In a thought-provoking article for Forbes, the author Lance Eliot examines the rapidly expanding use of artificial intelligence systems in mental health support — and flags a range of troubling issues when these tools stray into territory traditionally held for licensed human therapists. While the promise of greater access, lower cost and convenience of AI chatbots is appealing, many deployments fall short of ethical, clinical and relational standards expected in professional therapy.
One central concern is that these AI tools often mimic therapeutic language without embodying the relational depth, contextual awareness or judgment that human practitioners bring. They may provide advice or responses that sound caring yet lack real understanding. For example, users may form emotional reliance on a bot that operates without the nuance of human empathy or the safeguard of clinical supervision. The article underscores that this “therapeutic veneer” can lull users into thinking they are getting meaningful care when in fact fundamental safeguards are missing.
Another issue is safety and liability: AI systems may fail to detect crises (suicidal ideation, psychosis, self-harm) or provide responses that are misleading, inaccurate or inappropriate. Because these tools are often deployed outside regulated clinical frameworks, users may receive what looks like therapy but isn’t held to professional standards of confidentiality, evaluation, competence and accountability. The article argues that treating AI as a substitute rather than a complement to therapy carries substantial risk — especially for vulnerable people.
To address these concerns, the article suggests a number of actions: (1) clearly define the boundary between “support” tools and “therapy” tools; (2) mandate licensed human oversight or involvement when mental-health advice is given; (3) require transparency about the tool’s capabilities, limitations, data-use and privacy; and (4) integrate rigorous validation, regulation and professional-ethics frameworks into AI-mental-health deployments. The takeaway: AI can assist mental-health work, but it must be designed, governed and communicated with the care of a medical-grade intervention, not a generic chatbot.
