Sanjay Puri hosts UNICEF’s Thomas Davin on the RegulatingAI Podcast to discuss balancing AI’s educational power with child safety and cognitive risks.
WASHINGTON, DC, UNITED STATES, February 26, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ — Can a computer truly teach a child to read — or could it slowly teach them to stop thinking?
That was the central question in a thought-provoking conversation between host Sanjay Puri and Thomas Davin, Global Innovation Director at UNICEF, on the RegulatingAI Podcast. Recorded at the India AI Impact Summit, the discussion tackled one of the defining challenges of our time: how to harness generative AI for children’s benefit without compromising their cognitive, emotional, and social development.
With more than a billion children growing up in an AI-enabled world, the stakes could not be higher.
AI as the Great Equalizer
Thomas Davin was clear: AI is not just a “shiny new toy.” In the right hands, it could be a powerful instrument of inclusion.
Today, nearly 70% of children worldwide struggle to summarize a simple text they’ve read in class. Meanwhile, 260 million children remain out of school entirely. AI-enabled tools — from adaptive tutoring systems to speech-to-text interfaces for visually impaired learners — could help bridge that gap.
For a child in rural India who never completed primary school, an AI tutor isn’t just software. It can be a pathway to literacy, skills, and eventually, dignified employment. For children with disabilities, personalized and accessible learning tools could finally level a playing field that has long been uneven.
In that sense, AI holds the promise of becoming education’s greatest equalizer.
The Cognitive Trade-Off: Curiosity vs. Dependency
But the conversation did not shy away from the risks.
Davin voiced a serious concern: the danger of raising a generation that becomes overly dependent on AI systems. Just as social media has altered attention spans and focus, excessive reliance on generative AI could reshape how children think, learn, and solve problems.
The goal, he argued, is not automation of thinking — but augmentation of learning.
UNICEF advocates for a “human-in-the-loop” approach. Especially for younger children, AI should function as a guided tool — mediated by teachers or parents — rather than a direct, unfiltered interface. Adults remain essential in shaping context, values, and critical thinking.
Technology can assist. It cannot replace human mentorship.
The Chatbot Companion Dilemma
One of the most sensitive topics in the discussion was AI chatbot companions.
On one hand, they can serve as an early support system. With an estimated 87% of adolescents’ mental health challenges going undetected globally, conversational AI could act as a first line of engagement, identifying distress signals early.
On the other hand, there is a risk of deepening isolation. If children find “sufficient engagement” in digital companionship, the social fabric of childhood—friendships, play, human connection—may erode.
The challenge is balance: using AI to expand support systems without replacing human relationships.
Moving Beyond Blanket Bans
When the conversation turned to regulation, nuance became the central theme.
Some countries have considered sweeping restrictions or blanket bans on children’s access to digital platforms. But Davin argued that such one-size-fits-all approaches may do more harm than good.
In a country as diverse as India, the appropriate age and level of AI interaction may vary dramatically between urban and rural communities, between socioeconomic groups, and between educational contexts.
A policy designed to protect a child in a metropolitan household could unintentionally deprive a teenager in a remote village of their only access to skill development and job training.
Smart regulation must be context-aware, data-driven, and flexible.
Children as Shapers, Not Just Users
As the episode concluded, Davin offered a powerful reminder: children should not merely be passive users of AI — they should have a voice in shaping its governance.
While AI development may feel unstoppable, its guardrails are still being built. Safety, inclusion, and equity can — and must — be designed into these systems from the start.
As Sanjay Puri’s conversation highlighted, the question is not whether AI will shape the next generation.
It’s whether we will shape AI in a way that ensures no child — especially the most vulnerable — is left behind in the process.
Upasana Das
Knowledge Networks
email us here
Visit us on social media:
LinkedIn
Instagram
Facebook
YouTube
X
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability
for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this
article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
