In the matter of a few clicks and keystrokes, anyone can find themselves deep in conversation with "Psychologist" — a chatbot character that describes itself as an expert in empathy and active listening. It responds to messages of anxiety and sadness with reassurance, asks probing questions, and even replies with italicized nonverbal cues like, "The psychologist’s expression softens with compassion." Yet, in a smaller font, a disclaimer quietly reads: "This is A.I. and not a real person. Treat everything it says as fiction."

As more people turn to chatbots for mental health help and advice — including by some estimates one in eight teens and young adults — legislators are in a race to keep up with the quickly developing technology. Among the latest efforts is a bill that would add restrictions around the use of chatbot companions and other artificial intelligence-powered tools that people use to support mental healthcare or in lieu of professional help.

Drawing a Hard Line

Sen. Steve Padilla, a San Diego Democrat and the bill’s author, said the intent is to draw a definitive line: AI can be used for administrative purposes and to support clinicians, but it cannot usurpusurp (verb): take (a position of power or importance) illegally or by force; take the place of. the practice of psychotherapy.

"We’re dealing with a new impactful technology that is unfolding and is deployed in our world at light speed, and so it is both extremely powerful and consequential."

The debate has taken on new urgency amid wrongful death lawsuits — some playing out in California federal courts — that accuse AI chatbot makers of contributing to users’ suicides. Senate Bill 903 would ban companies from advertising chatbots as therapy. It would prohibit AI from making therapeutictherapeutic (adjective): relating to the healing of disease; having a good effect on the body or mind. decisions without the review of a licensed professional and require health providers to disclose and get a patient’s permission before using AI tools to record therapy sessions or to triage mental healthcare.

Consumer Protections vs. Innovation

The bill is backed by professional associations that represent psychologists, therapists, and counselors. Also behind the bill is the National Union of Healthcare Workers, which has been leading a push against unchecked use of artificial intelligence and digital tools in mental healthcare. Most recently, the union filed a complaint with state regulators against Kaiser Permanente for its alleged use of an automated algorithm in mental health triaging.

Padilla and supporters argue that the legislation is needed to protect consumers from AI in both formal and informal spaces, but also to protect licensed professionals from being displaced by AI. Opposition to the bill has largely focused around the restrictions of AI use in formal clinical spaces. TechNet, which represents tech-sector companies, argues the legislation could restrict beneficial uses of AI in healthcare and stiflestifle (verb): prevent (something) from happening or developing; suppress. innovation.

Robert Boykin, TechNet’s executive director for California, said the bill could limit the use of tools that help expand access to mental healthcare. "At a time when every county in California faces a shortage of behavioral healthcare workers, SB 903 still puts a clinician bottleneck in front of the intake and screening tools that help patients reach care faster," Boykin said in an emailed statement.

The bill currently awaits its next vote in the Assembly’s fiscal committee.

Official Statement from the Bill's Author

Senate Bill 903 is advancing! This groundbreaking measure will advance AI accountability in mental healthcare by prevent tech companies from advertising chatbots as therapy.

— Senator Steve Padilla (@SenStevePadilla) August 6, 2026

View the official post from Senator Steve Padilla on X

Sources: CalMatters, Palo Alto Online.