Therapists who use AI as a clinical tool may outlast colleagues who do not

The column argues that therapists who integrate AI into clinical care will outperform peers who avoid it, noting widespread consumer use of generative AI for mental health and concerns about safeguards.

The author examines a common claim that therapists who adopt AI as a hands-on clinical tool will outdo and outlast therapists who do not. The piece places that claim in the context of rapidly expanding generative AI use, public-facing lawsuits and ongoing debates about safeguards. It describes how clients already bring AI-generated guidance into sessions and how that is changing expectations for clinical practice. The article also contrasts clinical uses of AI with administrative applications and raises questions about risks and tradeoffs. Reported details: - The author asserts that therapists who integrate AI into clinical work are likely to have an advantage over therapists who ignore AI. - The piece reports widespread consumer use of generative AI for mental health and notes ChatGPT has been cited as having over 900 million weekly active users in the author’s analysis. - The article references an August lawsuit against OpenAI and highlights concerns that AI can provide unsuitable or harmful mental-health guidance in some cases. - The author describes an emerging therapist–AI–client triad and recommends therapist-led selection and oversight of AI to avoid conflicting guidance. - The article notes administrative AI uses such as session transcripts and billing, but emphasizes clinical integration as the primary differentiator. Summary: The article frames AI as reshaping therapy norms and reports that clinicians who thoughtfully integrate AI into clinical work may have comparative advantages, while poorly managed AI use carries risks. Undetermined at this time.