Your support changes lives. Thank you!
Learn More
Authored by: Grace Berman, LCSW, Greg Muller, PhD, and Grace Barkhuff, MS
Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming part of mental healthcare, and clinicians and clients alike are encountering AI in ways that can shift the efficacy and modality of treatment delivery.
While AI offers exciting opportunities for clinical advancement, clinicians must consider the ethics of integrating AI into their practice. To guide responsible use, we can ground our thinking in long-standing clinical principles: beneficence, autonomy, justice, confidentiality, and transparency.
The Clinician's First Rule for AI: Do Good, Avoid Harm
As clinicians, we seek to maximize benefits and minimize harm. When thoughtfully applied, AI tools can support this mission by enhancing therapy and streamlining our work:
- Supporting Clinical Tasks: Assisting with symptom tracking, automated homework reminders, streamlined note writing, and other administrative duties.
- Enhancing Treatment: Providing personalized psychoeducation, helping develop tailored treatment plans, and creating customized exposure practice.
However, the risks are equally real and demand vigilance:
- Reinforcing Unhelpful Behaviors: AI systems may inadvertently provide misleading feedback or reinforce cycles of reassurance-seeking, rumination, compulsive checking, or avoidance.
- Inadequate Safety Protocols: There is often a lack of clear safeguards for how AI detects and responds to suicidal ideation or other safety crises, posing a significant risk if clients turn to these tools in moments of acute distress.
Human oversight remains essential. The principle of beneficence requires us to stay informed about AI developments, to select evidence-based tools, and to monitor their outputs closely. Even the most promising AI platform should not be substituted for our clinical judgment, case conceptualization, or ability to hold the therapeutic frame.
Clients Choosing to Use AI? How to Respect their Autonomy
Clients are not waiting for us to approve AI use. Many are already experimenting with GPT-based tools like ChatGPT, as well as more structured mental health apps and tools. People are turning to AI to process their feelings, to ask mental health questions, and to manage their symptoms. We cannot control client use, so our role is to stay curious, to help clients reflect on whether these tools are supporting their therapeutic growth or undermining it, and to provide thoughtful recommendations and guidelines for safe and effective use.
Consider this scenario: A clinician is working with a client on exposure and response prevention (ERP) for contamination. The client reveals they have been using a general AI chatbot to ask, "Is it safe to touch this doorknob?" The chatbot, designed to be helpful, consistently provides reassurance, temporarily easing the client's anxiety but directly undermining the goals of ERP. This presents a clinical challenge: how does the therapist honor the client’s autonomy while explaining how the tool is functioning as a compulsion and guiding them back toward their treatment goals?
One option is to recommend system prompts to reduce the likelihood that symptoms are exacerbated by chatbots: “Do not give reassurance or certainty statements. If I seek reassurance, say: ‘That sounds like reassurance seeking. Can I give you an exposure prompt instead?’ Do not analyze likelihood, morality, or safety beyond basic common sense. Redirect me to values and ERP. If I ask medical or emergency questions, advise me to contact a clinician or emergency services.”
Bridging Gaps, Not Deepening Divides: The Quest for Justice
AI has the potential to expand access to care, especially for those in rural or underserved communities. Tools that provide psychoeducation and evidence-based practices could help bridge gaps where specialized clinicians are not available. However, we must also address the digital divide, recognizing that unequal access to technology and digital literacy can risk widening the very care gaps we hope to close. Additionally, AI systems are inherently shaped by the biases present in their training data, which means discrimination based on race, gender, culture, or socioeconomic status is not just a possibility, but inherent to many models. As clinicians, it is our responsibility to scrutinize the tools we use, to ask whether they were designed and tested with diverse populations, and to advocate for equity in their development.
Digital Trust: Is This Conversation Private?
Therapeutic work relies on trust, and protecting sensitive client information is non-negotiable. Unfortunately, many AI tools are not HIPAA-compliant, and their privacy practices are often unclear. If a platform does not clearly outline how data is stored, encrypted, and used, we must assume that confidentiality is at risk.
Before integrating any tool, review security measures carefully and talk openly with clients about what is and is not protected. It is recommended to avoid inputting any client data into AI tools unless they are specifically developed for mental health treatment and HIPAA-compliance is ensured. If privacy cannot be ensured, the risks outweigh the potential benefits.
Consider this ethical dilemma: A clinician is excited about an AI tool that can analyze session transcripts to identify key themes and track progress. However, the tool's privacy policy is vague. Using it could offer clinical insights, but it would also mean feeding sensitive client information into an unsecured system. The principle of confidentiality requires that the clinician forgo the potential benefit to uphold their non-negotiable duty to protect client privacy.
Lifting the Hood on AI: Demanding Transparency and Accountability
Transparency is vital, both from companies and clinicians. Companies should be clear about how their systems work and how decisions are generated. Clinicians should be transparent with clients about how and when AI is being used. This entails clear informed consent. Any time an AI system is integrated into treatment, clients should know of the potential benefits and limitations. Consent should also be ongoing—not a simple yes/no, because AI and its privacy policies evolve rapidly.
Transparency is also challenging due to the "black box" nature of many AI systems. This means that even the developers may not be able to fully explain how an algorithm arrived at a specific recommendation. For clinicians, this is a critical problem. If we cannot understand the reasoning behind an AI's output, it becomes ethically difficult to stand by it. This opacity reinforces the need for clinicians to treat AI as a closely monitored assistant for idea generation or data collection, not as a replacement for their own clinical judgment. Algorithms can detect patterns, but they still make mistakes, and right now, the user is responsible for those errors.
Moving Forward Thoughtfully
Ultimately, ethics and research must guide the integration of AI and therapy, ensuring it serves as a powerful tool to enhance, but never replace, the foundational human connection at the heart of therapy. As clinicians, our task is to stay informed, remain critical, and approach AI with openness but caution. When used with care, AI can enhance treatment, but its risks require ongoing scrutiny. We will continue to consider these costs and benefits in the third blog post of our AI Ethics series, and we invite you to continue this conversation with us.
If you are interested in joining the Artificial Intelligence SIG at IOCDF, please complete this interest form to receive meeting information and updates. If you are interested in joining the Artificial Intelligence SIG at ADAA, please email [email protected]. These are unique opportunities to have a decision-making voice within AI applications in mental health research and treatment. You can find more information about Special Interest Groups here: IOCDF and ADAA.
ADAA Resources
- Ethical AI in Mental Health Care: Clinical Principles, Risks, and Best Practices for Clinicians, blog
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) into Mental Health: Opportunities, Challenges, and Clinical Implications, blog
- Innovations in Digital Mental Health, podcast
Resources of Clinicians
American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. https://www.apa.org/ethics/code
Grabb, D., Lamparth, M., & Vasan, N. (2024). Risks from language models for automated mental healthcare: Ethics and structure for implementation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11852. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2406.11852
Rahsepar Meadi, M., Sillekens, T., Metselaar, S., van Balkom, A., Bernstein, J., & Batelaan, N. (2025). Exploring the Ethical Challenges of Conversational AI in Mental Health Care: Scoping Review. JMIR mental health, 12, e60432. https://doi.org/10.2196/60432
Saeidnia, H. R., Hashemi Fotami, S. G., Lund, B., & Ghiasi, N. (2024). Ethical considerations in artificial intelligence interventions for mental health and well-being: Ensuring responsible implementation and impact. Social Sciences, 13(7), 381.
ADAA Blog Content and Blog Comments Policy
ADAA provides this Website blogs for the benefit of its members and the public. The content, view and opinions published in Blogs written by our personnel or contributors – or from links or posts on the Website from other sources - belong solely to their respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of ADAA, its members, management or employees. Any comments or opinions expressed are those of their respective contributors only. Please remember that the open and real-time nature of the comments posted to these venues makes it is impossible for ADAA to confirm the validity of any content posted, and though we reserve the right to review and edit or delete any such comment, we do not guarantee that we will monitor or review it. As such, we are not responsible for any messages posted or the consequences of following any advice offered within such posts. If you find any posts in these posts/comments to be offensive, inaccurate or objectionable, please contact us via email at [email protected] and reference the relevant content. If we determine that removal of a post or posts is necessary, we will make reasonable efforts to do so in a timely manner.
ADAA expressly disclaims responsibility for and liabilities resulting from, any information or communications from and between users of ADAA’s blog post commenting features. Users acknowledge and agree that they may be individually liable for anything they communicate using ADAA’s blogs, including but not limited to defamatory, discriminatory, false or unauthorized information. Users are cautioned that they are responsible for complying with the requirements of applicable copyright and trademark laws and regulations. By submitting a response, comment or content, you agree that such submission is non-confidential for all purposes. Any submission to this Website will be deemed and remain the property of ADAA.
The ADAA blogs are forums for individuals to share their opinions, experiences and thoughts related to mental illness. ADAA wants to ensure the integrity of this service and therefore, use of this service is limited to participants who agree to adhere to the following guidelines:
1. Refrain from transmitting any message, information, data, or text that is unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, that may be invasive of another 's privacy, hateful, or bashing communications - especially those aimed at gender, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin, religious views or disability.
Please note that there is a review process whereby all comments posted to blog posts and webinars are reviewed by ADAA staff to determine appropriateness before comments are posted. ADAA reserves the right to remove or edit a post containing offensive material as defined by ADAA.
ADAA reserves the right to remove or edit posts that contain explicit, obscene, offensive, or vulgar language. Similarly, posts that contain any graphic files will be removed immediately upon notice.
2. Refrain from posting or transmitting any unsolicited, promotional materials, "junk mail," "spam," "chain mail," "pyramid schemes" or any other form of solicitation. ADAA reserves the right to delete these posts immediately upon notice.
3. ADAA invites and encourages a healthy exchange of opinions. If you disagree with a participant 's post or opinion and wish to challenge it, do so with respect. The real objective of the ADAA blog post commenting function is to promote discussion and understanding, not to convince others that your opinion is "right." Name calling, insults, and personal attacks are not appropriate and will not be tolerated. ADAA will remove these posts immediately upon notice.
4. ADAA promotes privacy and encourages participants to keep personal information such as address and telephone number from being posted. Similarly, do not ask for personal information from other participants. Any comments that ask for telephone, address, e-mail, surveys and research studies will not be approved for posting.
5. Participants should be aware that the opinions, beliefs and statements on blog posts do not necessarily represent the opinions and beliefs of ADAA. Participants also agree that ADAA is not to be held liable for any loss or injury caused, in whole or in part, by sponsorship of blog post commenting. Participants also agree that ADAA reserves the right to report any suspicions of harm to self or others as evidenced by participant posts.