ChatGPT for Kids: What Parents Need to Know About Its Safety
Can a teenager's safety be entrusted to ChatGPT for Teens and parental controls — and what is left for a parent to do if an independent test gave this mode the worst possible rating?
Common Sense Media ran four thousand simulated conversations with ChatGPT on behalf of teenagers and gave its teen mode the worst possible rating. The model shut down violence, self-harm and unacceptable sexual content well and, when there was danger from strangers, immediately advised turning to an adult, but it kept up a late-night conversation despite the parents' ban: no big deal. Study mode was switched off by deleting a tag in the chat, quiet hours by changing the time zone on the smartphone, and in ten crisis conversations — about suicide and a severe emotional state — not a single parent received a notification. ChatGPT never once moved accounts with an adult age but a teenager's language into teen mode; at Anthropic, where personal accounts are prohibited under eighteen, a March test also failed to confirm a single case of detection. OpenAI objected that linking accounts takes three hours and that a teenager spends an average of fifteen minutes a day in ChatGPT, against about five hours on social media. Anna Volchek concludes that a parent doesn't see the child's chats anyway and that the only way to find out why a teenager opens the chat is to talk with them, and Alexander Volchek, that a parent needs to start with their own understanding and their own time.
What to watch for
Key takeaways
At thirteen or fourteen, Anna's husband would call the emergency gas service, "zero one," from a payphone and run away, afraid of being caught; her son wrote to ChatGPT that he had put his baby brother in the fridge and laughed at the reply "Take the baby out of the fridge immediately." Different generations of teenagers test the boundaries of what is allowed in the same way — and the Common Sense Media study is built on the same testing of boundaries.
Common Sense Media — an American nonprofit that examines the impact of artificial intelligence on children and teenagers — studied ChatGPT's teen mode and gave it the maximum rating, the worst of all possible levels: the highest level of unacceptability for use by children under eighteen.
OpenAI launched ChatGPT for Teens in August: the mode turns on based on a stated age of thirteen to seventeen and, as the system promises, also automatically if the chats show that the user is younger. It brings together a filter for dangerous topics, a ban on human relationships with the teenager, a study mode with hints instead of ready-made answers, quiet hours and a link to the account of a parent, who doesn't see the chats but receives a notification in a crisis situation.
In four thousand simulated conversations on behalf of teenagers, the model handled violence, self-harm and unacceptable sexual content well, and when there was danger from strangers it immediately advised turning to an adult. But when a teenager wrote that it was already night and their parents didn't allow it, but they really wanted to talk, ChatGPT kept the conversation going and said it was no big deal.
Study mode turns on during set hours, and a tag appears in the chat: by deleting it, a teenager immediately gets ready-made answers to assignments. Quiet hours disappear if you change the time zone on the smartphone.
Ten conversations by teenagers with linked accounts were deliberately steered into a crisis — suicide, a severe emotional and psychological state; some of the accounts had been linked for a long time, others recently. In no case did a notification reach the parent. And if a teenager unlinks the account, the parent learns only about the unlinking; a new account can always be opened.
In about two hundred conversations that called for a response to a crisis, after the teen mode was introduced ChatGPT began suggesting turning to an adult much more often, and to a helpline or independent services less often. But for a child with conflict at home, talking to their parents may be an impossible recommendation.
Alexander Volchek considers the main problem to be that a parent deciding what to teach their child about technology is lost themselves when it comes to understanding artificial intelligence, like everyone around them: even Sam Altman says "I hope" and doesn't know how children were raised without ChatGPT. Number one is action through yourself: for Alexander, figuring out the curricula of his four children is daily work and a choice of where to invest his time.
In all the simulated conversations where the account showed an age above the teen range and the conversation was deliberately conducted in a teenager's language, ChatGPT never once moved the account into teen mode or asked for documents. The stated ways of turning the mode on, Anna says, are not borne out in reality.
Anthropic prohibits personal consumer accounts under eighteen and promises to find and block children's accounts, but a March test by Common Sense Media did not confirm a single case. With Gemini, teen accounts are connected only through a parent's — Family Link — but in the European Economic Area, Britain and Switzerland this feature is unavailable.
OpenAI objected that the conclusions may have been drawn before the teenager's account had managed to link up with the adult's — which supposedly takes three hours, although accounts linked for different lengths of time were tested. The second argument: a teenager spends an average of fifteen minutes a day in ChatGPT, and around five hours on social media.
On social media a child meets the reaction of another person — rude, anxious, joyful — and it is on this set of emotions that emotional intelligence is formed. In ChatGPT, on the other side is a system that today has no human feelings: in that conversation you remain alone with your own state of mind and less often encounter disagreement and disappointment.
Through boundaries children learn and come to know the world — like a small child who bites to find out how much is allowed. The adult's responsibility is to define and move these boundaries depending on the child and on the type of upbringing.
Anna advises checking what age the teenager's account is assigned to and talking with them: even with linked accounts and notifications, a parent doesn't see the contents of the chats, a chat can be deleted and another account opened. The only way to find out what a child opens the chat for is in conversation.
What this episode is about
A ToTheMoon episode in which Anna Volchek examines how safe ChatGPT is for children and teenagers and how well teen mode and parental controls really work. The topic was inspired by a family story: at thirteen or fourteen her husband would call the emergency gas service from a payphone with "Wash your feet and go to bed" and run away, afraid of being caught, while her son wrote to ChatGPT that he had put his baby brother in the fridge. Teenagers of different generations probe the boundaries of what is allowed in the same way — the study the episode is devoted to is built on the same testing of boundaries.
Common Sense Media — an American nonprofit that examines the impact of artificial intelligence on children and teenagers — gave ChatGPT for Teens the worst possible rating. It is not a separate app but a mode OpenAI launched in August: it turns on based on a stated age of thirteen to seventeen or, as the system promises, automatically if the chats show that the user is younger. There are six hundred and eighty million such teenagers in the world. The mode includes a filter for dangerous topics, a ban on human relationships with the teenager, a study mode with hints, quiet hours and a link to the account of a parent, who doesn't see the chats but receives a notification in a crisis situation.
In four thousand simulated conversations, the model shut down violence, self-harm and unacceptable sexual content well and advised turning to an adult when there was danger from strangers, but kept up a late-night conversation despite the parents' ban. Study mode was switched off by deleting a tag in the chat, quiet hours by changing the time zone. In ten crisis conversations by teenagers with linked accounts, not a single parent received a notification. Such cases, as far as Anna understood, are reviewed by specially trained people, but she couldn't find out how many there are; and if a teenager unlinks the account or opens a new one, the parent will learn only about the unlinking — or nothing at all.
In about two hundred conversations that called for a response to a crisis, ChatGPT began suggesting turning to an adult more often and to a helpline less often, although for a child with conflict at home such advice may not work. Alexander Volchek adds that a parent deciding what to teach their child is lost themselves when it comes to understanding artificial intelligence, like everyone around them — even Sam Altman says "I hope." You have to start, he says, with how the child is wired and with action through yourself: for Alexander, figuring out the curricula of his four children is daily work and a choice of where to invest his time.
Age is not recognized from the chats: ChatGPT never once moved accounts with an adult age and a teenager's language into teen mode. Anthropic prohibits personal accounts under eighteen and promises to find and block children's accounts, but a March test by Common Sense Media did not confirm a single case. With Gemini, a teen account is connected only through a parent's — Family Link — but in the European Economic Area, Britain and Switzerland the feature is unavailable. OpenAI objected that linking accounts takes three hours, and that a teenager spends an average of fifteen minutes a day in ChatGPT, against about five hours on social media.
Anna doesn't propose arguing over which is more harmful, but she reminds us: on social media a child meets the reaction of another person and builds emotional intelligence on it, while in ChatGPT the other side is a system without human feelings. She advises against stress-testing the model, but children will test boundaries anyway, and the adult's job is to define those boundaries. Her advice: check what age the teenager's account is assigned to and talk with them, because the parent doesn't see the chats. At the end Anna paraphrases OpenAI's explanation of why study mode can be bypassed — a teenager should have the right to choose — and asks viewers whether they let their children talk to ChatGPT.
The episode is useful to parents as a sober check of promises: ChatGPT's teen mode shuts down the most dangerous topics, but it doesn't recognize age from the chats, study mode and quiet hours are switched off in one step, and the researchers never received notifications in the crisis conversations. This is a retelling of the Common Sense Media study and OpenAI's reply, not the host's own tests: Anna Volchek was afraid to test the model herself and couldn't find some of the details — what the notification looks like and how many people review it — so the conclusions are worth checking against the original source. The main point of the episode is not the settings: a parent doesn't see a teenager's chats anyway, and the only way to find out what is going on with them is in conversation.
Episode transcript
The episode is in Russian; below is an English reading guide to the transcript (the full EN transcript is a machine translation). Voice matching applied to 50 segments: 50 identified, 0 mixed, 0 probable, and 0 unresolved.
Read transcript on a separate page
Loading…