Artificial intelligence is already being used to write emails, analyze investments and answer complex legal questions. So it is not a stretch to ask whether it can also draft something as consequential as a will, especially when hiring an estate planning attorney can cost thousands of dollars.
To test the idea, I asked ChatGPT to draft my will. The result looked polished and professional, raising an obvious and unsettling question: Would this document actually hold up in court, or invite a legal challenge after my death?
T
That question sits at the center of my conversation with Harry Margolis, an elder law attorney and the author of “Get Your Ducks in a Row.”
Below is an edited transcript of our discussion, revised for clarity and brevity, exploring whether a ChatGPT-written will is legal and what consumers should understand before relying on AI for estate planning.
Why AI and estate planning are colliding
Robert Powell: Many people are intrigued by artificial intelligence, and many are wondering whether a ChatGPT-written will is legal in their state. Joining us to discuss that question is Harry Margolis, author of “Get Your Ducks in a Row.” Harry, welcome.
Harry Margolis: Good to see you, Bob, on a snowy day.
Robert Powell: It’s great to see you. My driveway is shoveled, so all my chores are done and now I can work. This is a question that’s on a lot of people’s minds as they experiment with AI, whether it’s ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude or other platforms.
What makes a will legally valid?
Harry Margolis: The question is whether one of these AI systems can create a valid will. The answer is probably yes. For a will to be valid in, I think, all states, you have to sign it in the presence of two witnesses, and they have to sign it as well. That’s basically it.
Pretty much any document that purports to give away your assets at death and names someone as your executor or personal representative is going to be a valid will as long as it meets those requirements.
Related: Medicare mistakes seniors wish they’d known sooner
It does not have to be notarized, although it’s always better if it is. If it’s not notarized, the witnesses may later have to appear in court or file affidavits confirming they witnessed your signature and believed it was you.
If it is notarized, the witnesses generally do not have to do anything further. Notarization is not required, but it is a best practice.
Can better prompts reduce the risk of challenges?
Robert Powell: Are there things people should ask the AI, the large language model, to reduce the risk of a will being challenged in court?
Harry Margolis: I haven’t personally tried creating a will using these AI tools. My instinct is that you should specify the state you’re in, because the rules can differ from state to state.
It does make me a little nervous. The forms lawyers and reputable online programs use are known to be valid. AI-generated documents are probably valid, too, because they are based on existing materials. But you do not have the same guarantee you would have with an online service or a law firm.
Using an attorney as a backstop
Robert Powell: If someone is focused on saving money, could they generate a will using AI and then take it to an estate planning attorney for review?
Harry Margolis: You could, but that can create problems. When attorneys use their own forms, they know them intimately. If you bring them a document created by AI, they have to read every word carefully to make sure nothing is problematic. That is tedious and time-consuming, and it could end up costing more than using an online service or hiring the attorney from the start.
What about other estate planning documents?
Robert Powell: What about documents like health care proxies, advance directives or living wills? Is AI more appropriate there?
Harry Margolis: They are probably fine, but again, you don’t have the same certainty you get from a lawyer or a reputable service. One approach could be to have AI generate a document and then compare it to what an attorney or online service provides. That way you may get the benefit of clearer language or alternative phrasing without relying on AI alone.
DIY tools and completion risk
Robert Powell: For do-it-yourselfers who are reluctant to hire an estate planning attorney, are there software programs you tend to favor?
Harry Margolis: I don’t know them well because we use our own forms. My guess is they’re all pretty good. These companies can afford to hire good attorneys and they refine their forms over time. You’re likely to get solid documents from reputable online services.
Robert Powell: We would probably hear the horror stories if that weren’t true.
Harry Margolis: Exactly.
The biggest risk: never finishing
Robert Powell: Anything else that bears emphasizing?
Harry Margolis: My biggest concern with any do-it-yourself approach is whether people actually finish. Many start online late one night, hit a hard decision or a logistical issue, and plan to come back later. Sometimes they never do. Or they finish the document but never get witnesses or a notary.
Also worth reading
- Retirees may want to rebalance as markets broaden, volatility rises
- Why “breaking even” on Social Security is the wrong goal
- The $83,250 secret every solo entrepreneur needs to know for 2026
My guess is many more people start these processes than actually complete them. One advantage of using a lawyer is that they help you get to the finish line. They answer questions, help with decisions, and keep the process moving.
Robert Powell: I also think people may worry that something was missed in a prompt or an AI response, creating ambiguity that could undermine their intentions.
Harry Margolis: Yes, ambiguity can create real trouble down the road.
Related: Does a prenuptial agreement override a will?
