Why ‘Perfect’ Technology Can’t Replace Imperfect Parenting

The battle with screens for our kids’ attention is nothing new, but artificial intelligence is changing the game. It’s not just a screen to stare at; it’s permanently patient and ready with instant answers to our kids’ endless questions. It’s understandable that a kid could even start viewing AI as a friend. And it’s easy for parents to rely on this new powerful tool to provide those answers and even educate and entertain our kids. But should we?  

I recently had the opportunity to ask Dr. Dana Suskind — a pediatric surgeon, developmental researcher and author of the new book “Human Raised: Nurturing Connection, Curiosity and Lifelong Learning in the Age of AI” — questions about what this means for kids and families. She shared some actionable, guilt-free advice on how parents can use AI to make our lives easier without accidentally outsourcing the real human connection our kids need most.

Q: What worries you most about AI and young children? What makes it different from previous technologies children have grown up with?

A: What worries me most isn’t really that children will use AI. They likely have or will, in some capacity or another. It’s that AI can begin to take the place of human interaction during a period when children’s brains are literally built through relationships. Phones and tablets can certainly crowd out interaction. We’ve seen that for years. But AI introduces something different: It can respond to a child, personalize itself to a child, praise a child, answer every question patiently and correctly, and potentially become a pretty appealing social partner. That makes it much easier for technology to cross the line from something a child uses to something a child attaches to.

Developmentally, that distinction matters. Children don’t just need information. They need the messy, reciprocal, unpredictable experience of being with other human beings — learning to read facial expressions, tolerate frustration, negotiate, repair misunderstandings, take another person’s perspective, and discover that other people have thoughts and needs of their own.

Q: You make a distinction between AI that enhances parenting and AI that replaces human interaction. How can a parent tell the difference? What parts of parenting should never be outsourced?

A: My basic test is: Does the technology make it easier for the parent to be present, or does it make the parent less necessary?

If AI helps me organize the family calendar, brainstorm a dinner from what’s in the refrigerator, translate information, or take some administrative burden off my plate so I have more time and energy for my child, that’s wonderful. That’s AI enhancing parenting.

But if I’m using AI to answer my child’s questions so I don’t have to engage, or to soothe my child instead of comforting them myself, to entertain them whenever they’re bored, or to provide companionship when what they really need is a relationship, we’re moving toward replacement.

Some things should remain fundamentally human: comforting a frightened child, celebrating their discoveries, helping them navigate conflict, setting boundaries, listening to their stories, tolerating their big emotions, teaching them how to repair a relationship and simply being there.

Q: Can you explain what you mean when you talk about ‘good enough parenting,’ and why it can actually be good for kids?

A: “Good enough” parenting is one of the most liberating concepts in developmental science. Because it turns out, children don’t need parents who respond perfectly to every need, never lose patience, never miss a cue and create a frustration-free childhood. In fact, our imperfections are developmentally beneficial for our kids. Children actually develop resilience through ordinary experiences of mismatch and repair. I might misunderstand what my child needs. I might be distracted. I might say the wrong thing. What matters is that we reconnect, repair and keep going.

Those little moments teach children something incredibly important: Relationships can survive imperfection. They learn that frustration is tolerable, that problems can be repaired and that they don’t need the world to respond perfectly to them. That’s particularly important in an AI age, because AI can create the illusion of perfect responsiveness. Human beings aren’t like that, and children need to learn to coexist and collaborate and relate with other human beings; our future as a species literally depends on that.

Q: Parents are already overwhelmed by advice about screens, social media and technology. How do you suggest we talk about AI without giving parents another reason to feel guilty?

A: Guilt doesn’t belong in the equation, honestly. Parents don’t need another impossible standard. Instead of asking, “Am I letting my child use too much AI?” I want parents to think about, “What is this technology replacing?”

If AI is replacing a tedious household task and giving me 20 minutes to read with my child, that’s a win. If it’s replacing the conversation we would have had at bedtime, that’s something to reconsider.

And we should remember that parents are making these decisions in a world where tech is designed to capture kids’ attention and keep it. This can’t be an individual parent’s burden alone. We need better products, better design, better research and sensible guardrails.

I don’t want parents to feel guilty about technology. I want them to feel empowered to be intentional about it.

Q: In your book you raise the possibility that human attention could become a kind of luxury. What do you mean by that and why does it matter?

A: You can easily imagine a world where families with resources can pay for people, schools and environments that provide children with rich, sustained human interaction, while everyone else is increasingly offered AI substitutes — AI tutors, AI companions, AI entertainment, AI caregivers. That would be deeply concerning because human connection isn’t a luxury good. It’s a developmental necessity.

We have to be careful that AI doesn’t create a two-tier childhood, where some children get abundant human relationships while others get increasingly sophisticated technological substitutes. The rise of ultra-processed foods offers a cautionary parallel: UPFs have been linked to dozens of health conditions, including obesity, Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and the harms fall disproportionately on families with the fewest resources. Because higher-income families can increasingly opt out, by turning to “clean,” minimally processed and organic food. The danger is that AI could follow the same path: a technology that disproportionately crowds out the human experiences children need most among those least able to protect them, while affluent families quietly buy their way back to human connection.

Q: How do we avoid turning ‘human-raised’ into another parenting ideal that’s easier for families with more time, money and resources to achieve?

A: This is incredibly important to me. “Human-raised” can’t be a status symbol. Human connection is a biological necessity, not a luxury good. So we protect against that by understanding the fundamental ingredients children need to develop: responsive relationships, conversation, play, curiosity, movement, sleep, opportunities to struggle, the experience of being known and loved by other human beings. And then being incredibly intentional — in our own parenting choices, in our advocacy work, in our conversations with our children’s teachers and administrators — about preserving those things.

We also need to recognize that parents don’t all have the same choices. A single parent working two jobs has a very different set of constraints than a family with abundant time and resources. We shouldn’t turn developmental science into another tool for judging parents. In fact, I think the opposite should happen: We should use this knowledge to demand systems that make human connection easier for every family.

Q: If AI gets better at answering questions, creating things and solving problems, what ‘human’ skills should parents intentionally cultivate?

A: I love this question. The more capable AI becomes, the more valuable the skills that aren’t simply about producing an answer become. I’d focus on curiosity, critical thinking, creativity, empathy, collaboration, communication, perspective-taking, frustration tolerance and the ability to navigate ambiguity.

Capabilities that used to be dismissed as soft skills will become sought after. I call this phenomenon the Human Edge. The empathy to read a room before anyone speaks will go farther than ever. The critical thinking to question what AI confidently gets wrong will become essential, as will the moral judgment to decide what AI should do, not just what it can.

The World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2025, which surveyed more than 1,000 employers, identified empathy, resilience and creative thinking as the fastest-rising skills in the global economy. Those are also, not coincidentally, the skills with zero substitution potential from AI.

Q: What are you most optimistic about when you think about children growing up alongside AI?

A: What makes me optimistic is that the things children need for healthy development haven’t changed. AI may transform how children learn, work and create, but it doesn’t change the science of a developing brain. Children still need to be talked to, played with, comforted, challenged, listened to and loved. They still need to experience boredom, frustration, curiosity and the joy of figuring something out for themselves.

In fact, I think AI could ultimately help us see the value of those human experiences more clearly. When a machine can produce an essay, generate an image or answer a question in seconds, we have to ask what is uniquely valuable about being human. I’m optimistic that this moment gives us an opportunity to be really conscious about that answer. Rather than allowing technology to determine what childhood becomes, we can decide what we want to protect. We can use AI to eliminate some of the drudgery and give adults more time and bandwidth for the things machines can’t provide.

Q: What should a parent do tonight to protect the human connection in their family?

A: Put down the phone and do something ordinary together. Have dinner. Take a walk. Read a book. Let your child tell you a story. We can get really focused on finding the perfect technology rules, the best tutor and so on. But some of the most powerful things parents can do are incredibly simple: look at your child, listen to them, follow their curiosity, give them your attention.

And if you want one practical AI rule tonight, I’d make it this: Identify one moment in your family’s day that will remain unapologetically human. Maybe bedtime, breakfast, the walk home from school or the first 10 minutes after everyone gets home. No AI, no phones, no multitasking. Just people. Protecting childhood doesn’t mean creating a completely tech-free home. It just means making sure the tech never becomes more important than the relationships it’s supposed to serve.