Concern 584 · Working draft · editorial review in progress
Chatbots on suicidality
Inconsistent crisis responses mean a chatbot's handling of suicidal distress changes unpredictably across wording, context or repeated messages.
Understanding the concern
A service may respond appropriately to an obvious crisis phrase yet miss an indirect expression of danger. Safety also needs to hold over a conversation, not just one test prompt. The concern is that a user cannot know when the system will recognize the need for urgent human help.
Evaluations of adolescent health scenarios have found variation in consumer chatbot behavior. Those tests are useful but cannot certify a product for every crisis. Providers need repeated assessment, clear routes to human support and honest statements about the service's role. A disclaimer alone does not make an unsafe response acceptable.
An example
A chatbot offers a helpful support route in one test but misses a differently worded expression of the same concern.
Illustrative unless identified as a documented case.
Words in plain English
- Prompt
- The instructions or information given to an AI to guide its response.
Evidence and its limits
The sources assess bounded scenarios and reported safeguards. They do not establish that every current version behaves the same way.
Brewster and colleagues; JAMA Network Open · Research study
Characteristics and Safety of Consumer Chatbots for Emergent Adolescent Health Concerns ↗ (opens in a new tab)2025 simulated conversations and expert-rated responses, not a clinical trial measuring resulting injuries.
Australian eSafety Commissioner · March 2026 · Regulatory transparency report
eSafety report shows AI companions are putting children at risk ↗ (opens in a new tab)Summarizes four services' responses; a bounded review of reported safeguards, not every chatbot.
Broader frameworks and background
These resources provide context. They do not establish every claim in this concern.
A question to discuss
How should crisis safety be evaluated across varied language and extended conversations?
Keep track of different views, what needs checking, and any next step in your own discussion notes.
Open discussion notes →Principles for the conversation
Before you finish · reflect together
Virtues and principles to consider
Virtues are qualities we practice in how we treat people and make choices. They are not scores for judging someone. Use these ideas to explore what a thoughtful response could look like.
Dignity
Dignity means recognizing each person's worth regardless of usefulness, status, or a system's score. People deserve respect and a voice in matters that affect them.
Explain important decisions, avoid humiliating treatment, and keep room for a person's story. Do not treat a prediction as a complete account of who someone is.
Ask together: Does this use treat each person as someone whose experience matters?
Listening
Listening means trying to understand someone's experience before preparing an answer. People who use a service, work with it, or are judged by it may notice problems its designers miss.
Invite people to describe what happened in their own words. Repeat back what you understood and let them correct it. A quiet person or a complaint that is hard to measure may still reveal something important.
Ask together: Whose experience have we not heard yet?
Seeing potential
Seeing potential means recognizing people's capacity to learn, contribute, and grow. It resists reducing someone to a score or to the tasks a machine can perform faster.
Use tools to support people's development. Give learners time, feedback, and real opportunities to practice. A prediction about someone's performance should not close off their future.
Ask together: How could this help people develop abilities they value?
Editorial ratings
These are editorial judgments from the register, not measured probabilities or predictions about your situation.
About the register and scoring →More ways to explore
Search for more writing
For more specific or recent material, open a search below or ask for a web summary. AI-generated summaries can contain mistakes; open the original articles to check them.