Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and decision-making: Legal & ethical hurdles for implementation in mental health

This article argues that significant risks are being taken with using GenAI in mental health that should be assessed urgently. It recommends that guidelines for using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in mental health care must be established promptly. Currently, clinicians using chatbots without appropriate approval risk undermining legal protections for patients. This could harm the patient and undermine the standards of the profession, undermining trust in an area where human involvement in decision-making is critical. To explore these concerns, this paper is divided into three parts. First, it examines the needs of patients in mental health. Second, it explores the potential benefits of GenAI in mental health and highlights the risks of its use as it pertains to patient needs. Third, it notes the ethical and legal concerns around data use and medical liability that require careful attention. The impact of the European Union's (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (AI-Act) is also considered. It will be seen that these laws are insufficient in the context of mental health. As such, the paper recommends that guidelines should be developed to help resolve the existing legal gaps until codified rules are established.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Published
2024-10-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.102028
Citations
16
Primary Topic
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.48
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and decision-making: Legal & ethical hurdles for implementation in mental health

Barry Solaiman
16 citations
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
5.48
article

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) and decision-making: Legal & ethical hurdles for implementation in mental health

Barry Solaiman
article en
16 citations

Abstract

This article argues that significant risks are being taken with using GenAI in mental health that should be assessed urgently. It recommends that guidelines for using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in mental health care must be established promptly. Currently, clinicians using chatbots without appropriate approval risk undermining legal protections for patients. This could harm the patient and undermine the standards of the profession, undermining trust in an area where human involvement in decision-making is critical. To explore these concerns, this paper is divided into three parts. First, it examines the needs of patients in mental health. Second, it explores the potential benefits of GenAI in mental health and highlights the risks of its use as it pertains to patient needs. Third, it notes the ethical and legal concerns around data use and medical liability that require careful attention. The impact of the European Union's (EU) Artificial Intelligence Act (AI-Act) is also considered. It will be seen that these laws are insufficient in the context of mental health. As such, the paper recommends that guidelines should be developed to help resolve the existing legal gaps until codified rules are established.

International Journal of Law and PsychiatryVol. 97
Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar (QA)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
5.48
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.