In recent weeks, I’ve spoken to several journalists about a trend that’s gaining traction in general practice: the use of AI scribes to take notes during consultations.
Consumers Health Forum of Australia
From the perspective of clinicians, there are clear benefits. Many GPs tell us these tools reduce their admin burden and help ease burnout. Some say they can now focus more on the patient in front of them, rather than on typing or paperwork. That’s a positive development. We all want a health system that supports clinicians to stay in the workforce and build meaningful relationships with health consumers.
But from the health consumer perspective, it’s more complicated.
Generative AI is still new. We’re all learning, in real time, what it’s good at, where it falls short, and what its broader impacts might be. There’s enormous potential, but also serious risks.
When consumers talk about these scribes, one of the most common concerns we hear is about consent. Some consumers say they weren’t told that a scribe would be used until they were in the consultation itself. Others felt unable to ask questions, didn’t know the questions to ask, or felt saying no was not an option. Some didn’t want to upset the doctor. Others didn’t want to use up valuable consultation time.
The result is often silent compliance, not informed choice.
Nuances in meaning
Once a mistake enters your health record, it can be hard to correct. If the scribe misses the nuance of what you meant — your sarcastic tone, your accent, what you didn’t quite say — it might not show up as an error, but still change how your care is understood. Over many years we’ve heard from people who discovered errors or omissions in their health record, and found them difficult to correct. Once a mistake is in the system, it can shape future care in harmful ways. Let’s not have generative AI make this problem bigger.
Health consumers want to be respected always. They want clarity, transparency, and a genuine say in how healthcare is delivered. As AI becomes integrated into healthcare these same rules apply.
That’s why CHF is calling for clear safeguards. Every consumer should have the right to opt out of AI scribes, without being treated as uncooperative. We need consistent national policy and standards, stronger governance, and proper auditing that goes beyond cost-cutting to focus on safety, accuracy, and quality.
And all of this must be co-designed. Consumers, clinicians, privacy experts and policymakers need to be at the table together. That is how we build trust.
ROLE FOR GOVERNMENT
Government has a key role to play. As new tools like generative AI become part of everyday care, public understanding must keep pace. People need clear, accessible information. They need to know what is being used, how it works, and the smart questions to ask when they are considering consent.
This is true for our approach to generative AI and health policy more broadly. Having people who are well informed and able to contribute is essential, not only for emerging technologies, but for every part of the health system. That’s why we created the Consumer Assembly.
We’ve been thrilled by the response to the Expression of Interest process. More than 120 people applied for just 20 places. That reminds us all of something important: Australians care about the future of healthcare, and they want a voice.
Our team is now working through the applications and preparing for the first meeting in late June. The level of insight and commitment shown by applicants reminds us how powerful the consumer movement in Australia is.
We’ll continue to listen through Australia’s Health Panel and our online channels. If you’ve had experience with AI in healthcare, or want to share your views on policy more broadly, we’d love to hear from you at an upcoming event or on our social media.
This is a moment of change. If we want healthcare to stay human, responsive, and safe, the best way forward is together.
