New York
New York Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Healthcare Privacy
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 15, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 15, 2026. · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Under N.Y. Penal Law 250.00, patients in New York can record their own medical appointments without notifying the healthcare provider. HIPAA does not restrict this right because the law governs what providers do with health information, not what patients record during their own visits.
Patients in New York have the legal right to record their own medical appointments. Under Penal Law Section 250.00, one-party consent allows you to record any conversation you participate in, including discussions with doctors, nurses, therapists, and other healthcare providers. HIPAA does not change this right because HIPAA governs what healthcare providers do with your information, not what you do during your own appointments.
This guide covers patient recording rights, provider recording and surveillance rules, HIPAA and state privacy law interactions, telehealth recording, mental health records protections, and how medical recordings can be used in legal proceedings.
Patient Recording Rights
Can You Record Your Doctor in New York?
Yes. As a participant in a conversation with your healthcare provider, your knowledge of the recording constitutes consent under New York's one-party consent law. You can:
- Audio record office visits, consultations, and follow-up appointments
- Video record medical appointments (though providers may object more strongly to video)
- Record phone calls with your doctor's office, nurses, or other medical staff
- Record discussions about diagnosis, treatment plans, and medication
- Record informed consent conversations before procedures
- Record conversations with specialists, therapists, and other providers
Why Patients Record Medical Appointments
Recording medical appointments serves several legitimate purposes:
- Remembering complex medical information. Studies show patients forget 40-80% of medical information immediately after an appointment. A recording lets you review the conversation later.
- Sharing with family caregivers. Recordings help family members who could not attend the appointment understand the diagnosis and treatment plan.
- Documenting informed consent discussions. A recording captures exactly what the provider said about risks, benefits, and alternatives before a procedure.
- Building a personal medical record. Recordings supplement written medical records with the provider's verbal explanations and reasoning.
- Protecting against medical malpractice. If a provider gives incorrect advice or fails to disclose risks, a recording preserves that evidence.
- Ensuring accuracy. A recording can clarify disputes about what was said during an appointment.
Provider Policies on Patient Recording
While state law permits recording, individual healthcare providers and facilities may have their own policies:
- Some practices and hospitals have no-recording policies posted in their offices
- A provider can ask you to stop recording and may decline to continue the appointment if you refuse
- A provider cannot confiscate your device or force you to delete a recording
- If a provider refuses to treat you because of recording, you can seek care elsewhere
The tension between patient recording rights and provider preferences is an ongoing issue in healthcare. Many medical organizations now acknowledge that patient recording can improve health outcomes and patient satisfaction.
HIPAA and Patient Recording

What HIPAA Does and Does Not Do
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is a federal law that establishes privacy and security standards for protected health information (PHI). Key points about HIPAA and recording:
HIPAA does NOT prohibit patients from recording. HIPAA restricts covered entities (healthcare providers, health plans, healthcare clearinghouses) and their business associates. It does not restrict what patients do during their own appointments.
HIPAA does NOT give providers legal authority to prohibit recording. A provider cannot cite HIPAA as a legal basis for preventing you from recording your own appointment. HIPAA protects your information from unauthorized disclosure by the provider, not from your own recording.
HIPAA DOES restrict providers from recording you without proper authorization. If a healthcare provider wants to record an appointment (for research, training, or documentation), they generally need your written consent.
HIPAA Preemption in New York
When federal HIPAA rules and New York state privacy laws conflict, the stricter standard applies. The New York State Department of Health maintains HIPAA preemption charts that identify where New York law provides greater protection than HIPAA. In most cases, New York law provides at least equivalent privacy protections.
New York Healthcare Privacy Laws

Public Health Law Section 18: Patient Access to Medical Records
Public Health Law Section 18 establishes the right of patients and qualified persons to access medical records. Key provisions:
- Healthcare providers must allow patients to inspect their records within 10 days of a written request
- Providers must provide copies of records within a reasonable time frame
- Copying fees are limited to 75 cents per page plus postage for paper copies
- Providers can deny access in limited circumstances (such as when access could reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm to the patient)
While this statute focuses on written medical records rather than recordings, it establishes New York's strong framework for patient access to their own health information.
Public Health Law Section 17: Release of Medical Records
Public Health Law Section 17 governs the release of medical records. Patient consent is generally required before a provider can release medical records to third parties. This statute protects the privacy of recorded interactions as well as written records.
Mental Health Law Section 33.13: Clinical Records Confidentiality
Mental Health Hygiene Law Section 33.13 provides strict confidentiality protections for mental health clinical records. Mental health records receive even greater protection than general medical records in New York. Key provisions:
- Clinical records maintained by facilities licensed by the Office of Mental Health are confidential
- Release requires written authorization from the patient (with limited exceptions)
- Unauthorized disclosure can expose a facility to civil liability and professional discipline under related New York law (Section 33.13 itself sets the confidentiality rules but contains no penalty clause)
If you record your own therapy or mental health counseling sessions, your recording is not subject to Section 33.13 because the statute governs records maintained by the facility, not recordings made by the patient.
Healthcare Provider Recording and Surveillance

Security Cameras in Medical Facilities
Healthcare facilities can install security cameras in common areas:
- Waiting rooms and lobbies
- Hallways and corridors
- Entrances and parking areas
- Pharmacy areas and supply storage
- Administrative offices (common areas)
Where Cameras Are Prohibited in Healthcare Settings
Under Penal Law 250.45, cameras cannot be placed in:
- Examination rooms where patients undress
- Treatment rooms where patients receive care in states of undress
- Patient rooms in hospitals and inpatient facilities
- Bathrooms and restrooms
- Changing areas
A hidden camera in a medical examination room is unlawful surveillance, a Class E felony. Patients who discover unauthorized cameras in treatment areas should contact law enforcement immediately.
Provider Audio Recording of Patients
If a healthcare provider wants to audio record a patient encounter (for research, education, or quality improvement), the provider generally needs:
- Written informed consent from the patient
- Compliance with HIPAA authorization requirements
- Compliance with any institutional review board (IRB) requirements if the recording is for research
- Adherence to the facility's own recording policies
A provider recording a patient without consent could violate both HIPAA and New York's eavesdropping laws, depending on the circumstances.
Telehealth Recording
Recording Telehealth Appointments in New York
Telehealth has become a standard part of healthcare delivery in New York. Under one-party consent, you can record your telehealth appointments when you are located in New York:
- Video calls with your doctor through a telehealth platform
- Phone consultations with healthcare providers
- Virtual therapy sessions
- Remote monitoring check-ins
Cross-State Telehealth Recording
If your healthcare provider is located in a two-party consent state and you are in New York, the provider's state law may apply to the interaction. Some providers practicing in two-party consent states include recording disclaimers in their telehealth consent forms.
Platform-Specific Recording
Telehealth platforms (Doxy.me, Teladoc, Amwell) may have their own terms of service regarding recording. Some platforms include recording features controlled by the provider; others prohibit third-party recording. Your state law right to record as a one-party consent participant exists independently of platform terms, but violating platform terms could affect your access to the service.
Recording in Specific Healthcare Contexts
Emergency Room Visits
You can record your own emergency room visits, including conversations with ER doctors, nurses, and staff. ER recordings can be particularly valuable because:
- Emergency situations involve rapid decision-making that can be hard to recall later
- Informed consent discussions before emergency procedures happen under stress
- Documentation of wait times, triage assessments, and treatment decisions
- Evidence preservation if the visit results in a malpractice concern
Surgical Consultations and Informed Consent
Recording the informed consent discussion before surgery creates a detailed record of:
- What risks the surgeon disclosed
- What alternatives were discussed
- Questions you asked and the answers provided
- Whether you were given adequate time to make a decision
This recording can be critical evidence in medical malpractice cases where informed consent is at issue.
Mental Health and Therapy Sessions
You can record your own therapy sessions under one-party consent. However, many therapists strongly discourage or prohibit recording due to:
- Concerns about the therapeutic relationship being affected by recording
- Patient privacy considerations (especially in group therapy where other patients are present)
- Professional ethical guidelines from organizations like the American Psychological Association
If your therapist has a no-recording policy, they may decline to continue treatment if you insist on recording. You have the legal right to record, but the therapist has the right to set boundaries for their practice.
Nursing Home and Long-Term Care Facilities
Family members frequently want to record interactions between care facility staff and their loved ones. Under one-party consent, you can record conversations you participate in during visits. Placing a hidden camera in a patient's room raises more complex issues:
- If the patient consents to the camera, one-party consent may cover conversations the patient has with staff
- If the patient lacks capacity to consent, a healthcare proxy or guardian may be able to authorize recording
- Camera placement must avoid capturing other patients or staff in private situations
Medical Recordings as Evidence
Medical Malpractice Cases
Recordings of medical appointments are admissible evidence in New York malpractice cases. They can establish:
- What the provider told you about your condition
- Whether the provider performed an adequate examination
- Whether informed consent was properly obtained
- What instructions the provider gave for post-treatment care
- Whether the provider acknowledged an error
Insurance Disputes
Recordings of conversations with health insurance companies can support appeals of denied claims. Under one-party consent, you can record phone calls with insurance representatives discussing coverage, prior authorization, and claim decisions.
Workers' Compensation and Disability Claims
Recordings of medical evaluations for workers' compensation or disability claims can document the thoroughness of the examination and the provider's findings. These recordings can be used in administrative hearings and court proceedings.
More New York Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
Back to New York Recording Laws
More New York Recording Topics
More New York Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record my doctor's appointment in New York?
Yes. Under New York one-party consent law (Penal Law 250.00), you can record any medical appointment you attend without telling the healthcare provider. HIPAA does not prohibit patient recording. However, individual providers may have their own no-recording policies, and a provider could choose not to continue the appointment if you refuse to stop recording.
Can my doctor record me without my consent in New York?
Generally, no. A healthcare provider who wants to record a patient encounter typically needs written consent from the patient. HIPAA authorization requirements apply, and recording without consent could violate both HIPAA and New York eavesdropping laws depending on the circumstances.
Does HIPAA prevent me from recording at the doctor?
No. HIPAA restricts what healthcare providers and their business associates do with your protected health information. It does not restrict what patients do during their own appointments. A provider cannot cite HIPAA as a legal reason to prevent you from recording your own visit.
Can I record a telehealth appointment in New York?
Yes. If you are located in New York during the telehealth appointment, one-party consent allows you to record the session. If your provider is in a two-party consent state, the stricter law may apply. The telehealth platform may have its own terms regarding recording, but your state law right to record exists independently of platform rules.
Can hospitals put cameras in patient rooms in New York?
No. Patient rooms in hospitals and inpatient facilities are private spaces where patients have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Placing cameras in patient rooms, examination rooms, or treatment areas where patients undress violates Penal Law 250.45, which is a Class E felony. Cameras in hallways, lobbies, and other common areas are permitted.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
New York Penal Law
§ 250.05EavesdroppingIn forcecited in 14 of our articles
Eavesdropping. A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting or accessing of an electronic communication. Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 39 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):New York courts recognize a vicarious consent exception to the eavesdropping offense. The Appellate Term adopted it in People v. Clark (2008). The Court of Appeals then held in People v. Badalamenti (2016) that consent covers a parent with a good faith, objectively reasonable belief that recording serves the child's best interests.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- The People v. Anthony Badalamenti (New York Court of Appeals 2016, 27 N.Y.3d 423)✓A father's call to the mother's phone connected with no one speaking, and he recorded her boyfriend threatening to beat his five year old son; the court held that consent under Penal Law 250.05 includes a parent's vicarious consent, so the recording was admissible.
- People v. Badalamenti (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2015, 124 A.D.3d 672)✓Reviewing the same recording of a boyfriend threatening the father's young son, the Appellate Division adopted a vicarious consent exemption to Penal Law 250.05 where a parent has a good faith, objectively reasonable basis to believe recording serves the child's welfare.
- People v. Clark (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2008, 19 Misc. 3d 6)✓A mother slipped an audio recorder into the backpack of her nonverbal autistic eight year old before he boarded the school bus, capturing his bus matron; the Appellate Term held she could vicariously consent for him, so the recording did not violate Penal Law 250.05.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties, New York Smart Glasses Recording Laws 2026, New York AI Meeting Recording Laws (2026)
§ 250.00Eavesdropping; definitions of termsIn forcecited in 19 of our articles
Eavesdropping; definitions of terms. The following definitions are applicable to this article: 1. "Wiretapping" means the intentional overhearing or recording of a telephonic or telegraphic communication 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 or necessary to protect the rights or property of said corporation 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.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 56 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Fata (New York County Courts 1988, 139 Misc. 2d 979)“…Fata had a justifiable expectation of privacy; and (c) that Penal Law § 250.00 et seq. prohibit the mechanical overh…”
- The People v. Anthony Badalamenti (New York Court of Appeals 2016, 27 N.Y.3d 423)“…t of “mechanical overhearing of a conversation” pursuant to Penal Law § 250.00 (2), includes vicarious consent, on beh…”
- Gurevich v. Gurevich (New York Supreme Court 2009, 24 Misc. 3d 808)“…11 ing” as they relate to Penal Law § 250.05 are defined in Penal Law § 250.00 (6) as: “the intentional acquiring, r…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Dashcam Laws: Legality, Mounting Rules, and Evidence Use, New York Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Rights for Renters and Property Owners, New York Phone Call Recording Laws: Consent Rules for Landline, Cell, and VoIP
§ 250.45Unlawful surveillance in the second degreeIn forcecited in 18 of our articles
Unlawful surveillance in the second degree. A person is guilty of unlawful surveillance in the second degree when: 1. For his or her own, or another person's amusement, entertainment, or profit, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing a person, he or she intentionally uses or installs, or permits the utilization or installation of an imaging device to surreptitiously view, broadcast or record a person dressing or undressing or the sexual or other intimate parts of such person at a place and time when such person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without such person's knowledge or consent; or 2. For his or her own, or another person's sexual arousal or sexual gratification, he or she intentionally uses or installs, or permits the utilization or installation of an imaging device to surreptitiously view, broadcast or record a person dressing or undressing or the sexual or other intimate parts of such person at a place and time when such person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, without such person's knowledge or consent; or 3.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 51 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):People v. Piznarski (2013) held Penal Law 250.45 reaches a participant who secretly records consensual sex, that the victim kept a reasonable expectation of privacy, and that the one-party consent rule for eavesdropping does not apply. People v. Evans (2006) applied section 250.45(3) to a camera hidden in a bedroom.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Evans (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2006, 27 A.D.3d 905)✓A man placed a video camera in his girlfriend's 12-year-old daughter's bedroom and recorded her undressing, then pleaded guilty under Section 250.45(3); the court affirmed, holding the plea needed no express admission of no legitimate purpose given the statutory presumption.
- People v. Lema (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2017, 152 A.D.3d 440)✓A man used a phone camera to record under women's skirts on a subway train, but dark lighting produced no image of intimate parts; the court affirmed, holding Section 250.45(4) is satisfied when a device is used for the purpose of making such a recording.
- People v. Piznarski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2013, 113 A.D.3d 166)✓A student secretly recorded sex with two women using a camera left in view on his bedroom desk; the court affirmed under Section 250.45, holding the statute reaches a participant who records a consensual encounter and that a visible camera can still be used surreptitiously.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Laws on Recording in Public: Rights, Limits, and Privacy Rules, New York School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights, New York Workplace Recording Laws: Employee Rights and Employer Rules
New York Mental Hygiene Law
§ 33.13Clinical records; confidentialityIn force
Clinical records; confidentiality. (a) A clinical record for each patient or client shall be maintained at each facility licensed or operated by the office of mental health or the office for people with developmental disabilities, hereinafter referred to as the offices. For the purposes of this section, the term "facility" shall mean "facility" as such term is defined in section 1.03 of this chapter, provided, however, such term shall also include any provider of services for individuals with mental illness or developmental disabilities which is operated by, under contract with, receives funding from, or is otherwise approved to render services by, a director of community services pursuant to article forty-one of this chapter or one or both of the offices, including any such provider which is exempt from the requirement for an operating certificate under article sixteen or article thirty-one of this chapter. The record shall contain information on all matters relating to the admission, legal status, care, and treatment of the patient or client and shall include all pertinent documents relating to the patient or client.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 139 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Albany Law School v. New York State Office of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities (New York Court of Appeals 2012, 19 N.Y.3d 106)“…disability.” The 1986 legislation simultaneously amended Mental Hygiene Law § 33.13, the provision that secures the confide…”
- Dobies v. Brefka (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 1999, 263 A.D.2d 721)“…rospective economic advantage, conspiracy and violations of Mental Hygiene Law § 33.13. *722 After joinder of issue, defend…”
- In re Michelle HH. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2005, 18 A.D.3d 1075)“…this nature are contained in respondent’s foster care file, Mental Hygiene Law § 33.13 prohibits their release except in certa…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
New York Public Health Law
§ 17Release of medical recordsIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Release of medical records. Upon the written request of any competent patient, parent or guardian of an infant, a guardian appointed pursuant to article eighty-one of the mental hygiene law, or conservator of a conservatee, an examining, consulting or treating physician or hospital must release and deliver, exclusive of personal notes of the said physician or hospital, copies of all x-rays, medical records and test records including all laboratory tests regarding that patient to any other designated physician or hospital provided, however, that such records concerning the treatment of an infant patient for venereal disease or the performance of an abortion operation upon such infant patient shall not be released or in any manner be made available to the parent or guardian of such infant, and provided, further, that original mammograms, rather than copies thereof, shall be released and delivered.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 19 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Casillo v. St. John's Episcopal Hospital (New York Supreme Court 1992, 151 Misc. 2d 420)“…thin 10 days of the date hereof. Through August 31, 1991, Public Health Law §§ 17 and 18 permitted health care facilities…”
- Liberatore v. Calvino (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2002, 293 A.D.2d 217)“…New York statutes, e.g., Insurance Law § 5101 et seq. and Public Health Law § 17, as well as wielding the threat of liti…”
- Albany Medical College v. McShane (New York Court of Appeals 1985, 66 N.Y.2d 982)“…ct to defendant’s right to obtain copies (see, Public Health Law § 17; Matter of Hernandez v Lutheran…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Medical Records Retention Laws (2026 Guide)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- N.Y. Penal Law 250.00 - Eavesdropping Definitions(nysenate.gov).gov
- N.Y. Penal Law 250.45 - Unlawful Surveillance(nysenate.gov).gov
- HHS - Your Rights Under HIPAA(hhs.gov).gov
- HHS - HIPAA Privacy Rule(hhs.gov).gov
- NYS DOH - Patient Record Access(health.ny.gov).gov
- NYS DOH - HIPAA Preemption(health.ny.gov).gov
- Mental Hygiene Law 33.13(nysenate.gov).gov
- Public Health Law 17(law.justia.com)
- HHS - Individuals' Right to Access Health Information(hhs.gov).gov
- NYS DOH - You and Your Health Records(health.ny.gov).gov