Artificial intelligence is becoming a common tool in Australian general practice, with more than half of GP clinics now using AI-powered "medical scribes" to listen to consultations and automatically generate clinical notes. Doctors say the technology reduces paperwork, allowing them to spend more time focusing on patients rather than typing notes during appointments. However, privacy advocates and healthcare experts are warning that the rapid rollout of these systems is happening faster than the development of appropriate regulations and patient protections.

A report by Digital Rights Watch found that many patients are not fully informed when AI systems are recording or transcribing their consultations. The report also raised concerns that some clinics may not always obtain clear patient consent before using AI tools. In one reported case, a patient was allegedly refused an appointment after declining permission for AI-assisted transcription, prompting criticism from privacy advocates who argue that access to healthcare should not depend on accepting AI technology.

Australian Medical Association (AMA) Public Health Committee Chair Dr Michael Bonning said AI scribes are designed to support doctors rather than replace them. He explained that clinicians remain responsible for reviewing, correcting and approving every medical record before it becomes part of a patient's file. According to the AMA, the doctor—not the AI—is always accountable for the accuracy of clinical documentation.

Privacy experts have warned that sensitive health information collected during consultations requires stronger safeguards. They say patients should always be clearly informed when AI is being used, how their information will be stored, whether recordings are retained, and if data is processed by third-party providers or overseas cloud services. They are calling for consistent national standards governing consent, security and transparency.

The report also highlights concerns about the reliability of AI-generated notes. Some healthcare professionals interviewed said the technology occasionally produced inaccurate or incomplete summaries, particularly in complex consultations or when audio quality was poor. Medical experts stress that AI should remain a support tool rather than a substitute for professional clinical judgement.

Australia's Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is currently reviewing AI medical scribes to determine whether some systems should be regulated as medical devices. At the same time, the federal government's AI Safety Institute and privacy advocates are calling for stronger oversight as AI becomes more deeply integrated into healthcare.

While many doctors believe AI can improve efficiency and reduce administrative workloads, patient advocates say trust, informed consent and strong privacy protections must remain at the centre of any healthcare technology. Both medical organisations and digital rights groups agree that clearer regulations will be essential to ensure AI enhances patient care without compromising confidentiality or public confidence.