Ready to Register?

MyLawCLE All-Access Pass

Best choice

Add the All-Access Pass and get this program —
plus 1,000+ live CLE programs every year.


All specialty & ethics credits included
38 practice areas
New sections: AI & the Law, Practice Management
100s of current and trending legal topics
Nationally recognized and highly experienced presenters

$395 / year — this program included
Register with the All-Access Pass

This program + 1,000+ CLE programs, all year

Or register for just this program

Live Video Broadcast

Live webinar of this one program.
$195 Register

On-Demand Video

Recorded access + self-study credit.
$195 Register

Ambient AI Scribes: Building the Patient Consent and Post-Visit Review File

Hospitals and practices are racing to adopt ambient AI scribes without a defensible paper trail. Build patient-facing consent documentation, address HIPAA and all-party consent requirements, negotiate AI-specific vendor terms, and structure post-visit accuracy review before liability catches up.

2026-10-30 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-10-30 12:00:00

Program Details

2026-10-30 12:00:00

Over 1,000+ webinars

2026-10-30 12:00:00

Course Overview

Your AI Scribe Is Already a Witness in the Exam Room

2026-10-30 12:00:00

Ambient AI scribes now sit inside the exam room, continuously listening, transcribing and structuring what a patient says — work that used to stop at a human note-taker’s discretion. Hospitals, health systems and medical practices are deploying these tools faster than their consent forms, retention schedules and vendor contracts can keep pace.

Skip a required all-party consent disclosure, and a recorded encounter becomes an unauthorized recording. Leave HIPAA and state medical privacy authorizations unaddressed, and an AI transcript becomes an unauthorized disclosure. Sign a vendor’s standard business associate agreement without AI-specific data-use terms, and the practice inherits the vendor’s data-handling risk. Skip post-visit accuracy review, and an AI-generated error becomes part of the legal medical record.

Attendees walk out with a defensible documentation framework: patient-facing consent language, a pre-implementation compliance checklist, contract language for AI-specific vendor terms beyond the standard BAA, and a post-visit review and retention protocol counsel can hand a client the same day.

Format

CLE Credit

2h CLE Credits

Level

Intermediate

Length

2

Key topics that will be covered

01
HIPAA & Privacy Compliance
How to apply HIPAA, state medical privacy law, and emerging litigation and regulatory developments to what you capture, transcribe, and store from an ambient AI-recorded encounter.
02
Consent & Disclosure Design
How to draft patient-facing disclosures and all-party consent documentation that create a defensible compliance record before an ambient AI scribe goes live.
03
Recordings & Data Handling
How to handle recordings, transcripts, and other patient information an AI-enabled tool creates during the encounter.
04
Risk & Documentation Review
How to structure post-visit accuracy review and evaluate the privacy, regulatory, and clinical-record risk an AI-generated note creates once it becomes part of the chart.
05
Retention & Governance
How to set retention and governance rules for AI-generated notes, audio recordings, transcripts, and the underlying data behind them.
06
Vendor Contracts & Audits
How to negotiate AI-specific vendor terms beyond the standard BAA, assess a vendor’s data practices, and audit existing AI vendor arrangements for compliance gaps.

Program schedule

clock 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm EST

Building the Patient Consent and Privacy Framework for Ambient AI Scribes

This session examines the privacy, consent, and regulatory considerations healthcare providers should address before deploying ambient AI scribing technology. It will cover HIPAA, state medical privacy laws, all-party consent requirements, and emerging legal developments affecting the recording, transcription, storage, and use of patient encounters. The session will also address how providers can develop patient-facing disclosures and consent documentation that create a defensible compliance record.

Dianne BourqueDianne Bourque
William F. FarleyWilliam F. Farley
clock 1:10 pm - 2:10 pm EST

Building the Post-Visit Review, Record Retention and Vendor Risk File

This session focuses on the documentation and risk-management framework that should remain in place after an ambient AI scribe is activated. It will examine post-visit accuracy review, the treatment and retention of AI-generated notes and underlying data, and the contractual protections healthcare providers should seek from technology vendors. The discussion will also address how counsel can identify and mitigate privacy, clinical documentation, and regulatory risks associated with AI-generated patient records.

Dianne BourqueDianne Bourque
William F. FarleyWilliam F. Farley
Dianne Bourque

Dianne Bourque

Holland & Knight (Boston

William F. Farley

William F. Farley

Holland & Knight (Chicago)

Dianne Bourque

Dianne Bourque

Holland & Knight (Boston

Ms. Bourque advises healthcare clients on data acquisition and use in artificial intelligence algorithm training, research, product development, and digital health applications, and counsels providers on HIPAA, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and state medical privacy law compliance, including review of HIPAA-related contracts and forms and privacy-related due diligence. A substantial part of her practice involves counseling researchers and research sponsors on FDA- and OHRP-regulated clinical research, including patient consent, and she has served as counsel to a hospital’s Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee overseeing those consent processes. She was formerly in-house counsel to an academic medical center and is the first Suffolk University Law School graduate to hold a concentration in Health and Biomedical Law.

Education & Credentials

Suffolk University, MPA; Suffolk University Law School, J.D. (first Suffolk Law graduate with a concentration in Health and Biomedical Law); Boston College, B.A. Admitted to practice in Massachusetts.

Recognition & Leadership

Named in The Best Lawyers in America guide for Health Care Law, 2020–2027, and in the Chambers USA – America's Leading Business Lawyers guide for Massachusetts Healthcare, 2015–2017 and 2021–2026. Recognized as a Client Service All-Star by the BTI Consulting Group in 2022.

Professional Involvement

Member, American Healthcare Lawyers Association, 2005–2025. Former adjunct professor at Stonehill College, teaching an undergraduate course on healthcare law, and a guest lecturer in the Boston College MS in Cybersecurity, Policy and Governance program and at Boston University Law School.

Experience

Advised a national clinical lab on incident response and mitigation following a data breach affecting 12 million individuals, avoiding OCR enforcement, and represented a publicly traded precision medicine company in parallel OCR investigations opened by two regional OCR offices after back-to-back large-scale breaches, avoiding enforcement in both. Advised a national telehealth provider on the structure and implementation of its HIPAA compliance program and counseled a national provider of digital health products for oral care in a dispute with an overseas business associate vendor over the return of HIPAA-protected patient records. Provided regulatory and strategic advice, including data acquisition for algorithm training, to the developer of an AI-supported, hand-held medical imaging device and software platform. Served as counsel to the Institutional Review Board of a Massachusetts academic medical center and community hospital system, represented a national high-complexity genetic testing laboratory in structuring a collaborative data repository for testing and clinical outcomes data, and assisted a manufacturer of smart, wireless prescription bottles with structuring its patient interface consistent with privacy and data security law.
William F. Farley

William F. Farley

Holland & Knight (Chicago)

Mr. Farley’s data privacy practice includes defending consumer-facing clients in class actions involving website wiretap litigation under federal and state law, including claims under the Video Privacy Protection Act and the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), and he advises clients nationwide on data privacy compliance and on responding to data breaches and other security incidents. He is an International Association of Privacy Professionals Certified Information Privacy Professional for the U.S. private sector (CIPP/US) and has used artificial intelligence and automation technology to organize, evaluate, and defend large volumes of claims, and advises clients on legal issues involving the metaverse. His client industries include healthcare and life sciences, banking and financial services, insurance, and technology.

Education & Credentials

Loyola University Chicago School of Law, J.D.; University of Michigan, B.A., Political Science. Admitted to practice in Illinois, and before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of Indiana, the Southern District of Illinois, and the Northern District of Illinois, and the U.S. Tax Court.

Recognition & Leadership

Named a Holland & Knight Emerging Leader, Class of 2020, and selected for the Chicago Bar Association Leadership Institute's Inaugural Class, 2016.

Professional Involvement

International Association of Privacy Professionals, CIPP/US, since 2020; member, Chicago Bar Association. Contributing author, Annals of Health Law, The Health Policy and Law Review of Loyola University Chicago. Maintains an active pro bono practice.

Experience

Represented numerous consumer-facing clients defending class actions alleging invasion of privacy and violation of federal and state wiretap law arising from website recording, analytics tools, cookies, and pixels, and represented multiple Illinois employers defending BIPA class actions. Defended clients against claims that consumer website activity was recorded through session-replay software in violation of a state wiretap act, and advises clients on privacy policy and website functionality for compliance with state wiretap laws nationwide. Advises clients in the aftermath of data breaches and other security incidents, including remediation, investigation, and required notifications. Also represents clients in general commercial disputes, including supply chain, trade secret, and breach-of-contract matters, and is an experienced appellate lawyer before state and federal courts.
Dianne Bourque

Dianne Bourque

Holland & Knight (Boston

Ms. Bourque advises healthcare clients on data acquisition and use in artificial intelligence algorithm training, research, product development, and digital health applications, and counsels providers on HIPAA, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and state medical privacy law compliance, including review of HIPAA-related contracts and forms and privacy-related due diligence. A substantial part of her practice involves counseling researchers and research sponsors on FDA- and OHRP-regulated clinical research, including patient consent, and she has served as counsel to a hospital’s Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee overseeing those consent processes. She was formerly in-house counsel to an academic medical center and is the first Suffolk University Law School graduate to hold a concentration in Health and Biomedical Law.

Education & Credentials

Suffolk University, MPA; Suffolk University Law School, J.D. (first Suffolk Law graduate with a concentration in Health and Biomedical Law); Boston College, B.A. Admitted to practice in Massachusetts.

Recognition & Leadership

Named in The Best Lawyers in America guide for Health Care Law, 2020–2027, and in the Chambers USA – America's Leading Business Lawyers guide for Massachusetts Healthcare, 2015–2017 and 2021–2026. Recognized as a Client Service All-Star by the BTI Consulting Group in 2022.

Professional Involvement

Member, American Healthcare Lawyers Association, 2005–2025. Former adjunct professor at Stonehill College, teaching an undergraduate course on healthcare law, and a guest lecturer in the Boston College MS in Cybersecurity, Policy and Governance program and at Boston University Law School.

Experience

Advised a national clinical lab on incident response and mitigation following a data breach affecting 12 million individuals, avoiding OCR enforcement, and represented a publicly traded precision medicine company in parallel OCR investigations opened by two regional OCR offices after back-to-back large-scale breaches, avoiding enforcement in both. Advised a national telehealth provider on the structure and implementation of its HIPAA compliance program and counseled a national provider of digital health products for oral care in a dispute with an overseas business associate vendor over the return of HIPAA-protected patient records. Provided regulatory and strategic advice, including data acquisition for algorithm training, to the developer of an AI-supported, hand-held medical imaging device and software platform. Served as counsel to the Institutional Review Board of a Massachusetts academic medical center and community hospital system, represented a national high-complexity genetic testing laboratory in structuring a collaborative data repository for testing and clinical outcomes data, and assisted a manufacturer of smart, wireless prescription bottles with structuring its patient interface consistent with privacy and data security law.
William F. Farley

William F. Farley

Holland & Knight (Chicago)

Mr. Farley’s data privacy practice includes defending consumer-facing clients in class actions involving website wiretap litigation under federal and state law, including claims under the Video Privacy Protection Act and the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), and he advises clients nationwide on data privacy compliance and on responding to data breaches and other security incidents. He is an International Association of Privacy Professionals Certified Information Privacy Professional for the U.S. private sector (CIPP/US) and has used artificial intelligence and automation technology to organize, evaluate, and defend large volumes of claims, and advises clients on legal issues involving the metaverse. His client industries include healthcare and life sciences, banking and financial services, insurance, and technology.

Education & Credentials

Loyola University Chicago School of Law, J.D.; University of Michigan, B.A., Political Science. Admitted to practice in Illinois, and before the U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of Indiana, the Southern District of Illinois, and the Northern District of Illinois, and the U.S. Tax Court.

Recognition & Leadership

Named a Holland & Knight Emerging Leader, Class of 2020, and selected for the Chicago Bar Association Leadership Institute's Inaugural Class, 2016.

Professional Involvement

International Association of Privacy Professionals, CIPP/US, since 2020; member, Chicago Bar Association. Contributing author, Annals of Health Law, The Health Policy and Law Review of Loyola University Chicago. Maintains an active pro bono practice.

Experience

Represented numerous consumer-facing clients defending class actions alleging invasion of privacy and violation of federal and state wiretap law arising from website recording, analytics tools, cookies, and pixels, and represented multiple Illinois employers defending BIPA class actions. Defended clients against claims that consumer website activity was recorded through session-replay software in violation of a state wiretap act, and advises clients on privacy policy and website functionality for compliance with state wiretap laws nationwide. Advises clients in the aftermath of data breaches and other security incidents, including remediation, investigation, and required notifications. Also represents clients in general commercial disputes, including supply chain, trade secret, and breach-of-contract matters, and is an experienced appellate lawyer before state and federal courts.

Credits by state

AK2.0
AL2.0
AR2.0
AZ2.0
CA2.0
CO2.0
CT2.0
DC2.0
DE2.0
FL2.0
GA2.0
HI2.0
IA2.0
ID2.0
IL2.0
IN2.0
KS2.0
KY2.0
LA2.0
MA2.0
MD2.0
ME2.0
MI2.0
MN2.0
MO2.4
MS2.0
MT2.0
NC2.0
ND2.0
NE2.0
NH120.0
NJ2.0
NM2.0
NV2.0
NY2.0
OH2.0
OK2.5
OR2.0
PA2.0
RI2.5
SC2.0
SD2.0
TN2.0
TX2.0
UT2.0
VA2.0
VT2.0
WA2.0
WI2.0
WV2.4
WY2.0

Upcoming Live Online CLE Broadcasts

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

10,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

1000+

Live stream programs

24/7

Access to live webinars & recordings

70,000+

Trusted by Legal Professionals

MCLE Credits

Alabama
Approved
Alaska
Approved
Arizona
Approved
Arkansas
Approved
California
Approved
Colorado
Pending
Connecticut
Approved
Delaware
Pending
District of Columbia
No Required
Florida
Pending
Georgia
Approved
Hawaii
Approved
Idaho
Pending
Illinois
Approved
Indiana
Approved
Iowa
Pending
Kansas
Pending
Kentucky
Pending
Louisiana
Pending
Maine
Pending
Maryland
No Required
Massachusetts
No Required
Michigan
No Required
Minnesota
Pending
Mississippi
Pending
Missouri
Approved
Montana
Pending
Nebraska
Pending
Nevada
Approved
New Hampshire
Approved
New Jersey
Approved
New Mexico
Approved
New York
Approved
North Carolina
Pending
North Dakota
Approved
Ohio
Approved
Oklahoma
Pending
Oregon
Pending
Pennsylvania
Approved
Rhode Island
Pending
South Carolina
Pending
South Dakota
No Required
Tennessee
Approved
Texas
Approved
Utah
Pending
Vermont
Approved
Virginia
Not Eligible
Washington
Approved
West Virginia
Pending
Wisconsin
Pending
Wyoming
Pending

Alabama

Requirements

The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.  

Formats

  • Attorneys can earn unlimited “live” credit through live seminars, live webcasts, and co-sponsored locations with MyLAWCLE-Alabama approved programs
  • Attorneys are limited to 6 credits per compliance period of “online” programs through MyLAwCLE On-Demand programs