Navigating the Double-Edged Sword of AI: Protecting Children in the Digital Age

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has swiftly woven itself into the fabric of daily life, captivating the world with its ability to generate content and push the boundaries of human capability. As the globe inches closer to artificial general intelligence (AGI)—where machines could rival or surpass human intellect—the implications for younger generations are profound. For children under 18, AI presents both a remarkable opportunity for learning and connection, and a perilous landscape of exploitation, alienation, and psychological stress. In South East Asia and beyond, the urgent question remains: how can societies harness AI’s benefits while safeguarding the most vulnerable?

The duality of AI’s impact is stark. On one hand, it offers transformative educational tools, particularly for children with learning difficulties or disabilities. AI-driven platforms can personalise learning experiences, breaking down complex concepts and fostering connectivity through seamless communication and information sharing. In regions like Thailand and Vietnam, where digitalisation is rapidly advancing, such tools could bridge educational gaps, especially in underserved rural areas.

Yet, the risks are equally compelling. AI can be weaponised as a tool for exploitation, including the sexual abuse and grooming of children through digital platforms. It can amplify bullying, hate speech, and discrimination, creating environments of alienation. Perhaps most insidiously, AI’s addictive nature—often tied to superficial self-validation through social media algorithms—can erode mental well-being. If left unchecked, as some experts warn, AI could become an instrument of human subjection, particularly when it exerts near-absolute control over aspects of life through surveillance or manipulative content.

A Global Framework for Child Protection

The international community has not been blind to these challenges. The Convention on the Rights of the Child, bolstered by General Comment No. 25 on children’s rights in the digital environment, provides a guiding framework for protecting young users in the digital realm. This framework underscores the need for child-centric policies that prioritise safety, privacy, and transparency in AI development and deployment.

Implementation, however, varies widely. Some nations adopt a broad approach, crafting general laws and guidelines to shield children’s privacy and safety while promoting transparency about AI’s functions. Others take a more targeted stance, focusing on specific sectors or issues. For instance, the United States’ Online Privacy Child Protection Act, enacted 25 years ago, set a precedent by barring children under 13 from consenting to data disclosure. More recently, in 2025, California introduced the Patients Communications’ law, mandating clear disclaimers for AI-generated content in healthcare settings and ensuring access to human providers—an acknowledgment of the need for human oversight in critical areas.

In the European Union, the newly enforced AI Act of 2025 exemplifies a prescriptive model. It bans practices like social profiling that could discriminate against individuals, prohibits subliminal targeting of children’s emotions, and restricts real-time biometric data collection for surveillance, with limited exceptions for national security. Businesses are encouraged to adopt codes of conduct for self-regulation, integrated into the EU’s broader supervisory framework. Such measures signal a shift towards binding accountability, contrasting with softer ethical guidelines promoted by international agencies, which advocate principles like “Do No Harm,” safety, privacy, and transparency.

South East Asia’s Unique Challenges

In South East Asia, the intersection of AI and child protection is complicated by diverse cultural, legal, and technological landscapes. Countries like Thailand and Vietnam have robust laws against illegal content, such as the sexual exploitation of children, which automatically extend to AI-generated material. However, nuances arise when distinguishing between real and digitally generated depictions of children—a legal grey area that could complicate enforcement.

Beyond outright illegal content, harmful but non-illegal material poses another dilemma. For instance, expressions of personal animosity or bias online may not violate national or international laws but can still fuel bullying or discrimination against children. Here, the digital industry’s self-regulatory efforts—such as content moderation and filtering by developers and platform providers—play a critical role. Yet, these measures often lack the teeth of formal legislation, leaving gaps in protection.

The Path Forward: Literacy and Detox

At the heart of addressing AI’s ambivalence lies the need for digital and AI literacy. An informed public, equipped with the ability to critically assess technology’s benefits and risks, is indispensable. In South East Asia, where smartphone penetration is high even among younger demographics, schools and families must prioritise education on safe digital practices. Governments and tech industries could collaborate to integrate AI literacy into curricula, teaching children not just how to use technology, but how to navigate its pitfalls.

Equally important is the concept of a “digital detox.” Families across the region, from bustling Bangkok to rural Isaan, need spaces and times free from technology’s intrusion. Creating tech-free zones at home or designated periods for human interaction can foster emotional resilience and empathy—qualities no algorithm can replicate. Community initiatives, such as pro bono support for disadvantaged groups, could further nurture human connection, countering AI’s potential to isolate.

Industry accountability is another pillar. Developers and deployers of AI must embed risk assessment and mitigation into their processes as part of due diligence. This includes designing systems that prioritise child safety, such as age-appropriate content filters or transparent algorithms that avoid manipulative targeting. While self-regulation is a start, regional governments may need to consider stronger frameworks akin to the EU’s AI Act, tailored to local contexts.

Balancing Innovation and Humanity

The march towards AGI is inevitable, but its trajectory need not be reckless. If confirmed through ongoing global dialogue, a balanced approach—combining robust regulation, ethical guidelines, and public education—may offer the best path to mitigate AI’s risks while maximising its potential. However, as estimates and predictions about AI’s societal impact remain unconfirmed, caution is paramount. There is no evidence yet to suggest that AI will inevitably dominate human lives, but the possibility warrants proactive measures.

In South East Asia, where rapid technological adoption often outpaces policy, the stakes are high. Children, as the most vulnerable digital citizens, must be at the forefront of AI governance discussions. From Hanoi to Jakarta, the call for “Top Tips for Digital Detox” and actionable literacy programmes resonates as a practical starting point. Ultimately, the warmth of human empathy and the strength of community bonds must remain central, ensuring that technology serves humanity rather than subjugates it.

As the world grapples with AI’s double-edged sword, the challenge is clear: innovate without losing sight of what makes us human. For the children of today, who will inherit tomorrow’s digital landscape, striking this balance is not just a policy issue—it is a moral imperative.