Rules and Consent Requirements, Hawaii Voyeurism Laws: Hidden Camera Penalties and Privacy Protections
Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 711: OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
§ 711-1111Violation of privacy in the second degreeIn forcecited in 20 of our articles
(1) A person commits the offense of violation of privacy in the second degree if, except in the execution of a public duty or as authorized by law, the person intentionally: (a) Trespasses on property for the purpose of subjecting anyone to eavesdropping or other surveillance in a private place; (b) Peers or peeps into a window or other opening of a dwelling or other structure adapted for sojourn or overnight accommodations for the purpose of spying on the occupant thereof or invading the privacy of another person with a lewd or unlawful purpose, under circumstances in which a reasonable person in the dwelling or other structure would not expect to be observed; (c) Trespasses on property for the sexual gratification of the actor; (d) Installs or uses, or both, in any private place, without consent of the person or persons entitled to privacy therein, any means or device for observing, recording, amplifying, or broadcasting sounds or events in that place other than another person in a stage of undress or sexual activity; provided that this paragraph shall not prohibit a person from making a video or audio recording or taking a photograph of a law enforcement officer while the…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at capitol.hawaii.gov
Cited in 10 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hawaii decisions have construed HRS 711-1111 mainly alongside neighboring statutes. State v. Kaakimaka (2026) read subsections (1)(d) and (1)(e) as an inside and outside pair while construing the first-degree offense. State v. Lee (1984) treated 711-1111(1) as drawn from Model Penal Code 250.12 in reading the wiretap statute.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Lee (Hawaii Supreme Court 1984, 67 Haw. 307)✓An undercover officer wearing a recorder taped conversations in a doctor's private office; construing the wiretap consent provision drawn from HRS 711-1111(1)(b) and (c), the court held a body-worn device is not an "installation" in a private place, so the tapes were admissible.
- State v. Kaakimaka (Hawaii Supreme Court 2026)“…711-1110.9 and second degree violation of privacy under HRS § 711-1111 (2014 & Supp. 2025) convinces me that…”
- State v. Lester (Hawaii Supreme Court 1982, 64 Haw. 659)“…The Code provision covering wiretapping and eavesdropping, HRS § 711-1111, permits "consensual eavesdropping".…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Hawaii Dashcam Laws: Recording Rules, Audio Consent, and Legal Limits (2026), Hawaii Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance and Privacy Rights, Hawaii Phone Call Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules for Calls
Sources and References
- Hawaii Revised Statutes 803-42 - Interception of Wire, Oral, or Electronic Communications(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- Hawaii Revised Statutes 711-1111 - Violation of Privacy in the Second Degree(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- Hawaii Revised Statutes 803-48 - Recovery of Civil Damages Authorized(capitol.hawaii.gov).gov
- 45 CFR Part 164 - HIPAA Security and Privacy Rules(ecfr.gov).gov
- Hawaii Department of Health(health.hawaii.gov).gov
- HHS Office for Civil Rights(hhs.gov).gov