 | Tuesday, July 14, 2026 | | Free, always on, and legally untested. What could go wrong? | .jpg) | BSIP/Universal Images Group via Getty Images | A few months ago, someone posted a screenshot to r/ChatGPT showing an audio conversation with the chatbot that had run for almost 24
hours straight. The original poster said they were going through "rough times."
The replies came fast, and most redditors clocked it as reasonable. People described their own marathon sessions after breakups and layoffs and nights they couldn't otherwise get through.
A few said a chatbot had done more for them than any therapist had. A few said it made them worse, quieter, more
alone. Both things can be true, and that's the uncomfortable center of AI and mental health right now. The appeal is obvious enough. These tools are free or cheap, they respond at 3 a.m., and you know they won’t flinch when you say something ugly about yourself. A human therapist can't compete with that kind of communication, and there are good reasons they don't
try. | | SPONSORED |  | More to stream, one bundle | From Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, and National Geographic to Hulu hits, HBO Max favorites, and live sports from ESPN, Disney+ bundles bring more of what people watch
into one subscription. Choose the plan that fits your household, stream on multiple devices, and find movies, series, sports, and family favorites all in one place. | | |
| The liability questionChatbots don't hold back the same way as human therapists, and the
legal system hasn't decided who answers for that yet.
The old immunity that protects tech platforms was built for a different kind of product. Section 230 shields search engines and websites from liability for other people's speech, on the theory that they're just hosting it. But a chatbot isn’t hosting speech. It’s generating it, in response to a user.
States aren't waiting around either. Illinois, Nevada, and Utah have all passed laws this year restricting AI from performing anything that looks like therapeutic decision making, Texas has opened its own investigation into how chatbot platforms
market themselves, and New York now requires bots to recognize signs of self-harm and point users toward real help.
Pennsylvania is taking a different angle. The state sued Character.AI in May, accusing one of its chatbots of posing as a licensed psychiatrist, complete with a fake medical license number, and is asking a court to stop the company from practicing medicine without a license. | | | SPONSORED | | More to stream, one bundle | From Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, and National Geographic to Hulu hits, HBO Max favorites, and live sports from ESPN, Disney+ bundles bring more of what people watch
into one subscription. Choose the plan that fits your household, stream on multiple devices, and find movies, series, sports, and family favorites all in one place. | | |
| | The access problemStrip away the legal fights and the actual driver here is simpler and sadder. People can't get a human therapist, even when they have insurance.
It's worse without insurance. A March KFF poll found uninsured adults are more than twice as likely as insured adults to turn to AI
for mental health advice, 30% compared with 14%. It's the same pattern tech always falls into: build a cheaper substitute for a service the wealthy can still buy the real version of. Anyone who can afford a therapist with an opening is not the one being handed a chatbot instead.
What they're bad at is the part that matters most in a crisis. Stanford researchers tested chatbots with subtle suicidal ideation, someone mentioning a
lost job and then asking about tall bridges nearby, and found the bots cheerfully supplied bridge heights instead of catching the warning sign.
That's not a hallucination. That's a design flaw, built by systems optimized to be agreeable and keep you chatting, rather than disagree.
That flaw is also why chatbots can't just slot into the gap left by the therapist shortage and
call it solved. Psychiatric researchers describe an "amplification spiral," where a chatbot's agreeableness, its habit of mirroring how you talk, and its personalized responses combine to make it feel less like predictive text and more like
someone who understands you.
None of that erases the access problem. It just means the people arriving at 2 a.m. with nowhere else to go are often the same people least able to tell when the thing listening back has stopped helping.
—Jackie Snow, Contributing Editor | | Tired of boring business news?
The Hustle is your answer. We deliver snappy, unconventional business news for people who hate business news, plus free guides on making money with AI, starting side hustles, and more. Join 1.5M entrepreneurs and aspiring founders who read us every day.
|
| | | .png) | |
|
|
