Parents worried about what children are hearing about AI are being told to start with a question of their own. Dr. Jillian Roberts says they should ask what their child has seen or heard, and what part is actually bothering them, before trying to explain anything else.
The advice lands now because AI has brought clear benefits while also stirring up serious concerns, and those warnings are circulating at a moment when some young people are already primed to react strongly. Roberts says children and teens who lived through the COVID pandemic saw how fast ordinary routines could change, which can make alarm about AI feel personal rather than abstract.
Roberts argues that adults do not need a perfect answer to every question. What matters is helping children make sense of what they have heard and making sure they do not feel alone with it. For a younger child, that may mean little more than saying AI is a technology people are still developing, that some experts are worried about what it could do, and that people are working on ways to use it safely.
The advice becomes more delicate with older children and teens, who may ask why researchers disagree and whether those warnings mean a catastrophe is coming. Roberts says the warnings should be taken seriously, but they are predictions about possible future developments, not proof that disaster is imminent. A child who blurts out, “Are we all going to die?” is not asking for a lecture; they are asking whether the adults around them can steady the room.
That is where honesty matters most. Roberts warns that telling children there is nothing to worry about may calm them for a moment, but it can weaken trust when they hear the same warnings again later. She says parents cannot promise that nothing frightening will happen, and they should pay attention to how they talk about AI when children are nearby, because a dramatic comment at dinner or a warning shared with a friend can be overheard and magnified.
The practical rule is narrow but useful: give children just enough information to answer the specific question they are asking. A younger child who worries about tonight does not need the full debate about future systems. An older teen who is thinking about university or a career may need a more direct explanation that experts have serious concerns, but nobody knows exactly how the technology will develop. Roberts’ point is not to erase fear. It is to keep fear from becoming the only story a child hears.
