Kentucky
Kentucky Nursing Home Camera Laws: HB 491 and What Applies Today
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 14, 2026). · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Kentucky has no statute or regulation addressing cameras in long-term care resident rooms one way or the other. A 2026 bill, House Bill 491, would have created the state's first such framework, but it died in committee without a hearing. This page covers what Kentucky law says today, what HB491 would have done, and practical guidance for Kentucky families.
This page is part of our Nursing Home Camera Laws hub, which compares all 50 states, and our national Nursing Home Camera Laws guide covering the states that do have an enacted statute.
Kentucky Has No Nursing Home Camera Statute Today
No Kentucky statute grants a resident or their legal representative a right to install a camera or audio device in a long-term care facility room, and none prohibits it either. The Kentucky Residents' Rights Act, KRS 216.515, sets out the state's general resident-rights framework, including dignity, self-determination, and privacy in communications and records, but a full text review found no provision addressing electronic monitoring, cameras, or recording devices. The operations regulation that implements those rights, 902 KAR 20:300 (Operation and services; nursing facilities), requires that a nursing facility "shall ensure that the rights of residents are protected in accordance with KRS 216.515 - 216.520," and it is likewise silent on cameras, video, electronic monitoring, and recording devices. Some secondary sources circulating online flatly claim cameras are "prohibited everywhere" in Kentucky nursing homes, even with consent; others claim they are simply legal. Neither claim is supported by an actual Kentucky statute or regulation. The accurate description is that Kentucky law does not currently address in-room cameras one way or the other, leaving the question to each facility's own admission agreement and policy.
House Bill 491: A Detailed Framework That Died Without a Hearing
House Bill 491, sponsored by Rep. DJ Johnson, was introduced in the Kentucky House during the 2026 Regular Session. It was referred to the Committee on Committees on January 27, 2026, and then to the House Health Services Committee on February 3, 2026. It received no hearing, no committee vote, and no further action. The 2026 Regular Session adjourned sine die on April 15, 2026, and the bill died with it. Kentucky regular-session bills do not carry over to a later session, so HB491 would need to be refiled in a future session; Kentucky's 2027 session is a shorter 30-day session, with the next 60-day regular session in 2028.
As drafted, HB491 would have defined an "electronic monitoring device" as a fixed-position video camera, audio recorder, or combination of the two installed in a resident's room, and would have required a facility to post a notice at the entrance to a monitored resident's room, so devices could not be hidden. In a shared room, installation would have required the consent of the other resident or their guardian or attorney-in-fact, who could condition that consent, for example by requiring the device be pointed away from them; if a roommate refused, the facility would have been expected to attempt a reasonable room-relocation accommodation. The resident or their representative, not the facility, would have paid for the device and its installation, maintenance, and removal. The bill would have barred a facility from denying admission to, discharging, or otherwise retaliating against a resident over the decision to authorize a device, and would have restricted access to recordings to the resident, their guardian or attorney-in-fact, and law enforcement personnel, with additional viewers allowed only with authorization. Intentional tampering with a device in violation of the bill's terms would have been a Class B misdemeanor. The bill would have directed the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to develop authorization forms and storage and use rules.
Watch out: HB491 is not law. It describes what was proposed in the 2026 session, not what Kentucky actually permits or requires today. A facility is under no legal obligation to follow any of the procedures the bill would have created.
Audio vs. Video: Kentucky's General Recording Law Still Applies
Even without a nursing-home-specific statute, Kentucky's general eavesdropping law governs any camera or audio device placed in a resident's room. Kentucky is a one-party consent state: under KRS 526.010, "eavesdrop" means overhearing, recording, amplifying, or transmitting a wire or oral communication without the consent of at least one party, and under KRS 526.020, eavesdropping is a Class D felony. That definition is scoped to wire and oral communications, so it does not itself reach silent video recording.
A resident, or someone recording with the resident's consent, capturing their own conversations is on solid ground. It is less clear where a camera with audio also picks up conversations the resident is not part of, such as two staff members talking to each other or a roommate speaking with a visitor. Neither of those parties has consented, which can raise separate exposure under Kentucky's eavesdropping statute. A video-only device avoids this issue entirely. For the general mechanics of Kentucky's one-party consent rule, see our Kentucky recording law guide and its security camera page.
Dropping the audio does not put video outside Kentucky's criminal code, though. KRS 531.090 makes voyeurism a Class A misdemeanor, and it reaches the intentional use of "any camera, videotape, photooptical, photoelectric, or other image recording device" for the purpose of observing, viewing, or recording another person's sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or nipple of the female breast without that person's consent, where that person is somewhere a reasonable person would believe they will not be observed or recorded. KRS 531.100 makes video voyeurism a Class D felony where an image obtained that way is used or divulged for consideration, or distributed. Both statutes turn on the operator's purpose, so a camera trained on a bed to monitor how a family member is being cared for is a different thing from one positioned to capture a resident, or a non-consenting roommate, being bathed, toileted, or changed. That is why placement and aim matter as much as permission does.
What This Means in Practice
Because Kentucky has no statute either granting or barring a resident's right to a camera, the facility's admission agreement controls whether one is allowed. Before installing any device:
- Ask the administrator directly and get any permission in writing. Some Kentucky facilities allow family-installed cameras under their own policy; others prohibit them.
- Address a shared room separately. Kentucky has no statutory roommate-consent requirement outside the unenacted HB491; a facility that permits cameras will typically set its own rule, which may mean seeking the roommate's agreement or requesting a private room. Aim matters independently of consent: point the device away from any bed or area where a resident or roommate is bathed, toileted, or changed, because KRS 531.090 makes it a Class A misdemeanor to intentionally use a camera to view or record another person's genitals, undergarments, or breast without consent where they reasonably expect not to be observed.
- Consider a video-only device if consent from everyone who might be recorded, including staff and a roommate's visitors, cannot realistically be obtained.
- An undisclosed camera carries real practical risk. Silent video is not eavesdropping under KRS 526.020, which reaches only wire and oral communications, but a facility that discovers the device may treat it as a violation of the admission agreement; any audio it captures from a conversation no party consented to could expose the person who installed it to felony eavesdropping liability under KRS 526.020; and a camera positioned to capture a resident or roommate undressed can raise a voyeurism question under KRS 531.090 whether or not it was disclosed.
If You Suspect Abuse or Neglect
Camera footage, whether from a facility system or a family device installed with permission, is sometimes the evidence that first reveals abuse or neglect. If footage or another source raises a genuine concern about how a resident is being treated, that concern may support a legal claim separate from whether the camera itself was properly authorized.
Harmed by a product or exposure? Speak with an attorney about your options
If you or a loved one may have been harmed, you can speak with an attorney about your legal options at no cost. Whether you have a claim depends on the specific facts. This is attorney advertising, not a guarantee that you qualify or of any particular outcome.
Reporting a Concern: The Kentucky Long-Term Care Ombudsman
Kentucky residents, families, and staff can raise complaints about facility policy, retaliation, or suspected abuse or neglect with the state's Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program, run through the Cabinet for Health and Family Services' Department for Aging and Independent Living, with 15 district programs and 80 or more volunteer ombudsmen statewide. Under the federal Older Americans Act, the program covers assisted living residents as well as nursing home residents, regardless of whether Kentucky has a camera statute. Kentucky's Office of Inspector General, Division of Health Care, separately licenses and inspects nursing homes and manages abuse-incident reporting.
Information last verified on 2026-08-14, drawn from Kentucky Legislature HB491 bill records, KRS 526.010, KRS 526.020, and KRS 216.515. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer and is not legal advice.
Related Resources
- Nursing Home Camera Laws by State
- Nursing Home Camera Laws: 50-State Comparison
- Kentucky Recording Laws
- Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect Claims
- Kentucky Power of Attorney Laws
Last updated: 2026-08-14.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it legal to put a camera in a nursing home room in Kentucky?
Kentucky has no statute either granting or barring this right. Whether a camera is allowed depends on the individual facility's admission agreement. A 2026 bill, HB491, would have created a statutory right but died in committee without a hearing.
What happened to Kentucky's nursing home camera bill?
House Bill 491 was referred to the House Health Services Committee on February 3, 2026, and received no hearing or vote. It died when the 2026 Regular Session adjourned sine die on April 15, 2026.
Can a nursing home refuse to allow a camera in Kentucky?
Yes. Because no Kentucky statute grants residents a right to install a camera, a facility can lawfully permit, condition, or prohibit cameras as a matter of its own admission agreement and policy.
Is Kentucky a one-party or two-party consent state for recording?
Kentucky is a one-party consent state. Under KRS 526.010 and 526.020, a person who is a party to a conversation, or has the consent of at least one party, may lawfully record it. Eavesdropping on a conversation without any party's consent is a Class D felony.
Can a video-only camera still break the law in Kentucky?
It can. Kentucky's eavesdropping statute reaches only wire and oral communications, so silent video is outside it, but KRS 531.090 makes voyeurism a Class A misdemeanor when someone intentionally uses a camera to view or record another person's genitals, undergarments, or breast without consent where that person reasonably expects not to be observed. Aiming a device away from any area where a resident or roommate is bathed, toileted, or changed keeps a care-monitoring camera clear of that line.
Would Kentucky's proposed bill have required roommate consent?
Yes. As drafted, HB491 would have required the consent of a roommate, or their guardian or attorney-in-fact, before a device could be installed in a shared room, and would have let the roommate condition that consent, such as requiring the device be pointed away from them.
Who do I contact if I suspect abuse at a Kentucky nursing home?
The Kentucky Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program, run through the Department for Aging and Independent Living, investigates complaints about nursing home and assisted living residents' care and rights at no cost. Kentucky's Office of Inspector General also licenses and inspects facilities and handles abuse reporting.
Updates
Corrected the implementing regulation for Kentucky's resident-rights statute to 902 KAR 20:300 (Operation and services; nursing facilities) and added Kentucky's video-side criminal statutes, KRS 531.090 voyeurism and KRS 531.100 video voyeurism, so the guidance on video-only and undisclosed cameras is no longer a broader all-clear than Kentucky law supports.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
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.
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 216: HEALTH FACILITIES AND SERVICES
§ 216.515Rights of residents -- Duties of facilities -- ActionsIn force
Every resident in a long-term-care facility shall have at least the following rights: (1) Before admission to a long-term-care facility, the resident and the responsible party or his responsible family member or his guardian shall be fully informed in writing, as evidenced by the resident's written acknowledgment and that of the responsible party or his responsible family member or his guardian, of all services available at the long-term-care facility. Every long-term-care facility shall keep the original document of each written acknowledgment in the resident's personal file. (2) Before admission to a long-term-care facility, the resident and the responsible party or his responsible family member or his guardian shall be fully informed in writing, as evidenced by the resident's written acknowledgment and that of the responsible party or his responsible family member or his guardian, of all resident's responsibilities and rights as defined in this section and KRS 216.520 to 216.530. Every long-term-care facility shall keep the original document of each written acknowledgment in the resident's personal file.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 23 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Extendicare Homes, Inc. v. Whisman (Kentucky Supreme Court 2015, 478 S.W.3d 306)“…care, Inc.; and Kindred Health Care Operating, Inc. . KRS 216.515 enumerates certain enforceable rights e…”
- Overstreet v. Kindred Nursing Centers Ltd. Partnership (Kentucky Supreme Court 2015, 479 S.W.3d 69)“…OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUSTICE VENTERS KRS 216.515 sets forth certain rights of nursing ho…”
- King v. Butler Rest Home, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 2011, 365 S.W.3d 561)“…cept where prohibited by law or administrative regulation.” KRS 216.515(4). 900 KAR 2 2:050 § 2 deals with tra…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 526: EAVESDROPPING AND RELATED OFFENSES
§ 526.020EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 20 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he intentionally uses any device to eavesdrop, whether or not he is present at the time. (2) Eavesdropping is a Class D felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-23 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Basham v. Commonwealth (1984) held wiretap evidence obtained under a valid federal order is admissible in Kentucky, though it noted no state law authorizes electronic surveillance by Kentucky police. Brock v. Commonwealth (1997) held the exclusionary rule reaches only constitutional violations, so a private recording was not suppressed.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Springer v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1999, 998 S.W.2d 439)✓A neighbor used a police scanner to tape cordless calls from the victim's home, and detectives played it to induce Eades to confess; the court held the federal wiretap act and Kentucky's eavesdropping statutes did not bar using it against someone who was not a party to the calls.
- Stringer v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Kentucky Supreme Court 2004, 151 S.W.3d 781)✓Wal-Mart secretly ran about forty hours of audio and video surveillance of employees in a store claims area; the court did not decide whether that violated KRS 526.020, holding instead that the employees' statutory claim failed for lack of damages caused by the recording itself.
- Brock v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1997, 947 S.W.2d 24)✓Brock, claiming self-defense, was kept from using a private tape of the victim's mother saying her son had gone to kill him; the court held that even assuming the tape violated KRS 526.020, the exclusionary rule reaches only state action, so suppression was not required.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Kentucky Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, Kentucky Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance, Privacy, and Disputes
§ 526.010DefinitionIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
The following definition applies in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: "Eavesdrop" means to overhear, record, amplify or transmit any part of a wire or oral communication of others without the consent of at least one (1) party thereto by means of any electronic, mechanical or other device.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Major v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 177 S.W.3d 700)“…the activity was appropriate under Kentucky Criminal Law, KRS 526.010; thus not in violation of his Fourth Am…”
- Springer v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 1999, 998 S.W.2d 439)“…ions, is not precluded by 18 U.S.C. § 2510 , et seq. and KRS 526.010, et seq. Nor do these statutes have a…”
- Carrier v. Commonwealth (Court of Appeals of Kentucky 1980, 607 S.W.2d 115)“…ucky to depart from the federal norm. See also KRS 526.010, which defines “eavesdrop” as “to overh…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties, Kentucky Phone Call Recording Laws: What You Need to Know, Kentucky Workplace Recording Laws: Employee and Employer Rights
Code of Federal Regulations Title 42
§ 483.10Resident rights.In forcecited in 19 of our articles
(a) Residents rights. The resident has a right to a dignified existence, self-determination, and communication with and access to persons and services inside and outside the facility, including those specified in this section. (1) A facility must treat each resident with respect and dignity and care for each resident in a manner and in an environment that promotes maintenance or enhancement of his or her quality of life, recognizing each resident's individuality. The facility must protect and promote the rights of the resident. (2) The facility must provide equal access to quality care regardless of diagnosis, severity of condition, or payment source. A facility must establish and maintain identical policies and practices regarding transfer, discharge, and the provision of services under the State plan for all residents regardless of payment source. (b) Exercise of rights. The resident has the right to exercise his or her rights as a resident of the facility and as a citizen or resident of the United States.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 85 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts reviewing CMS penalties have applied the notice duty then codified at section 483.10(b)(11). Claiborne-Hughes Health Center v. Sebelius (2010) upheld noncompliance where a facility did not promptly consult the physician or notify family after a resident's decline; Senior Rehabilitation (2010) sustained a similar finding.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Roudachevski v. All-American Care Centers, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 2011, 648 F.3d 701)✓A doctor cut off from his nursing home patients sought an injunction, arguing residents' right under Section 483.10(d)(1) to choose a physician made the public interest favor him; the Eighth Circuit affirmed the denial, finding that interest not presently ascertainable.
- CLAIBORNE-HUGHES HEALTH CENTER v. Sebelius (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2010, 609 F.3d 839)✓A resident's food intake fell sharply for three weeks and he lost 18.5 pounds before the nursing home called his doctor or family; the Sixth Circuit upheld findings that it violated Section 483.10(b)(11)'s immediate-notification duty and that the lapse was immediate jeopardy.
- Gray Panthers Advocacy Committee v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1991, 936 F.2d 1284)“…how to apply for and use Medicare and Medicaid benefits.” 42 C.F.R. § 483.10 (b)(9) (1990). On the topic of property…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Nursing Home Camera Laws: No Statute, What Applies, Colorado Nursing Home Camera Laws: No Statute, What Applies, Massachusetts Nursing Home Camera Laws: All-Party Consent Risks
Kentucky Revised Statutes, Chapter 531: PORNOGRAPHY
§ 531.090VoyeurismIn forcecited in 14 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of voyeurism when: (a) He or she intentionally: 1. Uses or causes the use of any camera, videotape, photooptical, photoelectric, or other image recording device for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping the sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or nipple of the female breast of another person without that person's consent; or 2. Uses the unaided eye or any device designed to improve visual acuity for the purpose of observing or viewing the sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn without being publicly visible, or nipple of the female breast of another person without that person's consent; or 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Kentucky courts have treated KRS 531.090 largely as a jury-instruction question. Williams v. Commonwealth (2005) held the 2002 voyeurism statute could not reach conduct predating its July 15, 2002 effective date, and Morgan v. Commonwealth (2006) held voyeurism is not a lesser-included offense of first-degree burglary.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Williams v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2005, 178 S.W.3d 491)✓Williams photographed his eight-year-old stepdaughter naked in January 2001 and sought a lesser-included voyeurism instruction; the court held KRS 531.090 created a new offense effective July 15, 2002 and was not retroactive, so it could not reach his earlier conduct.
- Morgan v. Commonwealth (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 189 S.W.3d 99)✓Morgan watched a couple through a trailer window, then cut the phone line and broke in armed; the court held voyeurism under KRS 531.090 is not a lesser-included offense of first-degree burglary because it requires proof of unlawful entry to view another person.
- Commonwealth v. Mixon (Kentucky Supreme Court 1992, 827 S.W.2d 689)“…lier cases, arising under the former habitual criminal act, KRS 531.090, required authenticated records of fore…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Laws on Recording in Public: Rights, Limits, and Exceptions, Kentucky School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights, Kentucky Security Camera Laws: Home, Business, and HOA Rules
§ 531.100Video voyeurismIn forcecited in 7 of our articles
(1) A person is guilty of video voyeurism when he or she intentionally: (a) Uses or causes the use of any camera, videotape, photooptical, photoelectric, or other image recording device for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping the sexual conduct, genitals, or nipple of the female breast of another person without that person's consent; and (b) Uses or divulges any image so obtained for consideration; or (c) Distributes any image so obtained by live or recorded visual medium, electronic mail, the Internet, or a commercial on-line service. (2) Video voyeurism is a Class D felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at apps.legislature.ky.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Kentucky Bar Ass'n v. Daniels (Kentucky Supreme Court 2006, 193 S.W.3d 754)“…in Jefferson Circuit Court to one count of Video Voyeurism, KRS 531.100, and in Hardin Circuit Court to one cou…”
- Daniels v. Kentucky Bar Association (Kentucky Supreme Court 2008, 247 S.W.3d 530)“…ovant was indicted in Jefferson County for video voyeurism, KRS 531.100, a felony that criminalizes the non-co'…”
- Michelle Bray v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Kentucky Supreme Court 2025)“…sexual performance by a minor. KRS 531.320(1) (promoting); KRS 531.100(3) (defining “promote”). 17 The…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Kentucky Employee Monitoring Laws (2026): Workplace Surveillance Rights, Kentucky Surveillance Camera Laws (2026 Guide), Kentucky Ring Doorbell Laws: What You Need to Know in 2026
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Kentucky Legislature, House Bill 491 (2026 RS) bill status and actions(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 526.020, Eavesdropping(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- KRS 216.515, Rights of residents of long-term care facilities(apps.legislature.ky.gov).gov
- Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services, Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program(chfs.ky.gov).gov
- Kentucky Office of Inspector General, Division of Health Care, Long-Term Care Facilities(chfs.ky.gov).gov
- 42 CFR § 483.10, Nursing home resident rights (federal)(law.cornell.edu)
- KRS 531.090, Voyeurism(apps.legislature.ky.gov)
- KRS 531.100, Video voyeurism(apps.legislature.ky.gov)
- 902 KAR 20:300, Operation and services; nursing facilities(apps.legislature.ky.gov)