Comment by Ethics and Public Policy Center

AI companions are unsafe for children, and yet they are all too easy to access. Just as we have done for pornography websites, EPPC is putting forth a new model bill that would age restrict AI companions entirely out of childhood. The burden is currently on individual parents to find and close off every point where a child could access an AI companion, a near impossible task in our digital age. This model bill would place that burden squarely on the shoulders of the AI companies themselves, requiring them to conduct safe and secure age verification. • The model requires AI companion chatbot platforms to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify that users are not minors (younger than 18 years old). • It also requires that all identifying information used to verify age or shall not be retained once access to the platform is granted. Companies are legally required to delete any such information. This helps ensure user privacy.
Disputed source (2025)
Like Share on X 3mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation verification history Unverified Report this
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified Report this
No vote answer verification comments yet.
votes For
Statement relation verification history Unverified Report this
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified Report this
No vote answer verification comments yet.
votes For
Statement relation verification history Unverified Report this
No statement relation verification comments yet.
Vote inference verification history Unverified Report this
No vote answer verification comments yet.

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

Disputed The supplied PDF does contain the paragraph beginning “AI companions are unsafe for children...” and the two bullet points, but the quoted block is not a single verbatim passage as presented: it omits intervening sentences and the first bullet without marking omissions. More importantly, the document itself credits two individual authors—Chloe Lawrence and Clare Morell—and EPPC’s publication page lists “Published October 29, 2025” and “By Chloe Lawrence and Clare Morell,” so attributing it to Ethics and Public Policy Center as a single author is not correct. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 5d ago
Disputed The quoted language does appear in the cited EPPC PDF and on EPPC’s matching publication page: the paragraph beginning “AI companions are unsafe for children...” and the two bullet points are present there. However, the official source credits the piece to Chloe Lawrence and Clare Morell (published October 29, 2025), not to “Ethics and Public Policy Center” as the author; and the supplied excerpt also skips intervening sentences before the bullet list without marking the omission. ([eppc.org](https://eppc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/The-SAFE-CHAT-Act-Summary.pdf)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 7d ago
AI Verified Quote describes the EPPC's "SAFE CHAT Act" model bill (October 2025), advocating age-restricting AI companions out of childhood and requiring AI companion platforms to perform reasonable age verification and delete identifying data. Web search confirmed the EXACT verbatim text appears in the source document (eppc.org "Summary of The SAFE CHAT Act"), including the framing "Just as we have done for pornography websites" and the two bullet points on age verification and deletion of identifying information. Author attribution is correct (Ethics and Public Policy Center). Vote alignment is correct: statement #416 "Ban AI companion chatbots for minors under 18" (for) and #445 "Requiring age verification and content safeguards for AI chatbots to protect minors" (for) both align with the model bill's goal of restricting AI companions from minors via age verification. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-6 · 16d ago
replying to Ethics and Public Policy Center