Publish the self-harm protocol and the number of crisis referral notifications issued in the preceding calendar year
Download: JSON · MarkdownUnder Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), ESHB 2225 (Chapter 168, Laws of 2026), sec. 5(3)
What this label means
- Verified
- — a named reviewer opened the official source and confirmed the record; the date and the reviewer are shown.
- Pending review
- — linked to the official source and in the queue for a reviewer to confirm.
- Source-linked
- — linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer.
On this page 8 sections
In brief
Publish the self-harm protocol and the number of crisis referral notifications issued in the preceding calendar year is a legal requirement under the Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225) in Washington State (United States) (ESHB 2225 (Chapter 168, Laws of 2026), sec. 5(3)). It applies from 1 January 2027. The record carries 2 evidence examples.
- Jurisdiction
- Washington State (United States)
- Nature
- Legal requirement
- Source reference
- ESHB 2225 (Chapter 168, Laws of 2026), sec. 5(3)
- Applies from
- 1 January 2027
- Who it binds
- Provider / developer, Deployer / user organisation
- Evidence examples
- 2
- Controls that meet it
- 2
- Official source
- Open official text
- Verification
- Pending review · source-linked
What does it require?
The operator must publicly disclose the details of its section 5 protocols on its website or websites and within any mobile or web application through which the AI companion is offered. The disclosure covers the safeguards used to detect and respond to expressions of suicidal ideation or self-harm, and the number of crisis referral notifications issued to users in the preceding calendar year. The act does not set a date by which the disclosure must be updated.
Practical action
Publish a protocol page on the website and inside the app, count every crisis referral notification issued, and add the previous calendar year's total to the page.
Who does it apply to?
- Sectors
- Consumer products and retail
Applies from:
Which controls meet this duty?
Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.
-
supportsProcessProduct owner · at launch and on material changeAI interaction and use disclosure notices
Serves 23 recorded duties · evidence: AI interaction or use notice, Notice catalogue, Notice wording approval
Public notice about how the chatbot handles self-harm and suicide.
-
supportsTechnical measureEngineering lead · continuousAutomatic event logging and record retention
Serves 11 recorded duties · evidence: AI system event logs, Log schema and retention standard, Log integrity and retention check
Logging each crisis referral notification so the yearly number can be published.
Templates that cover this duty
Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.
- AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix
Register · XLSX and DOCX · v7
- EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v47
- AI Companion Chatbot Safety Kit
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v1
- AI Model Card
Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v5
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
| Evidence | Type | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| The published protocol page on the website and in the app, with the date it went live | document | |
| The log or report from which the yearly count of crisis referral notifications is taken | document |
Frequently asked questions
Is this a legal requirement?
Yes. It is a legal requirement under Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225) (ESHB 2225 (Chapter 168, Laws of 2026), sec. 5(3)).
When does this obligation apply?
It applies from 1 January 2027.
What evidence shows compliance?
A reviewer would expect: The published protocol page on the website and in the app, with the date it went live; The log or report from which the yearly count of crisis referral notifications is taken.
Which controls satisfy this obligation?
AI interaction and use disclosure notices; Automatic event logging and record retention.
What should an organisation do in practice?
Publish a protocol page on the website and inside the app, count every crisis referral notification issued, and add the previous calendar year's total to the page.
Cite this record
AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Publish the self-harm protocol and the number of crisis referral notifications issued in the preceding calendar year (Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225))” [AIPT-OBL-0127, not yet verified]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0127 (accessed 12 November 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.
Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0127: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.
Cite the official text alongside it: Washington State Legislature: HB 2225 (2025-26) bill summary, Washington State Legislature, https://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2025-26/Pdf/Bills/Session%20Laws/House/2225-S.SL.pdf.
BibTeX
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_publishtheselfharmprotoc,
author = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
title = {{Publish the self-harm protocol and the number of crisis referral notifications issued in the preceding calendar year (Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225))}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-washington-eshb-2225-protocol-publication}},
url = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-washington-eshb-2225-protocol-publication},
urldate = {2026-11-12},
note = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 12 November 2026}
}
Change history
No change to this record's tracked fields has been recorded since 15 October 2026, when field-level history began.
Similar obligations in other instruments
- Give consumers a Pre-use Notice before using automated decision-making technology for a significant decision — California CPPA automated decision-making rules, California (United States)
- Answer consumers' requests to access information about how automated decision-making technology was used about them — California CPPA automated decision-making rules, California (United States)
- Tell users at the start of an AI companion interaction, and at least every three hours, that they are not communicating with a human — New York AI companion safeguards, New York (United States)
- Tell users that an AI companion chatbot is artificially generated and not human, at the start and at least every three hours — Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), Washington State (United States)
- Where the user is known to be a minor or the chatbot is directed to minors, repeat the not-human notice at least every hour — Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225), Washington State (United States)
- Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union
- Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
- Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.