Research
May 22, 2026
- AI companion bots are a public health problem.
- They impose three layers of harm: lack of guardrails, addictive design, and risk of disruption of social skills—particularly for children.
- The most comprehensive legislative solutions that address all three of these harms are currently understood as “bans,” and thus often meet resistance.
- They would be better framed as “recalls,” which are already used across many industries where public health impacts are closely monitored (from automotive to pharmaceuticals).
- Employing a recall regime in the AI industry can change the playing field by creating a safety floor—so companies can design their AI bots for safety without losing to their competitors.
- 3 min read
AI companion bots are a public health problem. These bots impose three layers of public health harm stemming from lack of guardrails, addictive design, and risk of disruption of social skills, particularly for children. While legislative solutions exist, most focus on the first layer of harm: lack of guardrails. The most comprehensive solutions that address all harms, including the risk of disrupting children’s social skill development, are currently understood as bans.
Resistance to regulating technology is not new. For decades, regulators treated information technology differently from drugs and devices, which require proof of safety before market entry. The evidence of harm to children from excessive screen time and social media shows that this regulatory divide can no longer be justified. Closing this divide requires applying a public health framework to AI companions. This means a regime centered on pre-market approval, with recall as the most urgent tool, since many AI companion bots are already on the market.
Government agencies use recalls across many industries, from drugs and medical devices to cars. In practice, most recalls are voluntary. The power of mandatory recall lies in its existence—not in how often it is exercised. What the authority to recall does is shift incentives. It pushes companies to test carefully and prioritize safety over speed. Currently, no single company operating AI companion bots can act safely alone because it will lose to competitors vying for engagement. The market will not solve this problem on its own. But a recall regime can change the playing field by creating a safety floor, so companies can design their AI bots for safety without losing to their competitors.
Building a complete public health framework is a goal that takes time. But the tools to act already exist. What legislators and advocates are calling “bans” are functionally recalls. Proposed bans do not target all AI bots. They focus on mitigating harms for children and restrict AI bots designed to simulate human companionship. This is precisely what a recall does. It removes unsafe products from the market until manufacturers redesign them to meet safety standards. Once we recognize these bans as recalls, the real demand becomes clear: Companies must prove their products are safe before putting them back on the market.
Related Content
The Brookings Institution is committed to quality, independence, and impact.
We are supported by a diverse array of funders. In line with our values and policies, each Brookings publication represents the sole views of its author(s).