SEARCH RESULTS

House of Lords If only Jools could see how far his story has travelled. What began as a mother’s search for answers has become a campaign for change, to make sure no other parent is left in the dark when the unthinkable happens. I’ll be meeting with Baroness Beeban Kidron and other supporters of her amendment as we continue to push for   #JoolsLaw   — calling for the automatic preservation of children’s online data so that truth and accountability are never hidden behind a screen. (I do understand that it won’t actually be called JoolsLaw but if the crime and policing bill includes the wording to achieve that, then that’s perfect!) This invitation is another step forward — for Jools, and for every child whose story deserves to be told. 🕊️

Jools aged 4

This week, Baroness Beeban Kidron has tabled a powerful amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, one that would make data preservation automatic when a child dies. If passed, coroners would have to notify Ofcom within five working days of a child’s death, ensuring that all social media and online data is immediately preserved. Ofcom would then provide a standard template so coroners know exactly what information to request from platforms like TikTok, Snapchat and Meta, including what a child saw, searched, shared or was recommended. This is exactly what #JoolsLaw  has been fighting for since I lost my beautiful son, Jools. No parent should ever be left in the dark, waiting months or years to understand what happened to their child online, while vital evidence is deleted or lost forever. Automatic preservation isn’t just about data. It’s about truth, accountability and compassion. It’s about giving families answers. And it’s about protecting other children from suffering the same fate when we can prove the harm caused to children who have died. Thank you, Baroness Kidron, for backing my argument on this and continuing to stand up for children’s digital rights and for recognising that parents deserve the truth. We need to make sure this is passed in Parliament.   https://bills.parliament.uk/publicat.../63214/documents/7237 #JoolsLaw   #BaronessKidron   #OnlineSafety   #DigitalRights   #ProtectOurChildren   #BereavedParents   #DataPreservation

In August, I met with Baroness Beeban Kidron to share my concerns about the Data Use and Access Act and to call for automatic data preservation following the death of a child. Because of this, Baroness Kidron spoke in the House of Lords on 16th Oct 2025 and confirmed she’ll be tabling amendments to ensure the law works as promised and as Parliament intended. Fingers crossed that what I’ve been fighting for — now known as #JoolsLaw  — finally becomes law. Baroness Beeban Kidron speaking in the House of Lords, Westminster

Gosh, what an emotional day on what was   #worldmentalhealthday2025 . I was invited to London to support   Speak Their Name CIO , who has brought together 19 incredible memorial quilts, representing around 800 people who died by suicide. These quilts are now displayed in Parliament’s Upper Waiting Hall, a poignant and powerful space that every MP passes through on their way to Committee Rooms. The   Baton of Hope UK   began its London journey from there, and although I hadn’t planned to, I decided to walk with it. What an unforgettable experience. Along the way, I meet other bereaved families, each carrying their own story of love and loss. Then, unexpectedly, I was offered the chance to carry the baton myself. Even as I write this, I feel emotional, thinking about it. The baton was heavier than I expected, but not too heavy, enough to remind you of its meaning.   Andrea Sparke , one of the trustees (whom I’d only met that day), gently said to me, “Think of Jools as you walk.” And I did, fighting back tears while walking past Buckingham Palace. It was an honour beyond words. Thank you.   I also loved learning about the baton’s design, the interlocking shapes symbolising people holding one another up. That feels so true of this journey through grief and advocacy: we lift each other, often with nothing more than a hug and a mutual understanding of the pain of loss. During the event, I also learnt about the Baton of Hope Workplace Pledge, which every organisation should know about. It’s a simple but powerful commitment to: - Remove the stigma around mental health in the workplace - Increase awareness of suicide - Improve understanding and save lives - Make suicide awareness, support and prevention a workplace priority 👉You can pledge your company to do this here In the words of   Steve Phillip 's from   The Jordan Legacy CIC   Let's "Move towards a society that is willing and able to do all it can to prevent all preventable suicides through collaboration, education and awareness.”

Motion to Dismiss Hearing 16th January 2026 Our first hearing, a Motion to Dismiss, is set for January 16, 2026, and will take place via Zoom, which is apparently unusual for a hearing to be held by Zoom. If we are successful at this stage, we move to Discovery, where TikTok would finally be forced to release our children’s data (if they haven’t deleted it) — the very information we’ve been denied since losing them. The 4 of us, me,   Lisa Kenevan , Hollie Dance,   Liam Walsh   now also been joined by another incredibly brave UK mum, Louise Gibson, whose 11-year-old son Noah tragically died. Together, we are the first British parents to sue TikTok. This next step is not just about our own children. It’s about protecting every child online and holding these tech giants to account for serving harmful content to children, with thanks to   Laura Marquez-Garrett   at   Social Media Victims Law Center   for representing us.   Our fight continues for truth, transparency and justice in loving memory of Jools, Archie, Isaac, Maia and Noah, and to help protect your children by forcing these companies to change. I still believe that if we already had   #JoolsLaw   in the UK, we wouldn’t be fighting for our children’s data. Jools’ Law would ensure that, on the death of a child, their online data is automatically preserved and shared with the Coroner. #JusticeForOurChildren   #TruthAndTransparency   #tiktoklawsuit

Ofcom has issued its consultation on Data Preservation Notices (DPNs) and Coroner Information Notices (CINs). See... https://www.ofcom.org.uk/.../consultation-on-data ... As Jools’ mum, and as a campaigner for Jools’ Law, I want to share the reality families face when a child dies suddenly: Many parents don’t know all the accounts their child had; children often use multiple platforms, under different usernames. How can a coroner possibly know where to request data from? Without a standardised process, crucial evidence is easily lost. For example: Hollie Dance  was unaware that Archie Battersbee had social media accounts. I didn’t know Jools had multiple accounts and neither did the police discover this. Another family I know only discovered after their daughter’s death that she’d been groomed on an app called LMK, which they, and I, had never heard of. Even if coroners do request data, how are they expected to know what to ask for? Algorithms, search histories, “For You” feeds, private messages — all could hold vital answers. And here’s a critical procedural issue: When a child dies, the coroner will usually open an inquest quickly. However, in many cases, the inquest is then suspended while the police conduct their investigation. Once suspended, the coroner cannot issue CINs or DPNs. Responsibility for gathering evidence, including digital evidence, is passed back to the police. This creates a dangerous gap. The police rarely act swiftly enough to preserve online data, and while responsibility bounces between agencies, the “golden hour” passes. Platforms may delete or alter vital evidence before anyone acts. This happened in Lincolnshire, where parents were told their coroner couldn’t request social media data because the inquest was open but suspended. The same opening and closing happened in Jools’ case. So even though the new DPN powers exist, coroners cannot use them once they suspend an inquest, leaving families at the mercy of police delays. This is precisely why Jools’ Law is needed: automatic preservation of a child’s social media data at the point of death, without waiting for coroners or police to determine jurisdiction. Without automatic preservation, bereaved parents are left fighting an uphill battle for scraps of information while the truth about their child’s final days may already have been erased. We cannot allow that to continue. #JoolsLaw   #OnlineSafety   #ChildSafety   #BereavedParents   #DigitalEvidence

Once again today, I have been contacted by a journalist informing me of another devastated family, this time in Lincolnshire, whose teenager has tragically taken their own life. My heart breaks knowing the engulfing pain they are now living with. Coroners already have the legal powers they need, they just need to be used What angers me is hearing that the Coroner in this case is apparently applying to the High Court to access the young person’s social media data. This is simply not necessary. The inquest has not yet taken place, and under current law, the Coroner does not need to go to the High Court. This highlights, yet again, the serious lack of training for both Police and Coroners. Families are left crying out for answers while those who should know how to act are either unaware of their powers or uncertain about the correct procedure. In the meantime, vital data is at risk of being lost or deleted. The process should be straightforward: Since April 2024, coroners have had the power under Section 101 of the Online Safety Act to ask Ofcom to issue a Coroner Information Notice (CIN) to online platforms such as Snapchat, TikTok, Meta or Google. This notice requires the platform to provide information about a child’s online activity that may be relevant to their death. There is no need for a High Court application. In addition, the government has confirmed that the new powers to issue Data Preservation Notices (DPNs), which force platforms to preserve a child’s data so it cannot be deleted during an investigation, will now come into force by the end of September 2025, several months earlier than originally planned. Once active, DPNs will make it a criminal offence for companies to delete or alter a deceased child’s data once notified. Until then, coroners should continue to use Section 101 powers via Ofcom to secure data for an inquest. The two powers will work side by side: Section 101 CINs → to access a child’s online data. DPNs (from September 2025) → to preserve a child’s online data so it is not lost. Both Ofcom and the Chief Coroner’s Office have made clear that coroners should be working with Ofcom early in an investigation, and that police must inform coroners quickly under “golden hour” procedures so that vital data is not deleted before it can be secured. A Practical Checklist for Bereaved Families It makes me deeply angry that bereaved families are expected to do this themselves. In the aftermath of losing a child, no parent is in a fit state to navigate complex legal processes just to stop vital evidence from being lost. This is precisely why I continue to fight for Jools’ Law, because securing and preserving a child’s online data should happen automatically. No parent should have to beg for it, chase officials, or risk losing potential evidence that could help explain what happened to their child. If you are a bereaved parent and need social media data to be preserved or accessed for your child’s inquest: Ask the coroner directly: “Have you requested a Coroner Information Notice under Section 101 of the Online Safety Act?” Confirm the process: The coroner must go through Ofcom, not directly to Apple, Meta, or other companies. Ofcom will then issue the legal notice to the relevant platform. Raise urgency with police: Remind them of their duty under the “golden hour” principle — coroners should be notified immediately after a child’s death so that online data can be preserved. Keep records: Ask for written confirmation from the coroner or police of any requests made to Ofcom. Note dates and names of those you spoke with. From September 2025 onwards: In addition to CINs, coroners will be able to ask Ofcom to issue a Data Preservation Notice (DPN), making it illegal for a platform to delete your child’s data once notified. No parent should ever have to fight to stop vital evidence from being lost. Coroners already have the legal powers they need; they simply need to use them. I believe this process should happen automatically (which isn't the law YET) on the death of a child, without grieving families having to push for it.

Matt, Jools, Ellen He should have been opening his A-level results, dreaming about university, travel, and adventures. Instead, I’m left with milestones of could have been. Jools ended his life at just 14. I still don’t know why because the law stops me from accessing his online data. That’s why I’m fighting for Jools’ Law to give bereaved parents the right to answers and the chance to protect other children. I’m back from London today after continuing my fight for Jools’ Law, and an important meeting was had. This fight is for Jools and for every family who deserves the truth. Today, while other families celebrate results, I’m reminded that grades are never more important than a child’s life. Please keep talking, keep noticing, and keep listening. #JoolsLaw   #ForJools   #CouldHaveBeen   #SuicidePrevention   #ALevelResultsDay

Jools' 6th Birthday (Ellen, Jools, Matt) Today should have been filled with laughter and celebration. Today, our son Jools should have turned 18. Instead, there is silence. No card to write. No present to wrap. Just an aching, endless space where my brilliant, funny, kind boy should be. Since that awful day when Jools died, I’ve lived with a pain no parent should ever know. I’m fighting to understand what happened to him, but along the way, that search for answers has grown into something much bigger. Meeting so many other parents who are in a similar awful position. Because Jools is not the only child. There are others, right now, being harmed, confused, and overwhelmed by what they’re exposed to online. Violent, explicit, and deeply inappropriate content, content no child should ever see, and it is just a scroll away. It’s hurting their minds, their self-worth, and in some cases, their lives. So I keep going, not just to find answers about what happened to Jools, but for every other child who is still here and still at risk. I have no other children of my own left to protect, but I can fight to protect yours. And I will. Jools should still be here. He should be celebrating with his friends, with me, with his dad, and with everyone who loved him so much. If you’re a parent, please take a moment to hug your child today. Look them in the eyes and remind them they are loved beyond measure. And if you work in government, tech, education, or law, ask yourself: What are we really doing to protect our children online? Because right now, it is not enough. I’ll never get to buy Jools a pint. I’ll never see him off to university. I’ll never know the man he could have become. But I can fight. And I will. I can’t say “Happy Birthday,” because there’s not one part of this that feels happy. So instead, I’ll just say: Thinking of you, my darling boy, on what should have been your 18th birthday. I pinky promise to love you forever, Jools. Love, Mum x

I would like to introduce you to two incredibly brave parents whom I’ve had the privilege of meeting on this difficult journey. Their beautiful daughter was just thirteen when she was groomed online and tragically lost her life. What they’ve written below is raw, honest, and utterly heartbreaking — but it’s also vital reading for anyone who cares about protecting children. They didn’t ask to become campaigners. They’re grieving parents, like so many of us, who have been forced to carry this weight because the systems that should have protected their daughter failed her. Please take the time to read their words. Share them. Talk about them. Their message deserves to be heard. We will not stop fighting until the truth is faced and real change is made. For their daughter. For Jools. For every child. 💙 #JoolsLaw #OnlineSafety  Our daughter died as a result of online grooming. She was just thirteen years old. Following her death, a joint agency enquiry was launched to determine what lessons can be learned. That is right and necessary. But in our experience, it has not gone far enough. As her parents, we have not been invited to share what we know, what we’ve learned, or what we’ve come to understand in the painful aftermath of losing our child. This may seem like a procedural oversight, but it points to a deeper systemic issue: When governments, regulators and official enquiries fail to see the full picture, it is bereaved parents grieving, traumatised and exhausted, who are left to fight for the truth. And the truth is this: our daughter’s death was preventable. But the action needed to protect her and countless others, was delayed, diluted, or denied by those in power. The danger of online grooming has been known since at least 2017, when it became a criminal offence for adults to send sexual messages to children. By then, cases of digital grooming were already rising sharply. In the years that followed, the number of recorded grooming offences increased by more than 80%. In 2019, the UK government published the Online Harms White Paper, proposing a duty of care on tech platforms. But what followed was four years of slow progress and political distraction under successive Conservative governments. During this time, the number of children being harmed online continued to grow. So did the evidence. And still, meaningful regulation was delayed. The Online Safety Act, passed in October 2023, came far too late for our daughter. Even then, enforcement only began in mid-2025, by which point the apps and loopholes that exposed her had already done irreversible damage. Platforms like LMK and WhatsApp, which allowed predators to reach her directly remain widely available to young people with little or no oversight. And organisations like Ofcom, despite being tasked with regulation, have repeatedly failed to act with the urgency and strength required to protect children. We now hear the current government speak of reform, transparency, and safety. These words are welcome. But as campaigners like Ellen Roome have rightly warned, we have heard them before. The promises of one government are often undone by the inaction of the next. Unless there is a serious break with this cycle of delay and denial, more children will die, and more parents will be left to carry what we now carry. This is not just about one app, or one agency, or one enquiry. It is about a culture of deferral where warnings are ignored, safeguards are postponed, and grieving families are told, after the fact, that “lessons will be learned.” We are sharing this not to point fingers, but to say what must be said: Our daughter died not only because a predator found her, but because systems failed to stop him. Those failures began years ago and were allowed to continue across successive governments. The burden of change now falls on people who loved her the most, and who lost her in the most unimaginable way. We do not want this burden. But if no one else will carry it, we will. Two grieving parents United Kingdom

Image taken by Sky News, see article - https://news.sky.com/story/new-internet-rules-enforced-from-today-but-this-grieving-mother-is-sceptical-they-will-work-13401388 That means, for the first time in UK law: ✅ Platforms must introduce highly effective age verification to block children from accessing adult content, including pornography, suicide, self-harm, and eating disorder material. ✅ Algorithms must be changed to stop harmful content from being pushed into children’s feeds if the platform knows the user is a child. ✅ Risk assessments must be tailored by specific age groups, not just “13+”. ✅ New types of harm — like body shaming, hopelessness, and compulsive scrolling — must now be recognised and mitigated. ✅ Platforms must name a senior executive who is responsible for child safety. It sounds like progress — and it is, on paper. But here’s the truth ❌ Age Verification — rigorous on paper, weak in practice Yes, platforms must now apply “highly effective” age assurance for the most harmful content. But what does that really mean? Self-declared ages (e.g., ticking a box) no longer qualify. Ofcom now requires reliable methods, such as facial age estimation, official ID matching, mobile provider checks, or digital identity services. Platforms can be fined up to £18 million or 10% of their global revenue, with possible criminal penalties for senior executives. BUT these checks only apply when accessing harmful material directly (like explicit sites or flagged posts), not when a child creates an account or scrolls through algorithm-driven content. And here’s the kicker: 👉 There’s no obligation for platforms to go back and verify existing users. That means millions of children who signed up using a fake age are outside the protection of the new rules. ❌ Algorithms still addictive, still targeting the wrong eyes Platforms are supposed to stop harmful content being shown to under-18s but only if they know the user is under 18. So what happens when they don’t check? The algorithms that addict, isolate, and expose children to graphic material continue to run. The law targets new uploads, not systemic design. And existing harmful content? It’s still out there, pushed into feeds based on behaviour, not age. ❌ Accountability — still absent for bereaved families Even now, if the worst happens, families like mine have no legal right to access their child’s account, content, or digital history. We’re still forced to beg social media companies for answers, and often, we’re ignored or stonewalled. We need more than a starting point. We need real change. ✔️ Real age checks — at sign-up, not just content access. ✔️ Full audit of existing users — not just new ones. ✔️ Platform designs built for safety, not engagement. #JoolsLaw   #OnlineSafetyAct   #ChildrensCode   #AgeVerification   #ProtectChildrenOnline   #FixTheGaps https://news.sky.com/story/new-internet-rules-enforced-from-today-but-this-grieving-mother-is-sceptical-they-will-work-13401388