Prohibits providing services requiring a professional license through artificial intelligence unless a licensed person provides them, allows the licensing office to collect enforcement fees, and sets specific AI-use requirements for psychologists and mental health and substance-use professionals.
relative to the use of artificial intelligence to provide services requiring a professional license.
I support SB 640-FN because it establishes clear guardrails to ensure AI cannot substitute for licensed professional judgment in mental health and other regulated services. This bill protects consumers, maintains accountability, and ensures that emerging technologies are used transparently and safely under the oversight of qualified professionals.
Only humans can truly help humans recover mentally, so these restrictions, and stricter ones in the future, are necessary.
As a licensed therapist, I am incredibly concerned by the rise in the use of AI language models to address mental health concerns. Within just the past year, there have been multiple suicides and homicides related to the usage of a chatbot, including a homicide that happened in Maine just last year. This incident, and many others like it, happened because a person accessed an AI language model while experiencing psychosis or ideation to harm themselves or others, and the language model validated those delusional thinking patterns. Human mental health providers undergo thousands of hours of training to be able to keep people safe when they are experiencing a mental health crisis. The most valuable skill we can offer during a crisis is not knowing what to say - it's performing a mental status exam. During this exam, we observe a person's physical presentation - things like their movement, their speech patterns, and their ability to make reasonable judgements and decisions. When mental health providers respond to people in crisis, we are responding in context of both the information we are verbally given by the person, but also the observable information that we have about that person. When someone is experiencing strong suicidal ideation or psychosis, they do not have the ability to make safe or reasonable judgements. Sometimes people even recognize this, and attempt to use AI language models as an avenue to get external advice. However, the advice is never actually external, because AI language models are not able to observe people in the context of their environment to take an accurate mental status exam. Their only value is in "saying the right thing." So often, instead of recognizing when a person is not making clear judgements and needs additional support, AI language models simply tend to validate instead. This has already proven to be dangerous and deadly. As a therapist, I do have clients who choose to use general AI language models for therapeutic advice outside of session. While my clients are free to make their own decisions about how to use these tools, I make sure to educate my clients about the risks of using AI language models for mental health support. Many of them are not even aware that people have died due to use of AI language models for mental health support. AI technology is expanding faster than any of us are able to keep up with, and it's difficulty to stay informed. Banning AI mental health services in NH is needed in order to keep Granite Staters safe.
As a New Hampshire license clinical social worker, I support this bill regarding restriction of AI bots.
Please hold this bill for interim study. It has large flaws, but is trying to do an important effort. As is - problems are: Fails to adequately address consumer protection. SB 640 will not regulate generative AI chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude), which are the most common means through which the public interfaces with AI (e.g., OpenAI data from 2025 indicated that there are 800 million weekly users of ChatGPT and that approximately 1.2 million people have expressed suicidal planning or intent during these interactions) Will create inconsistency across the healthcare system. The bill language does not clarify which licensed professionals are subject to its provisions, risking public and professional confusion and creating inequities across the healthcare system. Will exacerbate workforce shortages. Targeting clinician use of AI tools places NH at a disadvantage relative to states where legislative focus targets developers of these tools. Misplaces accountability. Responsibility for AI outputs should be placed on the developers, not licensed professionals who lack access to or control over the underlying technology. Licensed professionals are already held accountable by state/federal law and ethics code. Threatens access to care and to innovation that is a primary driver of access to care and economic growth: Risks $134 million in Rural Health Transformation funding tied to innovative care delivery Prohibits use of digital therapeutics aligned with CMS priorities Will disrupt research and innovation (e.g., after IL passed a law similar to SB 640, researchers at Dartmouth had to cease collaboration with the University of Chicago on innovative use of AI tools to increase access to mental health services)
Please support this bill. It is dangerous for AI Bots, who cannot appropriately respond to the subtleties of being human, to act as therapists.
I am strongly opposed to this bill because it does not adequately address consumer protection, Will create inconsistency across the healthcare system, and it will exacerbate workforce shortages. The mental health provider community opposes this bill as do researchers who specialize in AI and mental health. This is simply not the right bill for this time.
As a therapist, I support this bill to help protect people from unregulated AI bots who could give incorrect information to clients which could directly cause harm.
As a parent and a counselor in the community I feel very strongly that only humans should be offering any type of therapy services. Only humans can read body language, facial cues, pick up on changes in voice and make that true connection that is so important in therapy. AI is too new and unregulated. I would never trust AI bots with my son, nieces and nephews.
What an absolutely insane idea to replace competent, caring health or mental health professionals with AI! I am an LCPC (Licensed Clinical Professional Counselor) of 47 years and I occasionally use AI to source some information I share with clients, but the idea that there is not a kind-hearted professional in the room with them, looking them in the eyes, responding to their body language (all of which is critical to an empathic, effective healing relationship) is abhorrent. New Hampshire adults and children will be forever short-changed if this law passes. No, no and no!
As a retired Social Worker, I am frightened by the increased use of artificial technology in health care. The thought of using "bots" as a connection in treatment is awful-the Human interaction is the crux of Social Work Practice. I support this bill banning "bots"in Social Work practice and treatment.
Hello, Therapy bots are dangerous. They just affirm thoughts and behaviors. Therapist spend years in school and spend post school hours with on the job training. AI can't understand the nuance of therapy, build the same level of trust and rapport. It is dangerous to have them. Id urge to pass this bill as we do not need people getting hurt or worse based on what a bot tells them.
I have been a licensed professional psychotherapist since 1996. I have been monitoring the rising use of AI chatbots as a ‘cheap’ substitute for human therapists. Psychologically fragile individuals have been encouraged to end their lives or the lives of others, and given instruction on how to do so because AI chatbots are designed to support and encourage, not to diagnose and treat dangerous thinking and behavior patterns. They cannot assess body language and tone of voice and they are not ethically bound. There is no substitute for human interaction.
As a practicing social worker, the harm of AI therapy bots can not be overstated. Althoith bots are able to learn a patient, they are doing so devoid of the human connection and the trust building process, that are the most important part of a therapeutic relationship. That is required for true healing.
As a School Social Worker, I work with a variety of individuals and families with different abilities. Using AI as a tool only, may not be understood. Every interaction with a child and family requires a level of connection and understanding that cannot be mimicked by AI.
AI bots are designed to support your ideas. Therapy is not blanket support for ideas/actions. We have already seen cases of AI triggering psychosis and leading to suicides. There must be human oversight of anything related to mental health.
I am a licensed mental health professional who practices in New Hampshire. I have studied the research and practice implications of therapy bots and am pleased to see New Hampshire leading the way in this area.
I am in favor os this bill, as it: I. Prohibits the use of artificial intelligence or other means to provide services requiring a professional license unless those services are provided by someone with such a license. II. Allows the office of professional licensure and certification to collect fees for the costs of enforcement of the prohibition on unlicensed practice. III. Establishes specific requirements for the use of artificial intelligence for psychologists, mental health practitioners, and alcohol and other drug use professionals. Please vote in favor. This bill makes sense.
This bill will not adequately protect consumers because it will not adequately regulate AI chatbots. It will create inconsistencies across healthcare systems because it does not clearly define which licensed professional are subject to the bill. It will create work force shortages because it is targeting the clinicians instead of the companies creating this software. It misplaces accountability on providers versus the developers of this software. It threatens access to care because it threatens funding to rural areas of NH. It disrupts research and innovation .
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.