Meeting the Prime Minister: Why Children's Online Safety Cannot Wait

On 26th May 2026, I joined a group of bereaved parents at Downing Street to meet with the Prime Minister.

Between us, we have lost children to online harms including suicide, sextortion, dangerous online challenges, grooming, exploitation, and harmful content amplified by social media algorithms.

We were not there as campaigners or politicians. We were there as parents.

Parents whose children should still be here.

One by one, we shared our children's stories. We spoke about who they were, what they loved, and the futures they should have had. We explained how social media platforms played a role in exposing them to harms that no child should face.

These were not isolated incidents or tragic accidents. We described systems and features that are deliberately designed to maximise engagement, keep children online for longer, and encourage compulsive use.

We discussed a number of harmful features that continue to exist across social media platforms, including:

• Endless scrolling and infinite feeds

• Algorithmic recommendation systems that push increasingly extreme or harmful content

• Livestreaming features that can expose children to abuse, exploitation and harmful interactions

• Direct messaging from strangers

• Disappearing messages and content that leaves little evidence trail

• Addictive engagement tools such as streaks, rewards and notifications designed to drive constant use

• Recommendation engines that can rapidly lead vulnerable children towards self-harm, suicide, eating disorder or other harmful content

• Features that make it easy for adults to contact, groom or exploit children

• Weak age verification systems that are easily bypassed

Our message to the Prime Minister was simple.

If these companies can remove harmful features, they should do so.

If they choose not to remove them, then those platforms should not be available to children.

For too long, the debate has focused on banning specific apps. I believe we should focus on the harmful features themselves. If a platform can demonstrate that it is genuinely safe for children, then it should be allowed to operate. If it cannot, children should not be exposed to it.

There is also growing discussion about raising the minimum age for social media access to 16. While I welcome the debate, my personal view is that 16 does not go far enough.

I believe the age should be 18.

The evidence increasingly shows that social media platforms are designed to influence behaviour, emotions and decision-making. We should not be exposing children to these powerful systems while their brains are still developing.

No law will bring Jools back.

No law will bring back any of the children whose parents sat around that table in Downing Street.

But if we are prepared to listen, learn and act, we can prevent other families from experiencing the same devastation.

That is why we continue to speak out.

That is why we continue to fight.

And that is why children's online safety must become a national priority.