Patient reports a nurse was already recording with ChatGPT when they declined AI notes
In a public Reddit account, a patient says a nurse asked whether AI could take notes at a medical appointment. After the patient objected, the nurse picked up a phone that the patient described as showing ChatGPT already recording. The patient describes the recording as occurring without prior notice and says their objection was dismissed. In replies, the author says the phone had Chrome open to ChatGPT and recording had started when the nurse entered the room, before asking consent. This is an uncorroborated first-person account. It does not establish what was captured, whether anything was sent to a server, retained or used for training, or whether a law was broken. The clinic’s location, account type and response are unknown.
- AI system
- ChatGPT (reported)
- Occurred
- Oct 2026
- Reported
- 2 October 2026
- Event location
- Unknown
- What the AI did
- Received personal information about the person
- Reported harm
- Loss of Autonomy
- Whose AI use
- An institution’s AI use
- Setting
- Health · Privacy
- Evidence
- AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account
- 3 claims: 3 reported. 5 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 1 person
AI system as recorded: ChatGPT on a nurse’s phone, identified by the patient in a public first-person account as already recording at a medical appointment.
Reported harm
The patient reports loss of control over recording of their medical appointment: the phone was allegedly already recording before consent, and their objection was dismissed. No server disclosure or clinical harm is established.
What remains unknown
- Exact local event day and clinic location; the archived post timestamp is 2 October 2026 UTC.
- Independent confirmation of the account and the clinic’s response.
- What information was captured, the recording duration and whether it was deleted.
- Whether information was transmitted, retained or used for training.
- The software configuration, account type and any legal finding.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: reported. The patient identifies ChatGPT as already recording at the appointment when they objected to AI note-taking. Under the approved input-privacy boundary, the reported capture itself supplies the relation and consent harm. This does not establish transmission to a server, retention, training, specific captured content, the account type or illegality. The author’s own replies specify that the phone displayed ChatGPT in Chrome and recording had already begun when the nurse entered, before consent was requested.
3 claims: 3 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported The patient reports that the nurse’s phone showed ChatGPT already recording when the patient declined AI note-taking.
Causal attribution. The recording and product identification are the patient’s account. No device evidence or independent confirmation was inspected.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Original post’s first paragraph: the question about AI notes, the objection and the description of ChatGPT already recording.
Reported The patient says there had been no notice of the recording and the nurse dismissed their objection.
Causal attribution. The described adverse experience is loss of control over recording and consent; no legal finding or onward data transfer is inferred.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Original post’s final sentence describing lack of notice and the nurse’s response.
Reported In replies to the same thread, the patient says the phone displayed ChatGPT in Chrome and that recording had already begun when the nurse entered, before asking consent.
Causal attribution. The same author adds these observations. Their illustrative introduction with name/reason placeholders is not treated as an actual consultation transcript. Server transmission and later handling remain unknown.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Author reply pdhsn3l describing the phone on the counter with Chrome open to ChatGPT.
- reddit.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
Author reply pdhtd2k, opening and final sentences about already recording and insisting it be disabled.
Sources
3 sources inspected, from 1 underlying account. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- Reddit, 2 October 2026: patient’s account of recording at a medical appointment(opens in new tab)
s1 · reddit.com · Forum post · English · Inspected · 2 October 2026 · Shares an underlying account with another listed source · Primary
- Reddit: author’s clarification of the ChatGPT screen(opens in new tab)
s2 · reddit.com · Forum comment · English · Inspected · Shares an underlying account with another listed source
- Reddit: author’s clarification of recording before consent(opens in new tab)
s3 · reddit.com · Forum comment · English · Inspected · Shares an underlying account with another listed source
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
Original English post body read directly and through its Arctic Shift capture. The archive gives created_utc 1790974521 (2 October 2026, 20:55 UTC). The author says the appointment was today; timezone is unknown, so only October is recorded for the event. Replies by the same author remain one reporting chain. Applies to s1.
Original English author reply inspected in the Arctic Shift thread capture. The reply author matches the original poster. It adds detail, not independent corroboration. Applies to s2, s3.
Event countries: Unknown. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: Unknown.
The original account gives no event location. References to a privacy law and the language do not establish a country.
Reviewed for publication 2026-10-06: Reviewed first-person account of an actual recording reportedly occurring in an identified AI service before consent. Published with attribution and explicit limits under the approved input-privacy boundary; no independent corroboration or finding of illegality is claimed.
People described
A patient describing their own experience at an unidentified medical appointment.
People reported harmed in this case
1 person
0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed
One patient reports their own consent and privacy experience. No other patients, staff or commenters are counted.
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Patient reports a nurse was already recording with ChatGPT when they declined AI notes. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-patient-reports-chatgpt-recording-at-clinic-without-consent
BibTeX
@misc{2026_patient_reports_chatgpt_recording_at_clinic_without_consent,
title = {Patient reports a nurse was already recording with ChatGPT when they declined AI notes},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-patient-reports-chatgpt-recording-at-clinic-without-consent}
} Related cases
Wife reports husband with no prior psychosis history developed messianic delusions after using ChatGPT for a project, lost his job and was involuntarily committed
Futurism reported in June 2025, from an interview with his wife, that a man with no prior history of mania, delusion or psychosis began using ChatGPT for a permaculture and construction project about 12 weeks before his wife was interviewed. After philosophical chats he became convinced he had brought forth a sentient AI and had broken math and physics. His behavior became erratic enough that he lost his job, he stopped sleeping and lost weight, and emergency services took him to an emergency room from where he was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric facility.
Family reports a South Korean woman’s isolation during intensive ChatGPT use
South Korean reporting describes a family’s account that a woman withdrew from relatives and everyday activity during intensive ChatGPT conversations. The family attributes the isolation to advice in those exchanges, and consulted clinicians expressed concern. The causal role remains an attributed account.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.