More than half of Australia's general practitioners are now using artificial intelligence to record and transcribe medical consultations, prompting urgent warnings that patient privacy protections have failed to keep pace with the technology's rapid adoption.
A new report has raised serious concerns about the use of so-called AI scribes in GP clinics — software that listens to doctor-patient conversations and automatically generates detailed medical notes within seconds. While the technology has won support from physicians who say it frees them to focus on their patients, critics are calling for stronger regulation and clearer legal safeguards.
What AI Scribes Do — and Why Doctors Like Them
AI scribe tools act as a digital assistant during consultations, capturing the spoken exchange between a doctor and patient and producing written clinical notes almost instantly. Supporters within the medical community argue the technology is transforming the way GPs work.
Australian Medical Association (AMA) public health chair Dr Michael Bonning said the tools gave doctors the opportunity to be "much more present, be much more thoughtful" during appointments. He was clear, however, that the technology does not replace clinical judgement — emphasising that doctors retain full responsibility for what goes into a patient's record.
"The author of any medical note is the doctor," Dr Bonning said. "We always have to check and make sure that what goes into the record is correct."
Privacy Concerns at the Heart of the Debate
Despite the clinical benefits, the new report has put a spotlight on significant gaps in how patient data is being handled. At the core of the concern is the fact that people are sharing deeply sensitive personal information — often without fully understanding how it is being captured, stored, or used.
Digital Rights Watch deputy chair Tom Sulston said the pace of adoption was outstripping the protections in place. "There are questions around patients' rights to their data and their privacy while they're discussing the most private information we have," he said.
The report also uncovered a particularly troubling case: one patient was reportedly refused an appointment after declining to have AI record their consultation — a scenario that Sulston described as completely unacceptable.
"This is not acceptable. We should not have to trade off our health care for the privacy of our health information," he said.
Calls for Regulation, Not a Ban
Critics of the current rollout are not seeking to ban AI scribes outright. Instead, they are pushing for meaningful regulatory reform that would guarantee patients the right to opt out of AI recording without facing any consequences for their access to medical care.
Notably, doctors themselves appear to agree that clearer rules are needed — both to protect patients and to maintain trust in the healthcare system more broadly.
As AI continues to reshape how medical professionals work, the debate over patient privacy in the consulting room looks set to intensify, with advocates warning that stronger oversight cannot wait.
