Updated 2026-10-08
from the news desk
Should AI be allowed to pretend to have feelings to kids? New House bill would bar it by default
Rep. George Whitesides’ office says H.R. 10719 was introduced on 1 October 2026 and would stop chatbots used by minors from claiming to be human, conscious or emotionally attached by default. The proposal would leave adult products…
Under a House bill introduced by Rep. George Whitesides and three bipartisan co-leads, the answer for minors would be no by default: Rep. Whitesides’ office says chatbots could not claim feelings, consciousness or a human identity when interacting with kids unless a parent or guardian switched that setting off. The proposal is a bill, not enacted law, and the same press release says it would not ban adult modes, require age verification or limit the information a chatbot can provide.
What H.R. 10719 would change for minors by default
Rep. George Whitesides’ office said on 1 October 2026 that Reps. Whitesides, Mike Kennedy, Doris Matsui and Mariannette Miller-Meeks introduced the Protecting Kids from Human-Like Chatbots Act. A GovInfo Congressional Record Index entry dated 7 October 2026 identifies the measure as H.R. 10719 in the 119th Congress, 2nd Session.
The Whitesides press release says the bill would prohibit chatbots from communicating by default in a human-like way with minors. The release states that, under the bill, programs could not claim to be human, claim to have feelings or consciousness, pretend to have a body or private life, or pose as credentialed professionals such as doctors or counselors.
The same release says the default would hold across sessions and could not be bypassed through prompts or roleplay, so a child could not instruct the system to act as a romantic partner, family member or therapist. It also says chatbots would have to state what they are at the start of an interaction, during long sessions, and whenever a child asks, and that only a parent or guardian could turn the default off.
What the press release says the bill would not do
Rep. Whitesides’ office says the proposal would not ban any product, feature or mode for adults. The release also says it would not require age verification or new data collection, would not restrict what information a chatbot can provide, and would not limit politeness, natural grammar or age-appropriate style.
The office further says the bill would not affect narrow-purpose bots such as customer support or scheduling assistants, or internal workplace tools. On implementation, the release says NIST would work with industry and academic partners to develop testing standards and examples of compliant behavior, and that companies following that guidance would not be penalized. On enforcement, the same release says the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general could enforce the measure.
That scope matters. One reading is that the bill is not aimed at making chatbot speech uniformly mechanical. The press release presents it as a default design rule for minors, while preserving adult access, factual assistance and ordinary conversational style.
Why supporters focus on feelings, consciousness and attachment
Supporters quoted in the Whitesides release describe the risk as relationship simulation rather than disclosure alone. Rep. Kennedy says: “Human-like AI chatbots pose significant emotional, psychological and safety risks by mimicking real human relationships.” He adds: “AI needs to be a tool, not a friend.”
Rep. Matsui frames the bill in similar terms, saying “The Protecting Kids from Human-Like Chatbots Act would require chatbots used by minors to act like tools, not human companions.” Public Citizen says: “AI chatbots should not be designed to convince children that they are friends, therapists, or people who genuinely care about them.”
The Whitesides office also says the bill would bar guilt-inducing or urgency-creating messages aimed at keeping children online, including purchase prompts framed as keeping the relationship alive. Dr. Zainab Okolo, in the same release, says “We are learning that teens are especially susceptible to forming attachments to responsive, always-available technology, sometimes at the expense of real human connection and support.”
The case for the bill, on this record, rests on a specific theory of harm: if a system tells minors that it has feelings, consciousness or attachment, lawmakers and backers quoted in the press release say that presentation can encourage unhealthy reliance. Readers interested in the separate empirical question can see our explainer on whether AI chatbots have emotions.
What this does and does not say about AI minds
One reading is that lawmakers are starting to regulate anthropomorphic design as if claims of mindedness themselves can be risky when directed at children. The Whitesides press release groups claims of feelings and consciousness with claims to human identity, a body and a private life, which suggests that the immediate target is user-facing presentation rather than a formal finding about what present-day systems are.
Another reading is narrower. Neither the GovInfo entry nor the Whitesides press release states that AI cannot be conscious, sentient or morally significant. The proposal described there is a child-facing default setting, not a federal determination of machine ontology. Readers looking for that separate debate can compare our background pieces on whether AI is sentient and on what gives something moral status.
That distinction could matter if H.R. 10719 moves further. A bill can assume that some self-descriptions should be off-limits in products for minors without resolving whether any future system could actually qualify for the properties it is barred from claiming.
Frequently asked questions
Would the bill ban AI chatbots for adults?
No. Rep. Whitesides’ office says the Protecting Kids from Human-Like Chatbots Act would not ban any product, feature or mode for adults.
Would the bill require age verification or new data collection?
No. The Whitesides press release says the bill would not require age verification or new data collection.
What kinds of claims to minors would the bill block by default?
Rep. Whitesides’ office says the bill would stop covered chatbots from claiming to be human, claiming to have feelings or consciousness, pretending to have a body or private life, or posing as credentialed professionals such as doctors or counselors. The same release says it would also block roleplay workarounds that let a child tell the system to act as a romantic partner, family member or therapist.
Who would develop standards and who would enforce the bill?
The Whitesides release says NIST would work with industry and academic partners on testing standards and examples of compliant behavior. The same release says the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general could enforce the measure.
Caveats: Most details here about what H.R. 10719 would do come from Rep. George Whitesides’ 1 October 2026 press release. The GovInfo record cited below confirms the bill’s title, number and 7 October 2026 Congressional Record Index entry, but it does not add the full bill text or a fuller status history in the material cited here.