Connect with us

Science

Why Cameras Are Popping Up in Eldercare Facilities

Published

on

Why Cameras Are Popping Up in Eldercare Facilities

The assisted-living facility in Edina, Minn., where Jean H. Peters and her siblings moved their mother in 2011, looked lovely. “But then you start uncovering things,” Ms. Peters said.

Her mother, Jackie Hourigan, widowed and developing memory problems at 82, too often was still in bed when her children came to see her in mid-morning.

“She wasn’t being toileted, so her pants would be soaked,” said Ms. Peters, 69, a retired nurse-practitioner in Bloomington, Minn. “They didn’t give her water. They didn’t get her up for meals.” She dwindled to 94 pounds.

Most ominously, Ms. Peters said, “we noticed bruises on her arm that we couldn’t account for.” Complaints to administrators — in person, by phone and by email — brought “tons of excuses.”

So Ms. Peters bought an inexpensive camera at Best Buy. She and her sisters installed it atop the refrigerator in her mother’s apartment, worrying that the facility might evict her if the staff noticed it.

Advertisement

Monitoring from an app on their phones, the family saw Ms. Hourigan going hours without being changed. They saw and heard an aide loudly berating her and handling her roughly as she helped her dress.

They watched as another aide awakened her for breakfast and left the room even though Ms. Hourigan was unable to open the heavy apartment door and go to the dining room. “It was traumatic to learn that we were right,” Ms. Peters said.

In 2016, after filing a police report and a lawsuit, and after her mother’s death, Ms. Peters helped found Elder Voice Advocates, which lobbied for a state law permitting cameras in residents’ rooms in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities. Minnesota passed it in 2019.

Though they remain a contentious subject, cameras in care facilities are gaining ground. By 2020, eight states had joined Minnesota in enacting laws allowing them, according to the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care: Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington.

The legislative pace has picked up since, with nine more states enacting laws: Connecticut, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nevada, Ohio, Rhode Island, Utah, Virginia and Wyoming. Legislation is pending in several others.

Advertisement

California and Maryland have adopted guidelines, not laws. The state governments in New Jersey and Wisconsin will lend cameras to families concerned about loved ones’ safety.

But bills have also gone down to defeat, most recently in Arizona. In March, for the second year, a camera bill passed the House of Representatives overwhelmingly but failed to get a floor vote in the State Senate.

“My temperature is a little high right now,” said State Representative Quang Nguyen, a Republican who is the bill’s primary sponsor and plans to reintroduce it. He blamed opposition from industry groups, which in Arizona included LeadingAge, which represents nonprofit aging services providers, for the bill’s failure to pass.

The American Health Care Association, whose members are mostly for-profit long-term care providers, doesn’t take a national position on cameras. But its local affiliate also opposed the bill.

“These people voting no should be called out in public and told, ‘You don’t care about the elderly population,’” Mr. Nguyen said.

Advertisement

A few camera laws cover only nursing homes, but the majority also include assisted-living facilities. Most mandate that the resident (and roommates, if any) provide written consent. Some call for signs alerting staff and visitors that their interactions may be recorded.

The laws often prohibit tampering with cameras or retaliating against residents who use them, and include “some talk about who has access to the footage and whether it can be used in litigation,” added Lori Smetanka, executive director of the National Consumer Voice.

It’s unclear how seriously facilities take these laws. Several relatives interviewed for this article reported that administrators told them that cameras weren’t permitted, then never mentioned the issue again. Cameras placed in the room remained.

Why the legislative surge? During the Covid-19 pandemic, families were locked out of facilities for months, Ms. Smetanka pointed out. “People want eyes on their loved ones.”

Changes in technology probably also contributed, as Americans became more familiar and comfortable with video chatting and virtual assistants. Cameras have become nearly ubiquitous — in public spaces, in workplaces, in police cars and on officers’ uniforms, in people’s pockets.

Advertisement

Initially, the push for cameras reflected fears about loved ones’ safety. Kari Shaw’s family, for instance, had already been victimized by a trusted home care nurse who stole her mother’s prescribed pain medications.

So when Ms. Shaw, who lives in San Diego, and her sisters moved their mother into assisted living in Maple Grove, Minn., they immediately installed a motion-activated camera in her apartment.

Their mother, 91, has severe physical disabilities and uses a wheelchair. “Why wait for something to happen?” Ms. Shaw said.

In particular, “people with dementia are at high risk,” added Eilon Caspi, a gerontologist and researcher of elder mistreatment. “And they may not be capable of reporting incidents or recalling details.”

More recently, however, families are using cameras simply to stay in touch.

Advertisement

Anne Swardson, who lives in Virginia and in France, uses an Echo Show for video visits with her mother, 96, in memory care in Fort Collins, Colo. “She’s incapable of touching any buttons, but this screen just comes on,” Ms. Swardson said.

Art Siegel and his brothers were struggling to talk to their mother, who, at 101, is in assisted living in Florida; her portable phone frequently died because she forgot to charge it. “It was worrying,” said Mr. Siegel, who lives in San Francisco and had to call the facility and ask the staff to check on her.

Now, with an old-fashioned phone installed next to her favorite chair and a camera trained on the chair, they know when she’s available to talk.

As the debate over cameras continues, a central question remains unanswered: Do they bolster the quality of care? “There’s zero research cited to back up these bills,” said Clara Berridge, a gerontologist at the University of Washington who studies technology in elder care.

“Do cameras actually deter abuse and neglect? Does it cause a facility to change its policies or improve?”

Advertisement

Both camera opponents and supporters cite concerns about residents’ privacy and dignity in a setting where they are being helped to wash, dress and use the bathroom.

“Consider, too, the importance of ensuring privacy during visits related to spiritual, legal, financial or other personal issues,” Lisa Sanders, a spokeswoman for LeadingAge, said in a statement.

Though cameras can be turned off, it’s probably impractical to expect residents or a stretched-thin staff to do so.

Moreover, surveillance can treat those staff members as “suspects who have to be deterred from bad behavior,” Dr. Berridge said. She has seen facilities installing cameras in all residents’ rooms: “Everyone is living under surveillance. Is that what we want for our elders and our future selves?”

Ultimately, experts said, even when cameras detect problems, they can’t substitute for improved care that would prevent them — an effort that will require engagement from families, better staffing, training and monitoring by facilities, and more active federal and state oversight.

Advertisement

“I think of cameras as a symptom, not a solution,” Dr. Berridge said. “It’s a Band-Aid that can distract from the harder problem of how we provide quality long-term care.”

The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with KFF Health News.

Science

Fourth measles case confirmed in L.A. County; person visited LAX, restaurants while infectious

Published

on

Fourth measles case confirmed in L.A. County; person visited LAX, restaurants while infectious

A fourth measles case has been confirmed in Los Angeles County, prompting renewed calls from health officials for residents to ensure they are protected against the highly contagious virus.

The infected individual flew from Singapore to Los Angeles International Airport on Feb. 9 aboard Singapore Airlines Flight 38. The plane landed at about 7 p.m. following a 14-hour journey, according to the L.A. County Department of Public Health.

Over the following days, the individual visited a few San Gabriel Valley fast food restaurants, potentially exposing others to the measles virus.

“As measles cases increase, it is important that residents take steps to make sure they are fully protected,” L.A. County Health Officer Dr. Muntu Davis said in a statement. “The [measles-mumps-rubella] vaccine is the safest and most reliable way to prevent measles and protect yourself, your family, and your community.”

Advertisement

The health department did not respond to questions from The Times regarding the sex or age of the infected individual, who was described in a statement as “a resident who recently traveled internationally.”

After arriving at and leaving the Tom Bradley International Terminal, the individual visited restaurants and convenience stores throughout Whittier and Montebello.

The individual ate at a Burger King in Montebello, 1212 West Beverly Blvd., on Feb. 10 between 5:30 and 7 p.m. The next day, the person dined at Taqueria El Atacor, 11156 1/2 Whittier Blvd. in Whittier, between 3 and 5 p.m.

The final two stops in Montebello were at Domino’s Pizza, 803 West Whittier Blvd., between 4 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. on Feb. 12; and 7-Eleven, 1106 West Beverly Blvd., on Feb. 13 between 4:30 p.m. and 5:45 p.m.

Those who were in the Bradley Terminal (Terminal B) on Feb. 9 from 7:30 p.m. to 9:40 p.m., or in the eateries above during the aforementioned time windows, may have been exposed to the measles virus.

Advertisement

Symptoms typically develop anywhere from seven to 21 days after exposure, according to the health department.

Concerned individuals should confirm whether they have protection against the virus, either through past measles vaccinations or infections.

Those who are not immunized or are unsure of their status should monitor themselves closely for signs of infection. Common symptoms include fever, cough, runny nose or red eyes, as well as a rash.

Those with such symptoms are encouraged to stay home and avoid school, work and any gatherings. They should also call a healthcare provider immediately, but not go into a healthcare facility without informing them.

The monitoring deadline for symptoms ranges from March 2 at LAX until March 6 at 7-Eleven for individuals who visited those spaces around the same time as the infected person.

Advertisement

Davis said the most effective way to protect against measles is to take the MMR vaccine. Children age 1 year and older are considered fully immunized after receiving two doses.

“Measles spreads easily and can lead to serious complications, including pneumonia, brain swelling, and even death,” Davis said. “We urge everyone to confirm their immunity and get the MMR vaccine if needed, especially before traveling. Taking this simple step helps safeguard your health and strengthens protection for our entire community.”

Previous cases confirmed in L.A. County so far this year also involved individuals who had traveled internationally. One of those individuals ventured to Sherman Oaks on Jan. 24, another to Woodland Hills on Jan. 30. The first case had no identified public exposure locations in L.A. County.

Measles cases have increased in the United States as vaccination rates have fallen in recent years, allowing the highly contagious virus to spread in communities with lower vaccine coverage.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there were 2,280 confirmed measles cases in the U.S. last year, the highest annual total since 1991. As of Feb. 12, 910 cases had already been confirmed nationwide this year — including 15 in California.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

Shark attacks rose in 2025. Here’s why Californians should take note

Published

on

Shark attacks rose in 2025. Here’s why Californians should take note

Shark attacks returned to near-average levels in 2025 after a dip the previous year, according to the latest report from the Florida Museum of Natural History’s International Shark Attack File, published Wednesday.

Researchers recorded 65 unprovoked shark bites worldwide last year, slightly below the 10-year average of 72, but an increase from 2024. Nine of those bites were fatal, higher than the 10-year average of six fatalities.

The United States once again had the highest number of reported incidents, accounting for 38% of global unprovoked bites when assessed on a country by country basis. That said, it’s actually a decline from recent years, including 2024, when more than half of all reported bites worldwide occurred off the U.S. coast.

In 2025, Florida led all states with 11 recorded attacks. California, Hawaii, Texas and North Carolina accounted for the remaining U.S. incidents.

But California stood out in another way: It had the nation’s only unprovoked fatal shark attack in 2025.

Advertisement

A 55-year-old triathlete was attacked by a white shark after entering the water off the coast of Monterey Bay with members of the open-ocean swimming club she co-founded. It was the sole U.S. fatality among 25 reported shark bites nationwide.

It’s not surprising that the sole U.S. shark-related death occurred in California, said Steve Midway, an associate professor of fisheries at Louisiana State University. “In California, you tend to have year-to-year fewer attacks than other places in the U.S. and in the world,” Midway said. “But you tend to have more serious attacks, a higher proportion of fatal attacks.”

The difference lies in species and geography, Midway said. Along the East Coast, particularly in Florida, many bites involve smaller coastal sharks in shallow water, which are more likely to result in nonfatal injuries. California’s deeper and colder waters are home to larger species, such as the great white shark.

“Great whites just happen to be larger,” Midway said. “You’re less likely to be attacked, but if you are, the outcomes tend to be worse.”

Whether measured over 10, 20 or 30 years, average annual shark bite totals globally are actually very stable.

Advertisement

“The global patterns change only slightly from one year to the other,” said Gavin Naylor, director of the Florida Program for Shark Research.

Those annual fluctuations are influenced by a combination of shark biology, ocean conditions and the number of people in the water at any given time in any given place, researchers say.

At the same time, global shark populations remain far below historical levels. Naylor categorizes about 30% of shark species as endangered, largely due to overfishing. In some countries, including the United States and Australia, stronger protections have allowed certain shark populations to recover.

Nevertheless, the risk of being bitten by a shark remains extremely low. The report notes that drowning is a far more common cause of death worldwide — and, if it helps you sleep (or swim), the data show that you are much more likely to be killed by lightning than you are by a shark.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Science

What a Speech Reveals About Trump’s Plans for Nuclear Weapons

Published

on

What a Speech Reveals About Trump’s Plans for Nuclear Weapons

Within hours of the expiration last week of the final arms control treaty between Moscow and Washington, the State Department sent its top arms diplomat, Thomas G. DiNanno, to Geneva to lay out Washington’s vision for the future. His public address envisioned a future filled with waves of nuclear arms buildups and test detonations.

The views of President Trump’s administration articulated in Mr. DiNanno’s speech represent a stark break with decades of federal policy. In particular, deep in the speech, he describes a U.S. rationale for going its own way on the global ban on nuclear test detonations, which had been meant to curb arms races that in the Cold War had raised the risk of miscalculation, and war.

This annotation of the text of his remarks aims to offer background information on some of the specialized language of nuclear policymaking that Mr. DiNanno used to make his points, while highlighting places where outside experts may disagree with his and the administration’s claims.

What remains unknown is the extent to which Mr. DiNanno’s presentation represents a fixed policy of unrestrained U.S. arms buildups, or more of an open threat meant to spur negotiations toward new global accords on ways to better manage the nuclear age.

Read the original speech.

Advertisement

New York Times Analysis

Next »

1

Established in 1979 as Cold War arsenals grew worldwide, the Conference on Disarmament is a United Nations arms reduction forum made up of 65 member states. It has helped the world negotiate and adopt major arms agreements.

Advertisement

2

In his State Department role, working under Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Mr. DiNanno is Washington’s top diplomat for the negotiation and verification of international arms accords. Past holders of that office include John Bolton during the first term of the George W. Bush administration and Rose Gottemoeller during Barack Obama’s two terms.

3

This appears to be referring to China, which has 600 nuclear weapons today. By 2030, U.S. intelligence estimates say it will have more than 1,000.

Advertisement

4

Here he means Russia, which is conducting tests to put a nuclear weapon into space as well as to develop an underwater drone meant to cross oceans.

Advertisement
Page 2 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

5

In this year’s federal budget, the Trump administration is to spend roughly $90 billion on nuclear arms, including basic upgrades of the nation’s arsenal and the replacement of aging missiles, bombers and submarines that can deliver warheads halfway around the globe.

6

Advertisement

A chief concern of many American policymakers is that Washington will soon face not just a single peer adversary, as in the Cold War, but two superpower rivals, China and Russia.

Page 3 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

7

Advertisement

The 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty or I.N.F. banned all weapons capable of traveling between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, or 310 and 3,420 miles, whether armed with nuclear or conventional warheads. The Trump administration is now deploying a number of conventionally armed weapons in that range, including a cruise missile and a hypersonic weapon.

8

The destructive force of the relatively small Russian arms can be just fractions of the Hiroshima bomb’s power, perhaps making their use more likely. The lesser warheads are known as tactical or nonstrategic nuclear arms, and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has repeatedly threatened to use them in Ukraine.

Advertisement

9

Negotiators of arms control treaties have mostly focused on long-range weapons because the delivery vehicles and their deadly warheads are considered planet shakers that could end civilization.

Page 4 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

Advertisement

10

This underwater Russian craft is meant to cross an ocean, detonate a thermonuclear warhead and raise a radioactive tsunami powerful enough to shatter a coastal city.

11

The nuclear power source of this Russian weapon can in theory keep the cruise missile airborne far longer than other nuclear-armed missiles.

Advertisement

12

Russia has conducted test launches for placing a nuclear weapon into orbit, which the Biden administration quietly warned Congress about two years ago.

13

Advertisement

The term refers to the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Page 5 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous Next »

14

Advertisement

A top concern of American officials is that Beijing and Moscow might form an alliance to coordinate their nuclear forces. Their joint program to develop fuel for atom bombs is seen as an indication of this emerging threat.

15

This Trump administration plan is dated November but was made public in December.

Advertisement

16

Released last year, this Chinese government document sought to portray Beijing as a leader in reducing the global threat of nuclear weapons.

17

Typically, arms control treaties have not required countries to destroy warheads so their keepers put them into storage for possible reuse. The United States retains something on the order of 20,000 small atom bombs meant to ignite the larger blasts of hydrogen bombs.

Advertisement

18

An imminent surge centers on the nation’s Ohio-class submarines. The Trump administration has called for the reopening of submarine missile tubes that were closed to comply with the New START limits. That will add as many 56 long-range missiles to the fleet. Because each missile can hold multiple arms, the additional force adds up to hundreds more warheads.

19

Advertisement

This refers to weapons meant for use on a battlefield or within a particular geographic region rather than for aiming at distant targets. It is often seen as synonymous with intermediate-range weapons.

20

Here, the talk turns to the explosive testing of nuclear weapons for safety, reliability and devising new types of arms. The United States last conducted such a test in 1992 and afterwards adopted a policy of using such nonexplosive means like supercomputer simulations to evaluate its arsenal. In 1996, the world’s nuclear powers signed a global ban on explosive testing. A number of nations, including the United States and China, never ratified the treaty, and it never officially went into force.

Advertisement

21

In new detail, the talk addresses what Mr. Trump meant last fall when he declared that he had instructed the Pentagon “to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis” in response to the technical advances of unnamed foreign states.

22

Outside experts say the central issue is not whether China and Russia are cheating on the global test ban treaty but whether they are adhering to the U.S. definition. From the treaty’s start in 1996, Washington interpreted “zero” explosive force as the compliance standard but the treaty itself gives no definition for what constitutes a nuclear explosion. Over decades, that ambiguity led to technical disputes that helped block the treaty’s ratification.

Advertisement

23

By definition, all nuclear explosions are supercritical, which means they split atoms in chain reactions that become self-sustaining in sufficient amounts of nuclear fuel. The reports Mr. DiNanno refers to told of intelligence data suggesting that Russia was conducting a lesser class of supercritical tests that were too small to be detected easily. Russian scientists have openly discussed such small experiments, which are seen as useful for assessing weapon safety but not for developing new types of weapons.

24

Advertisement

This sounds alarming but experts note that the text provides no evidence and goes on to speak of preparations, not detonations, except in one specific case.

Page 6 of undefined PDF document.

New York Times Analysis

« Previous

25

Advertisement

The talk gave no clear indication of how the claims about Russian and Chinese nuclear testing might influence U.S. arms policy. But it repeated Mr. Trump’s call for testing “on an equal basis,” suggesting the United States might be headed in that direction, too.

26

The talk, however, ended on an upbeat but ambiguous note, giving no indication of what Mr. DiNanno meant by “responsible.” Even so, the remark came in the context of bilateral and multilateral actions to reduce the number of nuclear arms in the world, suggesting that perhaps the administration’s aim is to build up political leverage and spur new negotiations with Russia, China or both on testing restraints.

Advertisement
Page 7 of undefined PDF document.
Page 8 of undefined PDF document.
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending