Artificial intelligence has quickly become part of everyday life. People use ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and other AI platforms to answer questions, organize information, draft documents, and make sense of complicated situations. Many individuals involved in divorce, child custody, child support, and other family law disputes are turning to these tools for guidance.
Although these tools may seem like a convenient and private way to explore legal questions, there is an important issue that many people do not consider: Your conversations with artificial intelligence may become relevant to discovery in your family law case.
In Maryland, what you enter into an AI platform, what documents you upload, and what responses you receive may raise questions about discoverability, confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, and the preservation of electronic evidence.
Your AI Prompts May Reveal More Than You Realize
One of the most significant discovery concerns is not necessarily the AI-generated response. It is the question the user asked in the first place.
AI prompts can reveal a person's thoughts, concerns, motivations, intentions, and perceptions about a particular situation. In a contentious family law case, that information can be particularly sensitive, and in certain circumstances, it may be relevant to issues being litigated.
For instance, a parent who claims that a custody modification is necessary because of "newly discovered" concerns about the other parent's parenting may have difficulty explaining AI conversations showing that the parent was researching the same concerns months earlier.
This type of situation does not automatically establish dishonesty or undermine a person's case. However, it illustrates why AI conversations should not be treated as harmless or inconsequential.
AI Conversations May Be Discoverable in a Maryland Family Law Case
Discovery is the process through which parties obtain information and evidence from one another before trial. Maryland's discovery rules generally permit parties to obtain relevant, nonprivileged information, including electronically stored information. Parties may also request documents and electronic information within another party's possession, custody, or control.
AI conversations are generally electronic records. Depending on the platform, those records may include:
- Questions and prompts entered into the AI platform.
- Responses generated by the AI platform.
- Documents, photographs, screenshots, and financial records uploaded into the AI platform.
- Draft pleadings, affidavits, parenting plans, and other legal documents.
- AI conversations analyzing text messages, emails, or communications with the other parent.
- AI-generated summaries, timelines, and assessments of disputed events.
This does not mean that every AI conversation automatically becomes discoverable simply because someone is involved in litigation. The information must still fall within the applicable discovery rules, and valid claims of privilege or work-product protection must be considered.
However, if a party has used AI to analyze events directly related to a custody dispute, evaluate the other parent's conduct, prepare for litigation, or assess financial issues, those conversations may become the subject of discovery requests.
The Other Party May Request Your AI Platform History During Discovery
A party may serve discovery requests seeking documents and electronically stored information relevant to the claims and defenses in the case. Depending on the circumstances, requests could seek information concerning AI use, including conversations about custody, parenting decisions, financial disclosures, or disputed events.
For example, opposing counsel might request:
- All AI conversations concerning the custody dispute.
- All AI prompts and responses concerning the other parent.
- Documents uploaded to AI platforms relating to the litigation.
- AI-generated parenting schedules or custody recommendations.
- Communications in which a party discussed or analyzed allegations raised in the litigation.
Whether such requests are proper is a separate question. A request for every AI conversation a person has ever had may raise relevance, privacy, and scope concerns.
Discovery is not an unlimited opportunity to investigate someone's private life. The fact that an opposing party asks for AI conversations does not mean that they are automatically entitled to receive them. The responding party may have legitimate grounds to object or seek a protective order.
However, an AI conversation concerning a disputed issue may be treated differently from an unrelated conversation about everyday life.
Attorney-Client Privilege and Attorney Work Product Issues
Attorney-client privilege protects certain confidential communications between an attorney and a client. The work-product doctrine separately protects qualifying materials prepared in anticipation of litigation, particularly an attorney's mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, and legal theories.
Generally, communications with a publicly available AI platform are not automatically protected by attorney-client privilege. An AI platform is not the client's attorney, and entering information into a third-party platform may raise questions about whether the information remained confidential.
Do not assume that labeling an AI conversation "confidential," "attorney-client privileged," or "prepared in anticipation of litigation" protects the AI conversation. Whether privilege or work-product protection applies depends on the circumstances.
Another increasingly common practice is uploading documents prepared by an attorney into an AI platform for explanation or review. The client may simply want a second explanation of what the document means. However, sharing attorney communications or litigation materials with a third-party AI platform may create confidentiality and privilege concerns.
It may also expose attorney work product, including legal theories, litigation strategy, and counsel's assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the case.
Clients should not independently upload their attorney's communications or work product into public AI platforms without first discussing the issue with counsel.
What Should You Do If You Have Already Used AI to Discuss Your Case?
If you have already entered information about your family law case into an AI platform, there is no reason to assume that you have automatically compromised your case or waived a legal privilege.
However, you should take the following precautions:
- Tell your attorney. Be transparent about whether you have used ChatGPT or another AI platform to discuss your case.
- Do not upload additional legal documents without consulting your attorney. Before sharing attorney communications, pleadings, financial records, or other confidential information with an AI platform, seek legal guidance.
- Preserve relevant conversations and other electronic evidence. Do not delete potentially relevant AI conversations or uploaded materials once litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated. Deleting AI conversations because they contain embarrassing information, unfavorable statements, or questions about the case can create additional legal problems.
- Do not rely on AI for legal advice. AI may provide inaccurate information, misinterpret Maryland law, or overlook facts that are critical to your particular case.
- Avoid discussing litigation strategy with public AI platforms. Questions about how to approach a custody hearing, respond to opposing counsel, or address specific allegations should be directed to your attorney.
- Be mindful of privacy. Even when an AI platform appears to offer a private conversation, its data retention, privacy, and training policies may affect how your information is handled.
The Bottom Line: Think Before You Type
Artificial intelligence can be a useful resource, but it is no substitute for sound legal advice. Before using AI to explore questions about your divorce, custody dispute, or other family law matter, consider what information you are sharing, how it may be stored, and whether you would be comfortable having that conversation reviewed during litigation.
Being informed about the potential risks does not mean you need to avoid technology altogether. It means being thoughtful about how you use it, particularly when your family's future and your legal interests are at stake.
Have Questions About How Technology or Electronic Evidence Could Affect Your Family Law Case?
At the Law Office of Shelly M. Ingram, LLC, we help clients navigate the legal and practical challenges of divorce, custody, and other family law matters. Whether you are preparing for litigation or already involved in a dispute, our attorneys can help you understand your rights, evaluate potential concerns, and make informed decisions about your next steps.
Contact our office to schedule a consultation with a Maryland family law attorney.
