Connecticut
Connecticut Medical Recording Laws: Patients, Doctors, and HIPAA Rules (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 22, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 22, 2026. · 8 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Connecticut patients may record in-person medical appointments without notifying the provider: the criminal eavesdropping offense, CGS 53a-189, reaches only "mechanical overhearing of a conversation" as defined in CGS 53a-187, and a participant's own presence and consent take the recording outside that definition. Telehealth visits conducted by phone are covered by CGS 52-570d's all-party consent rule for telephonic communications; providers generally apply the same all-party consent practice to video-based telehealth platforms by analogy, even though 52-570d's text speaks specifically to telephonic communications. HIPAA does not restrict patients from recording their own appointments, though individual healthcare facilities may have policies that limit recording on their premises.
Recording in medical settings raises unique legal questions that sit at the intersection of Connecticut's recording consent laws, federal HIPAA privacy regulations, and healthcare facility policies. Whether you are a patient who wants to record a doctor's instructions, a caregiver documenting a loved one's treatment, or a healthcare provider considering recording for quality improvement, the rules are different from other recording contexts.
This guide covers Connecticut's medical recording legal framework as of 2026, including patient recording rights, provider obligations, HIPAA considerations, telehealth recording rules, and hospital surveillance.
Patient Recording Rights
In-Person Medical Appointments
Connecticut's criminal eavesdropping offense, CGS 53a-189, reaches only wiretapping or "mechanical overhearing of a conversation" as defined in CGS 53a-187, and that definition requires the recorder to be absent as well as lacking consent. Patients may record in-person conversations with their healthcare providers without notifying or obtaining consent from the provider. As a participant who is present in the conversation, the patient falls outside the "mechanical overhearing" definition entirely, so no offense is committed.
This means you can legally record:
- Office visits with your primary care physician, specialist, or other provider
- Pre-surgical consultations where the surgeon explains the procedure, risks, and alternatives
- Diagnostic discussions where the doctor explains test results or a diagnosis
- Treatment planning conversations about medications, therapies, or lifestyle changes
- Discharge instructions at a hospital or outpatient facility
- Second opinion consultations with new providers
Why Patients Record Medical Appointments
Research shows that patients forget a significant portion of what their doctors tell them during appointments. Recording serves several practical purposes:
- Improving recall: Patients can review instructions about medications, dosing, side effects, and follow-up care
- Sharing with family: Recordings allow patients to share information with caregivers and family members who were not present
- Continuity of care: Recordings provide a reference when transitioning between providers
- Documenting informed consent discussions: Pre-surgical recordings document what risks and alternatives were explained
- Malpractice documentation: In rare cases, recordings serve as evidence of what a provider communicated
Facility Recording Policies
While Connecticut law permits patients to record in-person medical conversations, individual healthcare facilities may have their own recording policies. Some hospitals, clinics, and medical offices prohibit or restrict recording by patients or visitors. These policies are typically posted or included in patient registration materials.
If a facility's policy prohibits recording:
- The facility can ask you to stop recording
- If you refuse, the facility can ask you to leave (except in emergency situations)
- The facility cannot refuse medically necessary emergency care solely because you are recording
- Violating the policy does not create criminal liability under state recording law, but it may affect your relationship with the provider
Other Patients' Privacy
When recording in a medical setting, be aware that your recording may capture conversations or images of other patients. In a shared waiting room, emergency department, or multi-bed hospital room, your recording could capture other patients' protected health information. Take care to limit your recording to your own interactions and avoid capturing other patients' private information.
Recording Telehealth Appointments

All-Party Consent Required
Telehealth appointments conducted by phone are subject to Connecticut's all-party consent rule under CGS 52-570d, which by its text applies to telephonic communications; video-call telehealth platforms are treated the same way as a matter of practice and caution, even though 52-570d does not expressly name video calls. Unlike in-person visits, recording a telehealth appointment requires the consent of all parties, including the healthcare provider.
This distinction is important because telehealth has become a routine part of Connecticut healthcare. Before recording a telehealth visit:
- Inform your provider at the start of the call that you would like to record
- Obtain their verbal consent on the recording
- If the provider declines, respect their decision and take written notes instead
- Ask if the provider can send a written summary of the visit through the patient portal
Platform Recording Features
Many telehealth platforms (Zoom, Doxy.me, Teladoc) have built-in recording features. When the provider or patient activates recording, the platform typically notifies all participants. This notification helps establish consent, but verbal confirmation is still the best practice.
Provider-Initiated Telehealth Recording
Healthcare providers who record telehealth sessions for quality assurance, training, or documentation purposes must obtain patient consent. The provider should clearly explain what will be recorded, how the recording will be used, and how long it will be retained.
HIPAA and Recording

What HIPAA Does and Does Not Cover
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is a federal law that governs how healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses handle protected health information (PHI). It is important to understand what HIPAA does and does not do in the context of medical recording.
HIPAA does NOT:
- Prohibit patients from recording their own medical appointments
- Prevent patients from sharing recordings of their own medical visits
- Apply to patients, family members, or the general public (HIPAA applies only to "covered entities" and their "business associates")
- Override Connecticut's one-party consent rule that permits patients to record in-person conversations
HIPAA DOES:
- Restrict how healthcare providers record, store, and share patient information
- Require providers to obtain patient authorization before using recordings for purposes beyond treatment, payment, and healthcare operations
- Impose penalties on providers who improperly disclose patient health information
- Apply to any recording made by a provider that contains patient PHI
Provider Recording Obligations Under HIPAA
Healthcare providers who record patient interactions must comply with HIPAA's privacy and security rules:
- Minimum necessary standard: Providers should record only the minimum necessary information for the stated purpose
- Patient authorization: Recording for research, marketing, or purposes beyond treatment typically requires written patient authorization
- Security safeguards: Recordings containing PHI must be stored securely with access limited to authorized personnel
- Breach notification: If recordings containing PHI are improperly accessed or disclosed, the provider must follow HIPAA breach notification procedures
The HHS Office for Civil Rights enforces HIPAA and investigates complaints about improper disclosure of patient health information.
Healthcare Provider Recording of Patients

Clinical Documentation
Healthcare providers may record patient interactions for legitimate clinical documentation purposes with proper consent. This includes:
- Recording surgical procedures for the medical record
- Audio or video documentation of physical therapy sessions to track progress
- Recording patient symptoms or behaviors for diagnostic purposes
- Telehealth session recording for documentation
Quality Assurance and Training
Providers who record patient interactions for quality assurance or training purposes must:
- Obtain specific patient consent explaining the purpose of the recording
- Ensure recordings are stored securely and accessed only by authorized personnel
- De-identify recordings used for training when possible
- Comply with HIPAA requirements for the use of PHI
Medical Research
Recording patient interactions for research requires additional protections:
- Informed consent specific to the research purpose
- Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval
- Compliance with federal research regulations and HIPAA's research provisions
- Data security measures appropriate for the sensitivity of the information
Hospital and Medical Facility Surveillance
Security Cameras in Hospitals
Connecticut hospitals and medical facilities may install security cameras in common areas such as:
- Lobbies, entrances, and exits
- Hallways and corridors
- Parking structures and exterior areas
- Emergency department waiting areas
- Cafeterias and gift shops
Prohibited Camera Locations
Cameras are prohibited in areas where patients have a heightened expectation of privacy:
- Patient rooms (unless the patient consents for specific medical monitoring purposes)
- Restrooms and bathrooms
- Examination rooms (unless required for a specific clinical purpose with patient consent)
- Changing areas
- Mental health treatment areas where recording could compromise treatment
Installing cameras in these areas without consent can violate CGS 53a-189a (voyeurism), which requires the camera be used with malice or with intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desire, and can also raise HIPAA concerns.
Audio on Hospital Cameras
Audio-enabled cameras in hospital settings create both state law and HIPAA concerns. Conversations captured by hospital cameras may include protected health information. Hospitals should disable audio on security cameras or implement strict policies to ensure compliance with both Connecticut recording law and HIPAA.
Patient Monitoring Systems
Hospitals use video monitoring systems in certain clinical settings, such as:
- ICU monitoring for critically ill patients
- Fall prevention monitoring for at-risk patients
- Observation of patients under psychiatric hold
- Remote monitoring of neonatal units
These clinical monitoring systems are used for patient safety and treatment purposes with appropriate consent or legal authority.
Recording for Caregivers and Family Members
Accompanying a Patient
Family members and caregivers who accompany a patient to an in-person medical appointment may record the conversation under the one-party consent rule, as long as they are a participant in the discussion. If the doctor is speaking directly to both the patient and the family member, the family member's consent is sufficient.
However, if the family member is simply present in the room but not participating in the conversation, their right to record is less clear. The safest approach is for the patient to be aware of and agree to the recording.
Recording for Incapacitated Patients
When a patient is incapacitated or unable to make decisions, their healthcare proxy or legal guardian may need to record medical interactions on their behalf. Under Connecticut's healthcare proxy statute, a designated proxy can make healthcare decisions for the patient, which may extend to recording medical conversations for documentation purposes.
Nursing Home and Long-Term Care Monitoring
Family members concerned about the care their loved one receives in a Connecticut nursing home or long-term care facility may want to install a camera in the patient's room. This is a sensitive area where privacy laws, facility policies, and patient care intersect:
- The patient (if competent) or their legal representative should consent to the camera
- Roommates in shared rooms must also be considered, as they have their own privacy rights
- Facility policies may restrict or prohibit cameras in patient rooms
- Audio recording in the room triggers Connecticut's consent rules
Connecticut does not have a specific "granny cam" statute authorizing cameras in nursing homes, so general recording laws and facility policies govern.
Mental Health Recording
Heightened Privacy Protections
Mental health treatment records receive additional privacy protections under both federal and Connecticut law. 42 CFR Part 2 provides strict protections for substance abuse treatment records, and Connecticut law provides additional protections for mental health records.
Patients may still record their own in-person therapy sessions under the one-party consent rule. However, many mental health providers consider recording to be clinically inappropriate because it may inhibit the therapeutic process. Providers may include a no-recording clause in their treatment agreements.
Psychiatric Facility Recording
Recording inside psychiatric facilities raises unique concerns related to patient safety, the privacy of other patients, and the therapeutic environment. These facilities typically have strict policies prohibiting recording devices.
Practical Tips for Patients
- For in-person visits, you have the legal right to record under Connecticut's one-party consent rule
- For telehealth visits, you need your provider's consent before recording
- Check your healthcare facility's recording policy before your appointment
- If you plan to record, position your phone or device where it will clearly capture the conversation
- Tell your doctor you would like to record if you prefer a transparent approach, though you are not legally required to
- Do not capture other patients' information in your recordings
- Use recordings to improve your understanding of medical instructions, not as leverage against your provider
Practical Tips for Healthcare Providers
- Develop a clear recording policy and communicate it to patients at registration
- If a patient records an in-person visit, remember they have a legal right to do so under Connecticut law
- Obtain specific consent before recording patients for quality assurance, training, or research
- Ensure all recordings containing PHI are stored securely per HIPAA requirements
- Disable audio on security cameras in clinical areas
- Train staff on the interaction between Connecticut recording law and HIPAA
- For telehealth sessions, use platforms with built-in recording notifications and consent features
More Connecticut Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism & Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant | Dashcam Laws | Schools | Medical Recording
Back to Connecticut Recording Laws
More Connecticut Recording Topics
More Connecticut Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record my doctor's appointment in Connecticut?
For in-person appointments, yes. Connecticut's criminal eavesdropping offense, CGS 53a-189, reaches only "mechanical overhearing of a conversation" as defined in CGS 53a-187, and because your own presence and participation take you outside that definition, you can record conversations you take part in without notifying the other party. HIPAA does not prohibit patients from recording their own appointments. However, your healthcare facility may have a recording policy that restricts recording on their premises. Check the facility's policy before your visit.
Can I record a telehealth appointment in Connecticut?
Only with your provider's consent. Telehealth appointments conducted by phone are covered by CGS 52-570d's all-party consent rule for telephonic communications; video-call telehealth is generally treated the same way as a matter of practice, though 52-570d's text speaks to telephonic communications specifically. Inform your provider at the start of the call and ask for their agreement. If they decline, take written notes or ask for a written summary through the patient portal.
Does HIPAA prevent me from recording my doctor?
No. HIPAA applies to healthcare providers and their handling of patient information, not to patients themselves. HIPAA does not prohibit you from recording your own medical appointments or sharing those recordings. However, healthcare facilities may have their own recording policies, which are separate from HIPAA requirements.
Can a hospital have cameras in patient rooms in Connecticut?
Generally, no. Patient rooms are private areas where patients have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Cameras in patient rooms are only appropriate when used for specific clinical monitoring purposes with patient consent, such as fall prevention in high-risk patients or ICU monitoring. Security cameras in patient rooms without consent could violate the voyeurism statute (CGS 53a-189a), which requires the camera be used with malice or with intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desire, and could also raise HIPAA concerns.
Can I put a camera in my parent's nursing home room in Connecticut?
Connecticut does not have a specific 'granny cam' law authorizing cameras in nursing homes. General recording laws apply. If your parent is competent, they should consent to the camera. If they share a room, the roommate's privacy must be considered. Check the facility's policy, as many nursing homes restrict or prohibit cameras in patient rooms. Audio recording triggers additional consent requirements.
Updates
Corrected the citation for Connecticut's in-person patient-recording rule (the criminal eavesdropping offense is CGS 53a-189; CGS 53a-187 is only the definitions section it relies on) and clarified that the all-party phone-recording statute, CGS 52-570d, applies by its text to telephonic communications, with video telehealth platforms covered by common practice rather than express statutory language.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected two claims: (1) the voyeurism statute (CGS 53a-189a) requires the camera be used with malice or intent to arouse/satisfy sexual desire, not mere lack of consent; (2) CGS 53a-187 is the eavesdropping definitions section, not itself a 'one-party consent rule' statute — it produces that outcome because a participant's own presence falls outside the offense it defines.
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.
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 53a (Penal Code), Chapter 952
§ 53a-189Eavesdropping: Class D felony.In forcecited in 16 of our articles
(a) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping or mechanical overhearing of a conversation. (b) Eavesdropping is a class D felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 14 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Washington v. Meachum (1996) held the eavesdropping statutes, section 53a-189 among them, are violated only when neither party to a call knows it is being monitored. State v. McLoughlin (1998), a trial court ruling on a scanner intercept, read 53a-189 to cover cordless calls, a question no Connecticut appellate court had decided.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. McLoughlin (Connecticut Superior Court 1998, 45 Conn. Super. Ct. 497)“…on. Subsequently, the defendant was charged in violation of General Statutes § 53a-189, eavesdropping, which is a class D felo…”
- Rado v. Board of Education of the Borough of Naugatuck (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1990, 216 Conn. 541)✓A tenured teacher acquitted of eavesdropping was fired after a panel found he tampered with the school phone system to overhear staff calls; the court treated that conduct as proscribed by section 53a-189 and upheld the moral-misconduct finding.
- Washington v. Meachum (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1996, 238 Conn. 692)✓Inmates challenged prison rules allowing officials to monitor and record their nonprivileged phone calls; the Connecticut Supreme Court held the eavesdropping statutes are violated only when neither party knows the call is being monitored, so the noticed recording was lawful.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Recording Laws (2026): Hybrid Consent Rules Explained, Connecticut Phone Call Recording Laws: All-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Connecticut Audio Recording Laws: Mixed Consent Rules and Penalties (2026)
§ 53a-187Definitions. Applicability.In forcecited in 18 of our articles
(a) The following definitions are applicable to sections 53a-188 and 53a-189: (1) “Wiretapping” means the intentional overhearing or recording of a telephonic or telegraphic communication or a communication made by cellular radio telephone by a person other than a sender or receiver thereof, without the consent of either the sender or receiver, by means of any instrument, device or equipment. The normal operation of a telephone or telegraph corporation and the normal use of the services and facilities furnished by such corporation pursuant to its tariffs shall not be deemed “wiretapping”. (2) “Mechanical overhearing of a conversation” means the intentional overhearing or recording of a conversation or discussion, without the consent of at least one party thereto, by a person not present thereat, by means of any instrument, device or equipment. (3) “Unlawfully” means not specifically authorized by law. For purposes of this section, “cellular radio telephone” means a wireless telephone authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to operate in the frequency bandwidth reserved for cellular radio telephones.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 12 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Connecticut courts read section 53a-187's definitions to reach only surreptitious, nonconsensual monitoring. State v. Grullon (1989) applied it to place one-party-consent recordings outside the eavesdropping statutes, and Washington v. Meachum (1996) held those statutes are violated only when neither party knows the call is monitored.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Grullon (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1989, 212 Conn. 195)✓Police recorded the defendant's calls with his brother, who consented; the court held that replacing the older wiretap penal statute with section 53a-187, which reaches recording only when no party consents, gave no reason to exclude the transcripts.
- Washington v. Meachum (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1996, 238 Conn. 692)✓Inmates challenged prison rules allowing nonprivileged collect calls to be monitored after posted signs, signed forms and a recurring tone; reading section 53a-187's consent-based definitions, the court held the eavesdropping statutes are violated only when neither party knows.
- State v. McVeigh (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1993, 224 Conn. 593)✓Police used a scanner in a neighbor's apartment to record a couple's cordless phone calls; the court rejected the State's argument that a 1989 amendment adding cellular phones to section 53a-187's wiretapping definition left cordless calls unprotected, and ordered suppression.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Laws on Recording Police: Your Rights and Limits (2026), Connecticut Laws on Recording in Public: What Is Legal (2026), Connecticut School Recording Laws: Students, Teachers, and Campus Rules (2026)
§ 53a-189aVoyeurism: Class D or C felony.In forcecited in 13 of our articles
(a) A person is guilty of voyeurism when, (1) with malice, such person knowingly photographs, films, videotapes or otherwise records the image of another person (A) without the knowledge and consent of such other person, (B) while such other person is not in plain view, and (C) under circumstances where such other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, (2) with intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desire of such person or any other person, such person knowingly photographs, films, videotapes or otherwise records the image of another person (A) without the knowledge and consent of such other person, (B) while such other person is not in plain view, and (C) under circumstances where such other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, (3) with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desire of such person, commits simple trespass, as provided in section 53a-110a, and observes, in other than a casual or cursory manner, another person (A) without the knowledge or consent of such other person, (B) while such other person is inside a dwelling, as defined in section 53a-100, and not in plain view, and (C) under circumstances where such other person has a reasonable…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):In State v. Panek (2018) the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the 'not in plain view' element of section 53a-189a refers to the view of the general public, not of the person recording, and that the statute reaches a nonconsensual recording made in the victim's immediate presence. It rejected a vagueness challenge.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Panek (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2018, 328 Conn. 219)✓A man secretly recorded women during sexual encounters in his own home and argued they were in his plain view, so the voyeurism statute did not reach him; the Connecticut Supreme Court held the 'not in plain view' element refers to the public's view, reversing the dismissal.
- Middlesex Insurance v. Mara (District Court, D. Connecticut 2010, 699 F. Supp. 2d 439)✓Neighbors sued a homeowner for a campaign of harassment, including a voyeurism count under the statute for videotaping a woman; the federal court found every count alleged intentional acts excluded from his homeowner's policy and declared the insurer had no duty to defend.
- Project Veritas v. Michael Schmidt (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2023, 72 F.4th 1043)“…ev. Stat. Ann. §§ 18-9-301(8), 18-9- 304(1)(a) Connecticut: Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53a-189a(a)(1); Connecticut v. Panek, 177 A.3d 1…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Security Camera Laws: Home, Business, and Workplace Rules (2026), Connecticut Video Recording Laws: Consent, Surveillance, and Privacy Rules (2026), Connecticut Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Penalties and Protections (2026)
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 52 (Civil Actions), Chapter 925
§ 52-570dAction for illegal recording of private telephonic communications.In forcecited in 21 of our articles
(a) No person shall use any instrument, device or equipment to record an oral private telephonic communication unless the use of such instrument, device or equipment (1) is preceded by consent of all parties to the communication and such prior consent either is obtained in writing or is part of, and obtained at the start of, the recording, or (2) is preceded by verbal notification which is recorded at the beginning and is part of the communication by the recording party, or (3) is accompanied by an automatic tone warning device which automatically produces a distinct signal that is repeated at intervals of approximately fifteen seconds during the communication while such instrument, device or equipment is in use.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 22 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Holler v. Buckley Broadcasting Corp. (1998) held section 52-570d creates a cause of action unknown at common law that is strictly construed, and does not reach a third party's rerecording of an already illegal tape. Jezouit v. Malloy (2019) held the statute does not waive the state's sovereign immunity from suit.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Holler v. Buckley Broadcasting Corp. (Connecticut Appellate Court 1998, 47 Conn. App. 764)✓A girlfriend secretly taped a radio employee's call, and a coworker re-recorded that tape and used it to get him fired. The court held section 52-570d, strictly construed, bars taping a private call but not a third party's re-recording of an already illegal tape.
- Jezouit v. Malloy (Connecticut Appellate Court 2019, 193 Conn. App. 576)“…his complaint because (1) he brought his claim pursuant to General Statutes § 52-570d, which he contends waives sovereign imm…”
- State v. Skok (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2015)“…on without the consent of all parties to the communication. General Statutes § 52-570d (a) prohibits the use of ‘‘any instrume…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can I Sue Someone for Recording Me on Private or Public Property?, Connecticut Dashcam Laws: Mounting Rules, Audio Recording, and Evidence (2026), Connecticut Landlord-Tenant Recording and Surveillance Laws (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 53a-187 - Eavesdropping Definitions(cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-570d - Recording of Telephone Communications(cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 53a-189a - Voyeurism(cga.ct.gov).gov
- HIPAA - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(hhs.gov).gov
- HHS Office for Civil Rights(hhs.gov).gov
- Connecticut Department of Public Health(portal.ct.gov).gov
- 42 CFR Part 2 - Substance Abuse Treatment Records(ecfr.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 53a-189 - Eavesdropping: Class D Felony(cga.ct.gov).gov