Law / United States / 
Maine
Use of artificial intelligence in therapy or psychotherapy services
In force since .
An AI sector rules rule binding public and private bodies.
- Criminal exposure
- No
- Obligation class
- Prohibition, Consent, Governance
- Audit expectation
- none
What it requires
- This measure is enacted and signed, but its commencement date is not confirmed against a primary source as of the date below; treat it as a duty to prepare for.
- Do not provide, advertise, or otherwise offer therapy or psychotherapy services to the public, including through Internet-based artificial intelligence, unless the services are provided by a professional licensed in Maine to practice psychotherapy or behavioral health therapy.NIST AI RMFMAP 3.3
- If you are a Maine-licensed therapy professional using AI for supplementary support such as session notes, give the client written disclosure and get consent first, and never let AI make an independent therapeutic decision, interact directly with the client in therapeutic communication, or generate a treatment recommendation without your review and approval.NIST AI RMFMAP 1.6NIST AI RMFMAP 3.5
- AI use limited to administrative tasks such as scheduling or billing needs no client consent.
- An exception applies only to an AI-based intervention used solely within an institutional-review-board-approved research project.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
In the frameworks
- NIST AI RMF
- MAP 1.6System requirements (e.g., “the system shall respect the privacy of its users”) are elicited from and understood by relevant AI actors. Design decisions take socio-technical implications into account to address AI risks.
- MAP 3.3Targeted application scope is specified and documented based on the system’s capability, established context, and AI system categorization.
- MAP 3.5Processes for human oversight are defined, assessed, and documented in accordance with organizational policies from the GOVERN function.
- NIST AI 600-1
- GAI-RISK-04Data Privacy
- GAI-RISK-07Human-AI Configuration
- GAI-RISK-08Information Integrity
- GAI-RISK-11Obscene, Degrading, and/or Abusive Content
- NIST AI 200-2 Draft
- OWASP LLM Top 10
- LLM03:2026Excessive Agency
- OWASP Agentic Top 10
- ASI09Human-Agent Trust Exploitation
- MIT mitigations Draft
- 1.1Board Structure & Oversight
- 1.2Risk Management
- 1.5Safety Decision Frameworks
- 3.2Data Governance
- 3.3Access Management
- 3.5Post-deployment Monitoring
1 more
- 4.1System Documentation
- NIST Privacy Framework
- CT.PO-P1Policies, processes, and procedures for authorizing data processing (e.g., organizational decisions, individual consent), revoking authorizations, and maintaining authorizations are established and in place.
- CM.AW-P1Mechanisms (e.g., notices, internal or public reports) for communicating data processing purposes, practices, associated privacy risks, and options for enabling individuals’ data processing preferences and requests are established and in place.
- FINOS AIGF
- AIR-PREV-005System Acceptance Testing
- AIR-PREV-006Data Quality & Classification/Sensitivity
- AIR-PREV-024Human-in-the-Loop Action Approval Gate
- AIR-DET-004AI System Observability
- AIR-DET-011Human Feedback Loop for AI Systems
- AIR-DET-021Agent Decision Audit and Explainability
- ETSI EN 304 223
- 5.1.2-1Business need and security risks written down and assessed before deciding to build an AI system.
- 5.1.4-1Capability for human oversight designed in and maintained.
- 5.1.4-5End-users told which uses of the system are prohibited.
- 5.2.1-1Full inventory of assets, including their dependencies and connections.
- 5.2.4-1Developers keep an audit trail of system design and post-deployment maintenance plans and offer it downstream.
- 5.4.2-1Operators log system and user actions.
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST AI RMF, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
Identifiers refer to ETSI EN 304 223 V2.1.1 (2025-12), © ETSI 2025, all rights reserved. ETSI owns the standard; no ETSI text (titles or sentences) is reproduced here. The standard is free to download from ETSI.
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
Office of the Maine Attorney General under the Unfair Trade Practices Act for the public-facing prohibition; the applicable Title 32 professional licensing board for a licensee's own use of AI.
What it makes you log
Logging duty
Section 1500-EE itself states only the public-facing licensing prohibition and its Unfair Trade Practices Act enforcement; it states no logging or record-keeping duty of its own. The same act's Title 32 licensing-board provisions (32 M.R.S. §§ 2113, 2600-G, 3300-J, 3820-A, 6207-D, 7009 and 13870) separately require a licensed therapy professional to disclose the artificial intelligence tool and its purpose, and how session data collected by artificial intelligence will be stored, retained, used for training and deleted, before using artificial intelligence for supplementary support, and to obtain the client's consent.
- Kind
- None
- As of
What this law does
A person may not provide, advertise, or otherwise offer therapy or psychotherapy services to the public, including through Internet-based artificial intelligence, unless those services are provided by a professional licensed in Maine to practice psychotherapy or behavioral health therapy; a violation is a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.
The same act enacts parallel provisions across seven licensing-board chapters of Title 32 (including 32 M.R.S. §§ 2113, 2600-G, 3300-J, 3820-A, 6207-D, 7009, and 13870) that let a Maine-licensed therapy professional use AI for administrative support such as scheduling or billing and, with the client's written disclosure and consent, for supplementary support such as session notes, but forbid letting AI make an independent therapeutic decision, interact directly with a client in therapeutic communication, or generate a treatment recommendation without the licensee's review and approval; a violation of a board-chapter provision is enforced through board discipline under 10 M.R.S. § 8003(5) rather than through the Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Each provision excepts an AI-based intervention used solely within an institutional-review-board-approved research project. Enacted as LD 2082 (P.L. 2025, ch. 687) and signed by the Governor on . The Act took effect on , the date the Maine Legislature gives for non-emergency legislation enacted in the Second Regular Session of the 132nd Legislature.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app generates content with AI, makes health care decisions or deploys a mental-health chatbot.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .