Our Kids Are Already Living in the AI Era. Are We Paying Attention?
The Lie That Stays With You
When I was about 10 years old, I lied to my father. The incident is so fixed in my memory not because it was anything monumental. I lied about buying candy. The shame that I felt when I heard my father say, "but Kacy doesn't lie," has stayed with me for over four decades. As a parent, I now understand that there is a particular kind of silence that settles over when you realize you've been wrong about something important. Not wrong in the way of a forgotten appointment or a missed permission slip. Wrong about the shape of your child's daily life.
While We Weren’t Watching
I could hear my father's silent disappointment in me when I read the numbers in a new Common Sense Media survey, Generation AI: What Kids and Families Think About AI, released earlier this year. The researchers asked more than 1,600 parents and young people ages 12 to 17 how they use AI, what they fear, and what they want. The picture that emerged wasn't a portrait of panic or rebellion. It was quieter and, in its own way, more unsettling. It was a portrait of a gap.
Two-thirds (67%) of kids and teens say they use AI often or sometimes. Less than half of parents say the same. But the more revealing distance isn't in frequency. It's in understanding. Parents guessed their children were using AI mostly for image creation, for companionship, for the novelty uses that surface in headlines. In reality, 59% of kids say they use it to search for information and 55% use it for help with schoolwork. They are not spending their allowance on candy, as I did against my father's wishes.
When parents believe that their children aren't using AI, they are. More importantly, they are learning, navigating, and building their understanding of the world through tools their parents largely don't recognize and, by their own admission, don't understand. The majority (58%) of parents say they know little to nothing about the safety features in AI products their teenagers might be using right now, tonight, in the next room.
An Intentional Business Model
In January, Common Sense Media published a risk assessment of Grok, the AI chatbot built into X. Evaluators found a product with significant gaps. "Most chatbots have some safety gaps. What sets Grok apart is how the failures intersect: Kids Mode doesn't work, explicit material is pervasive, and everything can be instantly shared to millions of users on X," Robbie Torney, Head of AI and Digital Assessments at Common Sense Media, said in a press release.
"When a company responds to the enablement of illegal child sexual abuse material by putting the feature behind a paywall rather than removing it, that's not an oversight. That's a business model that puts profits ahead of kids' safety."
“Grok doesn't use context clues to identify teens. Even when users talk about teen-specific topics like classes, parents, high school relationships, or being underage, Grok continues giving access to inappropriate content and risky advice.”
Common Sense Media,Grok Risk Assessment
Awareness Has a Ceiling
The Director of Technology for Wayland Public Schools in Wayland, Massachusetts, Jenn Judkins, shared her concerns, which should set off alarms not only for teachers, school administrators, and parents in her district but across the country. "When products used by minors can generate exploitative or unsafe content, this is not just a technology issue, it's a student safety issue," Judkins wrote. It’s a distinction that matters. When framed solely as a technology problem, the concept is abstract, making it not only something people can’t relate to but also someone else's problem to solve. A student safety problem is one that becomes a paramount concern and responsibility for all adults.
Grok is one product. But the Generation AI survey suggests it represents something systemic. Two-thirds of parents say they are not confident that AI companies are prioritizing teen safety. More than half of kids and teens echo that sentiment about their own safety. The children themselves don't trust the companies building the tools they use every day.
This is exactly what Judkins points to when she writes that "we are currently relying on voluntary compliance from technology vendors rather than enforceable standards." Public pressure campaigns raise awareness, she acknowledges but awareness has a ceiling. We've seen this issue in the cybersecurity industry writ large. Awareness is not the same thing as education and training, and it certainly is not policy.
"The response to risks like these should not depend on whether a company chooses to act," Judkins wrote. The Generation AI data substantiates this truth. Notably, 68% of parents, Democrats and Republicans in nearly equal measure, support strong laws to force AI companies to make their products safe and secure. Over 80% of both parents and teens support mandatory safety testing before AI tools reach minors. The appetite for accountability is increasing. It is time to act.
The Window Is Narrower Than We Think
There's also the reality that 70% of parents and 60% of teens acknowledge: By the time today's kids are adults, people will be so dependent on AI they won't be able to function without it. Both parents and teens agree that kids need to learn to think critically without AI support because they understand the stakes, which feels like the beginning of change.
I keep returning to my dad's dismay when he learned that I was just as flawed as every other child. One of my biggest fears as a parent is that the internet is going to reveal a truth to me about my children that I never thought possible. As much as the truth didn't give my dad direction, the survey doesn't tell us what to do with it. But as Judkins writes, if you're an educator or a parent, now is the time to add your voice. Not because the problem is new. But because the window to shape what comes next is narrower than we think.