AI Use & Human Oversight
AI Use & Human Oversight
ASPIRE Transparency & Governance Statement
Approved Version 1.0 — 20 September 2026
Purpose
ASPIRE uses artificial intelligence (AI) as a development, research-support and administrative tool. This statement describes the intended role of AI within ASPIRE, the responsibilities retained by the human developer, and the safeguards used to support accuracy, integrity and appropriate human oversight.
This statement was formally approved by ASPIRE on 20 September 2026. It will remain subject to periodic review as ASPIRE develops and as evidence, professional expectations, legal requirements and AI technologies evolve.
How AI is used
AI may be used to assist with research discovery and synthesis, drafting and restructuring written material, comparing or refining wording, organising information, developing educational resources, creating working documents, supporting website and digital-product development, and assisting with administrative or project-planning tasks.
AI may also be used as an iterative thinking and development tool. Its outputs are treated as material for consideration, checking, revision or rejection rather than as an independent authority.
Human authorship, judgment and responsibility
Responsibility for ASPIRE's concepts, decisions, interpretation, final wording and published material remains with ASPIRE's human developer. AI output is not automatically accepted or published.
Material is reviewed against relevant lived experience, existing knowledge, source material and research. Wording and concepts may be challenged, corrected, expanded, removed or rewritten where they do not accurately reflect the intended meaning, available evidence or diversity of adoptee experience.
The speed or volume with which AI can generate material does not determine whether that material is ready for use. Human review and judgment remain necessary before material progresses.
Lived experience and adoptee-informed development
AI is not treated as a substitute for adoptee lived experience. ASPIRE is adoptee-informed and seeks to bring lived experience into meaningful connection with psychological theory, research and evidence-seeking practice.
Where lived-experience consultation is used, its purpose is to help test language, assumptions, relevance and how particular ideas or questions land with adoptees. Consultation does not transfer responsibility for ASPIRE's business, publishing or development decisions to participants, nor does any individual consultation response represent all adoptees.
Evidence and research safeguards
AI-generated statements about psychology, trauma, adoption, separation, development or research are not treated as established facts solely because an AI system has produced them. Where a claim requires evidentiary support, the underlying evidence should be identified and assessed.
ASPIRE seeks to distinguish between established research, psychological theory, lived-experience observations, emerging evidence, hypotheses and areas where evidence remains limited. Language should reflect the strength and limitations of the available evidence and should avoid presenting a single experience as universal.
Known limitations and risks
ASPIRE recognises that AI systems can produce inaccurate information, unsupported claims, fabricated or incorrect references, biased framing, overconfident conclusions and language that may flatten complex human experience. AI-assisted material can also appear polished or authoritative before the underlying evidence or reasoning has been adequately tested.
These risks require active human oversight. Relevant safeguards include source checking, critical review, revision, transparent qualification of claims, lived-experience input where appropriate, and additional professional or research scrutiny where the nature of the work requires it.
Educational material and assessment development
ASPIRE educational frameworks, workshops, resources and reflective tools should not be represented as clinically validated instruments unless the required evidence supports that status.
Where ASPIRE develops work intended to become a formal assessment instrument, including the Preverbal Infant Separation Assessment (PISA), that work requires a separate and more rigorous development pathway. AI assistance does not replace appropriate research design, psychometric development, validation, professional input, ethical considerations or other standards required for an assessment instrument.
Transparency and continuing review
ASPIRE intends to be transparent about the meaningful use of AI in its development while avoiding descriptions that either overstate AI's role or obscure human responsibility.
The use of AI will be reviewed as ASPIRE develops. Practices may be changed where new evidence, professional standards, legal requirements, technological developments or experience indicate that stronger safeguards or different approaches are appropriate.
Approval status and continuing review
Status: APPROVED — ASPIRE AI Use and Human Oversight Statement v1.0, 20 September 2026.
This statement has been reviewed and approved for alignment with ASPIRE's Mission, Values and Principles and current AI governance approach. It should be reviewed again if ASPIRE's privacy/confidentiality practices, evidence standards, legal or professional requirements, or AI tools and workflows materially change.
Publication: approved for use as an ASPIRE governance and transparency statement.