An AI scribe for therapists transcribes your session so it can help draft your clinical notes — in your own voice, not a generic template. It doesn't replace your clinical judgment, and nothing from your session is retained that you haven't approved. You review every word. You sign off. Privacy is where the whole thing starts, not an afterthought.
I'm Ian — I founded Soma, and I want to be plain about what an AI scribe is and isn't. There's a lot of noise in this space, and clinicians have every right to be skeptical. So let me walk through it the way I'd want it explained to me.
What is an AI scribe for therapists?
An AI scribe is software that listens during your session, transcribes what's said, and uses that transcription to help you draft a note afterward. That's the whole job.
Think of it like having a careful typist who hands you a first draft — one you then shape into the note you'd have written anyway. The clinician stays in charge of every clinical decision. The software just clears the blank page.
The reason this matters is simple: documentation is the near-universal #1 complaint we hear from the clinicians we work with. Notes pile up and follow people into their evenings. One survey of health-service psychologists found a median of around five hours a week spent on non-billable clinical work — and more than half of them, 51.6%, called that administrative load a significant source of work-related stress.
A good AI scribe gives some of that time back. That's the outcome we're after — not a flashy demo, just fewer late nights finishing notes. I've written about how therapists actually cut documentation time, and about why purpose-built tools beat pasting into ChatGPT.
A scribe hands you a first draft to shape — it never makes the clinical call.
Does an AI scribe write my notes for me?
No — it drafts, you decide. This is the distinction I care most about, so I'll be blunt about it.
The software produces a starting draft from the transcription. You read it, correct it, add the clinical reasoning only you can add, and you sign off. Nothing leaves your hands without your review. The note is yours, and the responsibility for it stays yours.
I think the word "scribe" actually helps here. A scribe writes down what's happening so the expert in the room can think. A scribe doesn't make the call. The judgment — what's clinically significant, what to flag, what the plan is — that's you, and it should always be you.
We built Soma's notes side and reports side around that idea. The draft is a convenience, never an authority. If a tool ever asks you to trust its clinical conclusions, that's the moment to walk away.
Privacy as the starting posture, not a feature bolted on later.
Is it safe for client privacy?
Privacy has to be the starting posture, not a feature you bolt on later. For us that means a few concrete things, and I'd hold any tool you evaluate to the same bar.
First — and this is critical — a responsible scribe transcribes in the moment. The valuable thing is the transcription that helps you draft, and nothing from the session is retained beyond what you approve.
Second, de-identified data matters. When clinicians set Soma up, what they share with us is de-identified — no client's name or identifying details. Stripping identifiers out of clinical text reliably is genuinely hard; research on automated de-identification of clinical notes shows it's a real technical problem, not something to wave away. Treating it seriously is the whole point.
Third, consent is non-negotiable. Your client should know a scribe is being used and agree to it. More on how I'd introduce that below.
And one honest note: some employers and clinics restrict AI tools, sometimes for good reasons. If you're not solo, check your organization's policy before you bring any scribe into a session. I'd rather you ask first than assume.
A draft should follow your structure and phrasing — the way you'd write it yourself.
Will the notes sound like me?
They should — that's the entire point, and it's the thing clinicians ask us about most. Nobody wants their charts to read like they came off an assembly line.
The therapists, counsellors, and psychologists we work with don't want a generic template. They want notes that sound like them — their structure, their phrasing, the way they'd actually describe a session. A note that reads like someone else's is almost worse than a blank page, because now you have to unpick it.
So the goal we hold ourselves to is a draft that reads like yours. The draft follows your shape, not ours — so it reads the way you actually write, not some anonymous house style. I won't get into the mechanics here; what matters is the outcome. If the draft doesn't sound like you, the tool hasn't done its job, and you should expect better.
Your voice is part of your clinical work. It carries your reasoning and your relationship with the client. An AI scribe that flattens that into boilerplate isn't saving you time — it's just handing you editing work in a stranger's words.
How do I introduce it responsibly?
Start with consent, keep your judgment, and review everything before it's final. Here's the simple way I'd approach it.
Tell your client plainly. Something like: "I use a software tool that helps me transcribe our session so I can write my notes faster and stay more present with you. Nothing is stored that I haven't reviewed myself. Is that alright with you?" Plain language, honest framing, their choice.
Then give it a small run before you lean on it. Try it on a few sessions, see whether the drafts actually read like yours, and check that the time saved is real for your workflow. No rush — you've got plenty of runway to decide if it fits.
Keep your review step sacred. The draft is a first pass. You read it, you correct it, you add what only you can add, and you sign off. If a note doesn't reflect your clinical thinking, it's not done — and the software should make that easy to fix, not hard.
Finally, mind your setting. Solo practice gives you more latitude; a clinic may have policies. Check first, and pick a tool that's transparent about how it handles data so you can answer questions if they come up.
The short version
An AI scribe for therapists transcribes your session to help you draft notes in your own voice. It doesn't write your notes for you, it doesn't hold on to your session data, and it doesn't replace your judgment. Consent first, de-identified data, your review, your sign-off — that's the responsible shape of it.
We built Soma for the clinicians drowning in documentation, and I never forget that you're trusting us with the most careful work there is. Thank you for taking the time to think it through carefully — it means a great deal to us, and it's exactly the kind of skepticism this work deserves.
If you want to see how the notes side and the reports side actually feel in practice, give it a run and see if it sounds like you. Here's a clinician-first alternative to ChatGPT for your notes. I'd love to hear how it goes.
With gratitude,
— Ian
