Turn one proposed AI use into a reviewable plan.
This tool applies published pediatric, education, child-rights, privacy, and AI-risk guidance. It does not diagnose a child, certify a product, determine legal compliance, or replace review by a school, clinician, privacy officer, or counsel.
Who is using what—and why?
No child information is required. Record only what another adult needs to understand the proposed use.
What role will the system play?
The same model can create very different developmental and governance risks depending on its role.
What must be true before use?
Answer for the actual configuration—not the vendor’s general promise.
A recommendation you can inspect—not a mystery score.
The result is conservative where evidence is limited and does not certify a vendor or resolve applicable law.
Complete the review.
Preserve the decision record
Export a plain-language packet for a co-parent, teacher, school review, product team, or qualified advisor.
What this decision model relies on.
Sources are dated and linked so users can inspect the underlying guidance. Product behavior and rules can change; re-check before adoption.
American Academy of Pediatrics · 2026
A state-of-the-art review emphasizes developmental differences, potential benefits, misinformation and privacy risks, false perceptions of AI as a friend or caregiver, AI literacy, critical thinking, and safe integration.
Read the review →UNICEF · Guidance on AI and children, v3
Child-centered AI should support development and well-being, protect data and privacy, provide safety, fairness, transparency, explainability, accountability, inclusion, and child participation.
Read the guidance →UNESCO · Generative AI in education and research
Guidance calls for human-centered, age-appropriate use, data protection, institutional validation, teacher capacity, and careful regulation of untested tools.
Read the guidance →U.S. Department of Education · FERPA and online tools
Schools should confirm approval, direct control, authorized use, limited redisclosure, and consultation with administration and IT before tools receive education-record information.
Read the guidance →Federal Trade Commission · COPPA Rule update, 2025
The amended rule strengthens parental choice, data minimization and retention limits, security requirements, and restrictions surrounding children’s data.
Read the update →NIST · Generative AI Profile, updated 2026
A cross-sector risk-management resource for governing, mapping, measuring, and managing generative-AI risks across the system lifecycle.
Read the profile →Six questions before “yes” or “no.”
What capacities and relationships are still being built?
What precise job is AI doing for the child or adult?
What thinking, practice, care, or connection might it replace?
What leaves the child’s control, who receives it, and for how long?
Which adult can inspect, intervene, correct, and stop the use?
What benefit is expected, what harm signals matter, and when will the decision be revisited?