Latest news with #NationalConsumerVoiceforQualityLong-TermCare
Miami Herald
27-04-2025
- Health
- Miami Herald
Why cameras are popping up in eldercare facilities
The assisted living facility in Edina, Minnesota, where Jean Peters and her siblings moved their mother in 2011, looked lovely. "But then you start uncovering things," 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 midmorning. "She wasn't being toileted, so her pants would be soaked," said Peters, 69, a retired nurse-practitioner in Bloomington, Minnesota. "They didn't give her water. They didn't get her up for meals." Her mother dwindled to 94 pounds. Most ominously, 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 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. Monitoring from an app on their phones, the family saw 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 Hourigan was unable to open the heavy apartment door and go to the dining room. "It was traumatic to learn that we were right," Peters said. After filing a police report and a lawsuit, and after her mother's 2014 death, Peters in 2016 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. 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. For the second year, a camera bill passed the House of Representatives overwhelmingly but, in March, failed to get a floor vote in the state Senate. "My temperature is a little high right now," said state Rep. 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,'" Nguyen said. A few camera laws cover only nursing homes, but the majority include assisted living facilities. Most mandate that the resident (and roommates, if any) provide written consent. Some call for signs alerting staffers 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 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, 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. 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 Shaw, who lives in San Diego, and her sisters moved their mother into assisted living in Maple Grove, Minnesota, 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?" 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. Anne Swardson, who lives in Virginia and in France, uses an Echo Show, an Alexa-enabled device by Amazon, for video visits with her mother, 96, in memory care in Fort Collins, Colorado. "She's incapable of touching any buttons, but this screen just comes on," 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 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?" 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 spokesperson 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," 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. "I think of cameras as a symptom, not a solution," 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 withThe New York Times. ____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Why Cameras Are Popping Up in Eldercare Facilities
The assisted living facility in Edina, Minnesota, where Jean Peters and her siblings moved their mother in 2011, looked lovely. 'But then you start uncovering things,' 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 midmorning. 'She wasn't being toileted, so her pants would be soaked,' said Peters, 69, a retired nurse-practitioner in Bloomington, Minnesota. 'They didn't give her water. They didn't get her up for meals.' Her mother dwindled to 94 pounds. Most ominously, 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 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. Monitoring from an app on their phones, the family saw 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 Hourigan was unable to open the heavy apartment door and go to the dining room. 'It was traumatic to learn that we were right,' Peters said. After filing a police report and a lawsuit, and after her mother's 2014 death, Peters in 2016 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. 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. For the second year, a camera bill passed the House of Representatives overwhelmingly but, in March, failed to get a floor vote in the state Senate. 'My temperature is a little high right now,' said state Rep. 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,'' Nguyen said. A few camera laws cover only nursing homes, but the majority include assisted living facilities. Most mandate that the resident (and roommates, if any) provide written consent. Some call for signs alerting staffers 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 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, 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. A central question remains unanswered: Do cameras bolster the quality of care? 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 Shaw, who lives in San Diego, and her sisters moved their mother into assisted living in Maple Grove, Minnesota, 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?' 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. Anne Swardson, who lives in Virginia and in France, uses an Echo Show, an Alexa-enabled device by Amazon, for video visits with her mother, 96, in memory care in Fort Collins, Colorado. 'She's incapable of touching any buttons, but this screen just comes on,' 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 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 studies technology in elder care. Even when cameras detect problems, they can't substitute for improved care that would prevent them. 'Do cameras actually deter abuse and neglect? Does it cause a facility to change its policies or improve?' 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 spokesperson 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,' 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. 'I think of cameras as a symptom, not a solution,' Berridge said. 'It's a band-aid that can distract from the harder problem of how we provide quality long-term care.' KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF. Subscribe to KFF Health News' free Morning Briefing. This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license. The post Why Cameras Are Popping Up in Eldercare Facilities appeared first on Katie Couric Media.
Al Jazeera
18-04-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
‘Ripple effect:' In US, anti-immigrant policy strains child and eldercare
When she saw the Trump sign in the yard, Camila knew she would have to watch out. It was February 2025, and Camila* had shown up at a home in North Texas to meet the new family for whom she would nanny. The 22-year-old college student doesn't have legal documentation, but that's never been an issue. In her experience, many families like to pay their childcare workers in cash. Still, this new family posed an interesting challenge. The interior of the home was filled with more Trump paraphernalia. 'Trump everything, everywhere,' Camila says. It turned out the father works for Fox News. 'It was very ironic,' Camila told Al Jazeera. 'If I were to say, 'Hey, this is my legal situation,' it could have gone one of two ways. Maybe they wouldn't care, or maybe they would've told me to get out. And who knows what would've happened then.' She ultimately decided not to tell them and just focused on her job of caring for their children. The uncomfortable encounter and the 'chill' it gave Camila evoke a larger problem. In the US, immigrant labour, including undocumented workers, has long propped up the childcare, home care and elder care industries. Yet amid the anti-immigrant policy and posture in US President Donald Trump's second administration, including the threat of 'mass deportations', those ailing industries face new threats that experts say could have a 'ripple effect' on millions of Americans. 'People are not showing up for work because they're concerned about raids happening in their workplace,' said Lori Smetanka, executive director of the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care. And children, she added, 'have been really worried about their parents and whether or not they're going to be coming home at the end of the day'. Economists have documented the devastating effect mass deportations would have on the economy, and organisations like the American Immigration Council map the trillions of dollars immigrants contribute to the US in taxes and spending power. But some industries are uniquely vulnerable to shifts in immigration policy. For instance, about one in five US childcare workers are immigrants, and some studies indicate that nearly 30 percent of direct care workers are immigrants. As multiple experts emphasised to Al Jazeera, these roles have a far-reaching effect on communities across the country. 'There are going to be ripple effects based on some of the policies that we're seeing being put into place,' Smetanka said. The policies, she continued, 'are impacting the ability of immigrants to not only come to this country, but get their citizenship, to feel safe in staying and working in this country, and to provide the services that are necessary in those communities'. Early in his second term, Trump rescinded the 'sensitive areas' guidance that has prevented immigration raids from occurring in schools, churches and places of employment. The government is also denying or delaying H-1B visa permits, which continues a decade-long trend of diminishing access to a programme that helps immigrants find work. 'We want people, by the way, to come into our country, but we want them to come in through a legal process,' President Trump said in his April 2 tariffs announcement. 'We need people to run these plants and to help the auto workers and the teamsters and the non-union people and everybody else, but we need people.' Despite this rhetoric, the president's administration has limited legal pathways by freezing the US refugee resettlement programme. Then, in an interview on April 15, Trump proposed a new pathway by which 'great people' could be eligible to re-enter the US and attain permanent citizenship status if they first leave the country, then receive sponsorship from an employer. The president has also proposed the creation of a 'gold card' visa that would cost applicants $5m. Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh, a policy analyst for the Migration Policy Institute, said the policy's core objective 'seems to be to bring wealth to the US'. To evaluate if the legal pathways for immigrants are getting stronger, one would have to look at not just the number of visas granted but also 'who those visas are reaching, if strengthening legal pathways reduces irregular migration, or the timeframe in which visas are processed'. In other words, admitting more immigrants through a 'legal process' Trump referred to in his April 2 speech would involve making visas easier to attain, something he failed to do in his first term, where so-called legal migration diminished. Further still, the revocation of temporary protected status has school administrators, nursing home leaders and daycare operators wondering who they can hire and how they can protect them. Wendy Cervantes says these changes have been made so that immigrant families are 'attacked from every angle'. Cervantes is the director of immigration and immigrant families at The Center for Law and Social Policy, and her team recently held a webinar to provide technical assistance for childcare providers across the US. She said more than 1,000 people showed up, driven by the 'stress and fear' created by the new administration's approach to immigration. 'People aren't just worried about parents any more; they're worried about staff, too,' she told Al Jazeera. As a result, administrators in fields like childcare are learning about the intricacies of warrants: Which kind of documentation is needed, and what information an immigration officer needs to provide to be legally allowed on the premises. 'This knowledge at least gives them some measure of agency,' she said. 'But that's a really scary place to be in.' One of Cervantes's goals is similar to that of the economists tracking the effect of deportations: She wants people to realise how much their lives are shaped by immigrants. This is especially true for anyone whose family has some connection to the childcare, home care or elder care sectors. Roughly 20 percent of all US seniors live in rural communities, and in the last five years, 40 new counties have become nursing home deserts: Areas where nursing care is needed but unavailable, forcing residents to drive long distances for much-needed care. According to Smetanka, when a nursing home closes, it leaves a gaping hole in the community. Dozens lose jobs, and patients – who likely had few options to begin with – are left scrambling to find a new home. It's difficult to quantify the economic and psychological effect this has on a family or a community at large, just as, for Cervantes, it's difficult to quantify the damage done to a child's psyche when they're afraid of being deported. Despite all of this, Smetanka says it's important to remember how much immigrants want to remain in the US and keep working in places like nursing homes. The average hourly pay for direct care workers increased by less than $3 between 2014 and 2023, but healthcare fields remain widely popular among immigrants. Sarah Valdez, an immigration lawyer based in Austin, Texas, puts it bluntly, 'You [won't be able to] replace the 10 people you deported with 10 American-born workers.' Camila, the nanny from North Texas, is one of those people who is willing to work long hours, without complaint, and for little pay. Nannying may not be her long-term career, but she chose the field because she needed to pay for her school, and she loves working with kids. In many cases, she feels as if she spends as much time with her clients as their parents do. Her typical day involves getting up at 6am and working until about 10pm, while finding time for classwork and studies in any free time she can manage. She's helped multiple children cope with divorce and sudden deaths in the family, among many other life situations. 'With everything happening in the world, I don't know what's next for me,' she said. 'I'm just taking it day by day, week by week. But I know I want to stay. I'm just glad to be here right now.' *Camila's name has been changed to protect her identity.
New York Times
07-04-2025
- Health
- New York Times
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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?' 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. '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.'
