The two-name line: what a coach says out loud before a first recorded session

Two things sit in front of your first recorded session in Ember Console, the session-report builder for coaches, now in closed beta: your client’s agreement, and whatever your jurisdiction asks. One sentence said out loud handles the first. The second is a check only you can make.

Name the recorder and name the AI, before you press anything. I call that the two-name line.

What do the coaching bodies ask before you record?

The 2025 ICF Code of Ethics added a standard about the AI, not only about the recorder. Erickson’s write-up of the new Code describes Standard 2.5, Responsible Use of AI: a coach has to disclose that AI is in use, including transcription tools, and say who will see the data. On consent the write-up is blunt: “Consent is not legally required by ICF - but best practice is to ask for and record it explicitly.”

Credentialing is firmer. One read of the Code says written permission before recording is mandatory for a recording submitted for a credential, and ICF publishes a sample release form for applicants. Keep yours with your coaching agreement.

Why can’t a state-by-state chart answer this for you?

Because the two pages Google ranks highest for that question do not answer it the same way. NextPhone’s 2026 call-recording guide puts a number on it: 38 states plus DC run on one-party consent, and 12 require all-party. Justia’s 50-state survey gives no count. It says a majority require one-party consent and a smaller group all-party, then spends its length on the exceptions, including states that require consent only where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Justia also notes that where a conversation crosses state lines, a recorder may want to comply with the most restrictive law, since courts have disagreed about which applies. Remote coaching makes that ordinary.

Ask your client, and check your jurisdiction. No chart can say what is lawful where you sit.

What does the two-name line sound like?

Say it before the recording starts, naming both things your client cannot see.

“I record our sessions, and an AI writes my report from the recording. Say no and I’ll write it by hand. Is that all right?”

1. Say the line before you start the recording.
2. Wait for an answer out loud.
3. Start recording, or write by hand.
4. Note the date they agreed.

What I would not lean on is a signature collected months ago, because the recorder that was already running is what goes wrong. One r/lifecoaching thread has a client describing exactly that.

Ember records the coaching session, or takes the recording from a recording app. The landing page says it will “transcribe your meeting and generate session reports right inside your AI stack”, and the report is yours to edit in the dashboard.

What is not stated yet?

Three questions sit unanswered on my own fact sheet: how Ember records, whether in a browser, on a phone or inside a call; which recording apps can hand it a recording, and in what formats; and whether a recording has a length limit.

Until I answer those, no recording app is Ember’s, no file format is promised, and no session length is safe to assume.

The line is yours either way. Say it before the first recording, and check your jurisdiction before you say it.

Questions people ask next?

Is it legal to record coaching sessions?

Where you and your client sit decides it, and I cannot answer that for you. Justia’s 50-state survey says most states require one-party consent and a smaller group all-party. Ask your client, then check your own jurisdiction.

Do you need consent to record a coaching session?

Erickson’s write-up of the 2025 ICF Code says consent is not legally required by ICF, and calls asking for it explicitly the better practice. Standard 2.5 asks you to disclose AI use in the session.