Can You Record Your Doctor Appointment in California?

Recording an in-person visit

California Penal Code § 632 makes it illegal to record a "confidential communication" without the consent of all parties, and it covers face-to-face talks. The California Supreme Court says a conversation is confidential if someone reasonably expects it is not being overheard or recorded (Flanagan v. Flanagan, 2002), and a court let a doctor sue people who secretly recorded him in his office while posing as patients. The law targets secret recording: if you clearly tell everyone at the start and they keep talking, courts generally treat that as consent, but a clear "yes" is safest.

Phone and telehealth visits

Recording a call that involves a cell phone or cordless phone needs everyone's consent, even if the call is not confidential (§ 632.7), and the California Supreme Court has held this applies to people on the call, not just outsiders (Smith v. LoanMe, 2021). Video visits are covered by § 632 when confidential, which a medical visit usually is. California applies its rule when one person is in California and the other is in a one-party state (Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, 2006), so ask permission whether you or your clinician is in California.

When you and your clinician are in different states, for example on a phone or video visit, there is no single national rule for which state's law applies. Courts decide case by case, and they have not all agreed. California's highest court applied California's stricter rule to calls recorded in Georgia with people in California, while a Pennsylvania court declined to apply Pennsylvania's stricter rule to a call recorded in New York. The safest choice is to follow the stricter state's rule: tell everyone you are recording and get their OK.

Things to know

• Clearly telling everyone at the start that you are recording, and having them continue, is usually treated as consent. Courts have not settled whether a beep tone alone is enough.
• If your clinician says no, recording anyway could lead to a lawsuit or criminal charges.
• A recording made in violation of § 632 generally cannot be used as evidence in court (§ 632(d)).
• Sharing an illegally made recording of a health care provider is a separate crime (§ 632.01).
• A 2026 law (SB 690) changed a different part of California's privacy law, about website tracking lawsuits. It did not change these recording rules.
• Do not leave your phone recording in the room after you step out. Once you are not part of the conversation, recording it could count as illegal eavesdropping.
• Penal Code § 632.01 makes it a separate crime to intentionally disclose or distribute, including online, the contents of a confidential communication with a health care provider that was recorded in violation of § 632 (fine up to $2,500 per violation, up to one year in jail, or both; up to $10,000 for repeat offenders). It does not reach recordings made with everyone's consent.

What happens if you break the law

Violating § 632 or § 632.7 is punishable by a fine of up to $2,500 per violation, up to one year in county jail or a state prison term, or both, with fines of up to $10,000 for repeat offenders. A person who is illegally recorded can sue for $5,000 per violation or three times actual damages, whichever is greater (§ 637.2).

How to ask your clinician

Ask before you start, and record the answer so there's no doubt later:

“Before we start, is it okay if I record this visit? I want to remember your instructions correctly.”

Wait for a clear yes. If your clinician says no, take notes instead or ask for a written summary. More tips are in our guide to asking to record your doctor visit.

California law and court decisions

• Cal. Penal Code § 632: Recording a confidential communication, in person or by phone or other device, without consent of all parties
• Cal. Penal Code § 632.7: Recording calls involving a cellular or cordless phone without consent of all parties, whether or not confidential
• Cal. Penal Code § 632.01: Disclosing or distributing an illegally recorded confidential communication with a health care provider
• Cal. Penal Code § 637.2: Civil action: greater of $5,000 per violation or three times actual damages
• 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d): Federal wiretap law: a participant may record a wire, oral or electronic communication unless the purpose is to commit a crime or tort
• Flanagan v. Flanagan, 27 Cal.4th 766 (2002): A conversation is "confidential" under § 632 if a party has an objectively reasonable expectation that it is not being overheard or recorded, regardless of whether its contents might later be repeated.
• Lieberman v. KCOP Television, Inc., 110 Cal.App.4th 156 (2003): A physician secretly recorded in his office by reporters posing as patients made a prima facie showing of a § 632 violation; the presence of the fake patients' companions did not defeat confidentiality as a matter of law.
• Smith v. LoanMe, Inc., 11 Cal.5th 183 (2021): Section 632.7 applies to parties as well as non-parties, so a participant may not record a covered cell or cordless phone call without the consent of all parties.
• Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 39 Cal.4th 95 (2006): California's all-party rule applies to calls between California residents and a business in a one-party state (Georgia); § 632 bars secret recording, and informing all parties at the outset that the call is recorded avoids a violation.

Recent change: SB 690 (signed September 30, 2026; operative January 1, 2027) amends § 637.2 so that only the Attorney General can sue over pen register and trap and trace claims (§ 638.51) based on website and app activity. It does not change §§ 631, 632 or 632.7 or the rules for recording conversations.

Frequently asked questions