OpenAI’s Paternalism: Does the AI Know Best?

OpenAI’s new teen safety feature is being criticized by some as a form of digital paternalism, where a tech company and its algorithm presume to know what is best for a user, even against their implicit wish for privacy. This move raises fundamental questions about user autonomy in the age of AI.
The core of the paternalistic argument is that the system overrides the user’s agency. A teen who chooses to confide in an AI is making a choice about how and with whom they share their feelings. By deciding to inform parents without the teen’s consent, OpenAI is essentially stating that the teen’s judgment in that moment is invalid and that the AI’s assessment is superior.
Supporters defend this as a necessary and benevolent form of paternalism, akin to a doctor making a decision for an incapacitated patient. They argue that a person in a severe mental health crisis may not be capable of making the best decisions for their own safety. In this view, the AI’s intervention is a protective measure that respects the user’s ultimate well-being over their immediate desire for privacy.
This debate over AI’s role was intensified by the Adam Raine tragedy, a case that highlights the potential failures of a system based purely on user autonomy. The company has since shifted towards a model that incorporates a degree of paternalistic oversight, believing it is a more responsible approach.
The acceptance of this feature will largely depend on society’s comfort level with this new form of AI paternalism. Do we want our technology to be passive servants that respect our every command, or do we want them to be active guardians that intervene when they believe we are about to make a terrible mistake? The answer is far from simple.