Rethinking Youth Privacy

*Danielle Keats Citron, Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law; Vice President, Cyber Civil Rights Initiative; 2019 MacArthur Fellow. Ari Ezra Waldman, Professor of Law and, by courtesy, Professor of Sociology, University of California, Irvine School of Law; Member, Board of Directors, Cyber Civil Rights Initiative. Special thanks to Alice Abrokwa, Anita Allen, Anu Bradford, Naomi Cahn, Ryan Calo, Ellie Citron, Maxine Eichner, Fanna Gamal, Alison Gocke, Woodrow Hartzog, Clare Huntington, Paul Schwartz, Kate Silbaugh, Scott Skinner-Thompson, Mona Sloane, Daniel Solove, Kathy Strandburg, Catharine Ward, and Phil Weiser (who graciously joined UVA Law’s Spring 2024 Privacy 1 class to discuss his work on youth privacy). Matthew Hamilton, Ryan Johnston, Zoe Kirsner, Adeline Lee, Olivia Sahid, and Shivani Vikuntam provided outstanding research assistance. Kate Boudouris is a librarian extraordinaire, and Michaela Thompson a superb assistant. The editors of the Virginia Law Review went above and beyond in their skilled efforts; we are grateful to Tyler Tidwell, Derek Furr, Olivia Haimerl, and all of the editors who worked on this piece. We thank our respective Deans Leslie Kendrick and Austen Parrish for their support. The authors contributed equally to the Article, so names are listed alphabetically.Show More

Congress and state legislatures are showing renewed interest in youth privacy, proposing myriad new laws to address data extraction, addiction, manipulation, and more. Almost all of their proposals, and youth privacy law in general, follow what we call the parental control model. The model is erected in the name of children, but it mostly ignores their expressed privacy interests. Under the model, parents are asked to provide consent for the collection of children’s data, to check on the handling of that data, and to protect children from danger. Because parental control dominates policymaking and scholarly discourse, it goes unquestioned. This Article challenges the status quo. Parental control risks harm to vulnerable children, overburdens caregivers (who are more often women), and denies youth the intimate privacy that they need to grow and develop close relationships, including, ironically, relationships with their parents. The parental control model disserves nearly everyone involved except companies that press for its adoption because it earns them massive advertising profits without costly responsibilities for youth safety and privacy. The time is now to reimagine the youth privacy project. We need to shed the yoke of exclusive parental control and to protect the intimate privacy that youth want, expect, and deserve. Our proposal foregrounds youth voices and intimate privacy interests. It calls for policymakers to address corporate amassing of youth data and to place responsibility on their shoulders, which accords with what young people say they want. Companies are best situated to secure youth privacy and to minimize risks to child safety. Beyond law, parents should be encouraged to act more as partners with their children in the effort to protect their intimate privacy. That personal imperative will redound to parents’ and children’s benefit and engender trust and love.

Introduction

The privacy afforded young people is under threat. Social media companies track and share young people’s online activities with advertisers, generating billions in profits.¹ 1.Alfred Ng, Where Parental Snooping Is Becoming the Law, Politico (Apr. 11, 2023, 1:50 PM), https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/11/social-media-privacy-parents-kids-00‌091400.Show More Commercial websites trap young people in endless loops of data extraction, data-driven targeted advertisements, and video feeds that manipulate behavior, facilitate addiction, and increase screen time.² 2.Samuel Levine, Bureau of Consumer Prot., Protecting Kids From Stealth Advertising in Digital Media 1–5 (2023), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/p214505kidsadvertis‌ingstaffperspective092023.pdf [https://perma.cc/39DS-KZYF].Show More Surveillance software monitors students’ laptop and tablet activities to detect bullying, suicidal ideation, and threats.³ 3.Nir Kshetri, School Surveillance of Students via Laptops May Do More Harm Than Good, The 74 (Jan. 19, 2022), https://www.the74million.org/article/school-surveillance-of-students-via-laptops-may-do-more-harm-than-good/ [https://perma.cc/MMX8-79LE].Show More

Parental supervision has been policymakers’ go-to solution to securing youth privacy interests for decades. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (“COPPA”) requires websites and online services to ask parents for permission to handle children’s personal data and requires parents to contact those services to stop the further collection and sale of their children’s personal data.⁴ 4.E.g., Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) of 1998, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506.Show More On January 16, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), which enforces COPPA, finalized changes to its COPPA Rule to give parents control over advertisements targeted to children.⁵ 5.Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, 16 C.F.R. § 312 (2025).Show More The Kids Online Safety Act, which the Senate passed in June 2024, would enhance parental authority by requiring online platforms to provide controls for parents so they can monitor accounts held by children aged sixteen and younger.⁶ 6.Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act, S. 2073, 118th Cong. § 103(b) (as passed by Senate, July 30, 2024); see also H.B. 311, 2023 Gen. Sess., Reg. Sess. (Utah 2023) (“Social Media Usage Amendments”); S.B. 152, 2023 Gen. Sess., Reg. Sess. (Utah 2023) (giving parents power to monitor children’s social media accounts without their knowledge or permission).Show More

Under the mandate of law and the hydraulics of social pressure, parents have gotten the message that they should be monitoring their children.⁷ 7.See, e.g., What Parents Should Know About Parental Control Apps, Nat’l Cybersecurity All. (June 28, 2023), https://staysafeonline.org/programs/events/what-parents-should-know-a‌bout-parental-control-apps-webinar/ [https://perma.cc/7R48-S727] (“[A]n essential part of parenting in the 21st Century is monitoring your children’s digital lives . . . [so] parents can work to keep their kids safe.”); Top 10 Best Parental Control Apps (2025), Fam. Online Safety, https://www.familyonlinesafety.com/best-paretnal-control-apps [https://perma.cc/DHT4-5‌TXT] (last updated Oct. 2025) (“Parental control apps are fast becoming a must have for any parent.”).Show More According to one study, 90% of parents surveyed try to monitor the digital activities of younger children (aged six through twelve); 40% of parents say that they endeavor to monitor the activities of older children (aged thirteen through seventeen).⁸ 8.Microsoft, Global Online Safety Survey 2024, at 38–39 (2024), https://news.microsoft.co‌m/wp-content/uploads/prod/sites/40/2024/02/Microsoft-Global-Online-Safety-Survey-2024.‌pdf [https://perma.cc/R6WM-LFFY] (explaining that parents surveyed monitored children by receiving activity reports, reviewing friend requests, and reviewing and adjusting children’s privacy settings on accounts and devices).Show More Utah State Senator Kathleen Riebe, who uses an app to control her son’s phone, urges fellow parents to do the same.⁹ 9.Utah Senate, Senate Floor Audio on S.B. 152, Day 28, 2023 Gen. Sess., at 01:05:58 (Feb. 13, 2023) [hereinafter Utah Senate Audio (Feb. 13, 2023)], https://le.utah.gov/av/floorArchive‌.jsp?markerID=121381 [https://perma.cc/34RU-SG94] (statement of Sen. Kathleen Riebe).Show More

The prevailing approach to children’s privacy in the United States follows what we call the parental control model—the ecosystem of laws, practices, logic, and ideologies that give parents authority over children’s privacy interests. That model is erected in the name of children’s privacy, but it mostly excludes youth and their privacy interests from the calculus.

Lawmakers are scrambling to tackle profoundly harmful corporate practices that exploit children’s data, including the manipulation of young people to consume material that causes self-doubt, depression, and suicide and exposes children to harassment and predation. Policymakers’ go-to response—parental control—is a failure. While the parental control model was never well suited to protect children’s privacy, it cannot meet this moment.

No parent, no matter how well intentioned and resourced, can ensure that children’s privacy is prioritized and protected. No parent can meaningfully curtail corporate data collection, either for themselves or their children.¹⁰ 10.See Geoffrey A. Fowler, Your Kids’ Apps Are Spying on Them, Wash. Post (June 9, 2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/09/apps-kids-privacy/ (noting that by the time a person turns thirteen, “online advertising firms hold an average of 72 million data points” on them).Show More Therefore, the inevitable result of parental authority is more corporate monetization of children’s data.¹¹ 11.Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm’n, FTC Staff Report Finds Large Social Media and Video Streaming Companies Have Engaged in Vast Surveillance of Users with Lax Privacy Controls and Inadequate Safeguards for Kids and Teens (Sept. 19, 2024), https://www.ftc.gov/‌news-events/news/press-releases/2024/09/ftc-staff-report-finds-large-social-media-video-stre‌aming-companies-have-engaged-vast-surveillance [https://perma.cc/UUT7-RFES] (detailing “the data collection and use practices of major social media and video streaming services” to “incentivize[] mass collection of user data to monetize, especially through targeted advertising”).Show More As for safety, even if parents could minimize or prevent some hazards, exclusive parental responsibilities mean exclusive parental burdens, and parents are ill-equipped to shoulder them. Also, not all parents are well meaning: youth have been thrown out of their homes or beaten after adults discovered children’s emerging LGBTQ+ identities by accessing their private online activities.¹² 12.Jamie Gorosh & Chris Wood, LGBT Tech & Future of Priv. F., Student Voices: LGBTQ+ Experiences in the Connected Classroom 7 (2023) (noting a 2020 survey by the Trevor Project that found “29% of LGBTQ+ youth have experienced homelessness, been kicked out of their homes, or have run away” (citation omitted)); see also Anne Collier, Why I Struggle Mightily with the New Utah Law, Net Fam. News (Mar. 30, 2023), https://www.netfamilynews.org/wh‌y-i-struggle-mightily-with-the-new-utah-law [https://perma.cc/L2AG-NDHR] (arguing that laws giving parents control over children’s online accounts “could end up supporting abusive parents who use it to monitor and punish children who use social media to get help”).Show More

The parental control model has a perverse downside: it undermines the very privacy that young people need to grow, mature, and thrive. In this Article, we use the term youth intimate privacy to refer to the privacy that young people claim, expect, and deserve.¹³ 13. See generally Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age, at xii–xiii (2022) [hereinafter Citron, Fight for Privacy]. Intimate privacy is a capacious privacy interest that is critical to identity development, self-esteem, and love; it has special importance because it helps youth learn the skills of autonomy, independence, and relationship building, which are essential for adulthood. See infra Section III.B. We focus on youth intimate privacy for practical and normative reasons. Much of what law regulates implicates youth intimate privacy, and the privacy that most matters to human flourishing involves the privacy around our intimate lives. See generally infra Part III. Because of its importance and because even prosaic personal data becomes intimate data when amassed, we use the phrase youth intimate privacy interchangeably with youth privacy unless we signal otherwise.Show More Youth intimate privacy involves others’ access to, and information about, minors’ bodies, thoughts, health, sex, gender, sexual orientation, sexual activities, and close relationships, whether in physical or digital activities or spaces.¹⁴ 14.Citron, Fight for Privacy, supra note 13, at xii.Show More Youth need intimate privacy for maturation, self-esteem, and close relationships.¹⁵ 15.Danielle Keats Citron, The Surveilled Student, 76 Stan. L. Rev. 1439, 1457–60 (2024) [hereinafter Citron, Surveilled Student].Show More Intimate privacy is a prerequisite for autonomy and maturation.¹⁶ 16.See, e.g., Maxine Wolfe, Childhood and Privacy, in Children and the Environment 175, 189 (Irwin Altman & Joachim F. Wohlwill eds., 1978) (explaining that “children’s experiences with privacy feed back into their sense of self-esteem and help define the range, limits, and consequences of individual autonomy”); Ross D. Parke, Children’s Home Environments: Social and Cognitive Effects, in Children and the Environment, supra, at 33, 66–68 (explaining how children’s need for privacy increases with age and varies by situation and activity).Show More Only with privacy can children grow and develop into democratic citizens, an oft-stated goal of parenting, education, and socialization.¹⁷ 17.See W. Va. Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 637 (1943) (“That [public schools] are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual . . . .”).Show More

Current privacy law ignores all of this and damages youth intimate privacy. It also frays parent-child relationships rather than enhances them.¹⁸ 18.Valerian J. Derlega & Alan L. Chaikin, Sharing Intimacy: What We Reveal to Others and Why 15 (1975) (explaining that children can and occasionally will claim zones of privacy and that when parents disrespect those zones, children lose the trust necessary for close relationships).Show More Because children under parental surveillance feel that their trust has been betrayed, they do their best to hide their online activities from their parents.¹⁹ 19.For a recent example, see Denise Witmer, Why Teens Need Privacy From Their Parents, Yahoo (July 29, 2024, 11:36 AM), https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/why-teens-privacy-paren‌ts-153635430.html [https://perma.cc/U2Q2-DNNV]. Part IV explores the rich social science literature in detail.Show More This puts youth at greater risk from the very hazards that rightly worry parents and policymakers.²⁰ 20.Ng, supra note 1 (“Researchers have found that parental monitoring apps . . . were associated with increased chances of teen online victimization, compared to teens whose parents didn’t use monitoring services.”); see Citron, Fight for Privacy, supra note 13, at 14–15 (explaining that some health apps pose risks to young women and girls’ health privacy and safety); Ari Ezra Waldman, Privacy as Trust: Information Privacy for an Information Age 62–78 (2018) [hereinafter Waldman, Privacy as Trust].Show More

In short, the parental control model is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. It is an empowering facade that leaves parents unable to protect children and undermines the intimate privacy that youth need to thrive. It is bad for parents, children, and parent-child relationships. And it is bad for the pursuit of equality. The parental control model places impossible burdens on caregivers, many of whom are women.²¹ 21.Microsoft, supra note 8, at 39 (identifying mothers as more active in monitoring their children’s online activities).Show More It does the opposite of what it purports to do—it hurts parents and children, and it does not lead to greater privacy protections. Indeed, the central beneficiaries of parental control are the companies that earn massive profits from exploiting children’s data and endangering their safety.

Policymakers must reckon with the inadequacies of the current approach. They should reject exclusive parental control and choose a structural and collaborative posture to youth intimate privacy for the good of children, parents, families, and democracy. We propose a new model to do just that. Our approach foregrounds youth voices and interests, prioritizes legal reform focused on corporate responsibility, encourages parental-child collaboration, and supports young people and their parents.

Now is the time to rethink youth intimate privacy. Federal proposals are being introduced and debated. States are filling the void, but their work is just beginning. Plus, the risks are undeniable: the advertising-driven information economy invades young people’s privacy at alarming rates.²² 22.Katie Joseff, Behavioral Advertising Harms: Kids and Teens, Common Sense Media 2–3 (2022), https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/featured-content/files/beha‌vioral_-surveillance-advertising-brief.pdf [https://perma.cc/N2S7-XFTK] (noting that the advertising technology industry has at least seventy-two million data points about each child before they are thirteen).Show More Rapidly advancing artificial intelligence metastasizes those privacy risks by increasing demand for data about individuals.²³ 23.E.g., Harry Surden, Artificial Intelligence and Law: An Overview, 35 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 1305, 1315–16 (2019).Show More Adolescents, particularly young women, face the dangers of image-based sexual abuse and pornographic deepfakes.²⁴ 24.Natasha Singer, Teen Girls Confront an Epidemic of Deepfake Nudes in Schools, N.Y. Times (Apr. 8, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/technology/deepfake-ai-nudes-w‌estfield-high-school.html.Show More

In developing this argument, this Article makes several contributions to legal scholarship. We challenge the conventional approach that automatically associates parental privacy control with youth privacy. We interrogate the often-ignored step of relying upon parents to the exclusion, and sometimes to the detriment, of children themselves. We unearth legislative history showing that many so-labeled youth privacy laws were drafted to empower parents to dictate young peoples’ activities, rather than to directly secure youth privacy interests. We highlight youth perspectives on intimate privacy, drawn from state legislative testimony, which have been left out of scholarly discussion in the United States. Our vision of youth privacy law charts a more straightforward, inclusive, and productive path. It begins with structural reform because individualized efforts are ineffective, burdensome, and isolating. It calls for the involvement of all parties (including youth, parents, and schools) in securing youth privacy interests. Adjusting parental control at the margins or shifting domination from parents to young people or schools is insufficient.

This Article has four parts. Part I shows the breadth of the parental control model. It surfaces the tradition of parental privacy authority in youth privacy law, from the rules governing the collection and processing of children’s data by digital platforms to data concerning youth as students.

Part II uncovers the prevailing rationales for the parental control model, filling a gap left by existing privacy scholarship that has, for the most part, assumed that parental control is obvious and acceptable. Those explanations involve distinct but interrelated categories: social science, norms, and legal policy. First, we show that the parental control model depends on a particular view of childhood development that sees maturity, defined by age, as a prerequisite for making informed choices about privacy. Second, the parental control model is based on legal rationales borrowed from consumer privacy, including the rationality demands of the “notice-and-consent” approach whereby adults are presumed to read privacy policies and make choices about online disclosure.²⁵ 25.The literature on notice-and-consent is voluminous. For discussions specifically connecting notice-and-consent with the presumption of rationality, see, e.g., Ari Ezra Waldman, Industry Unbound: The Inside Story of Privacy, Data, and Corporate Power 52–63 (2021); Woodrow Hartzog, Privacy’s Blueprint: The Battle to Control the Design of New Technologies 35–36 (2018).Show More Last, it reflects norms of the family in which adults inculcate children with their values and ideals.

Part III challenges these rationales, finding them uninformed, overinclusive, and discriminatory. This Part highlights how exclusive parental control over youth privacy is not supported by the social science literature, which emphasizes the importance of privacy to childhood development. It explores how social norm-based rationales for parental control are based on an overly romanticized conception of the family, in terms of both gender roles and the relationship between caregivers and youth. Relying on this vision of the family sweeps aside the reality that many young people, including LGBTQ+ children, grow up without that romanticized family dynamic. Finally, this Part shows how the legal rationales border on the absurd: a long line of studies shows that adults are incapable of bearing the burden of privacy self-management and effectuating their own privacy preferences,²⁶ 26.See, e.g., Daniel J. Solove, Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma, 126 Harv. L. Rev. 1880, 1882–93 (2013).Show More and yet current law expects them to do so not only for themselves but also for their children.

Part IV offers a new model for youth intimate privacy based on four principles: respect for youth voices, structural reform, collaboration, and support. Lawmakers and regulatory authorities should step in to ensure that youth intimate privacy interests are secured in the information economy—the time is now to regulate the very companies whose data-extractive practices undermine youth intimate privacy and endanger child safety. Lawmakers can and should collaborate with and listen to young people about their privacy expectations and needs. Schools and youth can support parents, alleviating parental isolation from systems of support and bearing some of the burdens. We consider this piece a first step, not a precise road map. We want to encourage the development of a youth intimate privacy project that can evolve to meet new challenges and accommodate different interests.

1.  Alfred Ng, Where Parental Snooping Is Becoming the Law, Politico (Apr. 11, 2023, 1:50 PM), https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/11/social-media-privacy-parents-kids-00‌091400. ↑
2.  Samuel Levine, Bureau of Consumer Prot., Protecting Kids From Stealth Advertising in Digital Media 1–5 (2023), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/p214505kidsadvertis‌ingstaffperspective092023.pdf [https://perma.cc/39DS-KZYF]. ↑
3.  Nir Kshetri, School Surveillance of Students via Laptops May Do More Harm Than Good, The 74 (Jan. 19, 2022), https://www.the74million.org/article/school-surveillance-of-students-via-laptops-may-do-more-harm-than-good/ [https://perma.cc/MMX8-79LE]. ↑
4.  E.g., Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) of 1998, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506. ↑
5.  Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, 16 C.F.R. § 312 (2025). ↑
6.  Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act, S. 2073, 118th Cong. § 103(b) (as passed by Senate, July 30, 2024); see also H.B. 311, 2023 Gen. Sess., Reg. Sess. (Utah 2023) (“Social Media Usage Amendments”); S.B. 152, 2023 Gen. Sess., Reg. Sess. (Utah 2023) (giving parents power to monitor children’s social media accounts without their knowledge or permission). ↑
7.  See, e.g., What Parents Should Know About Parental Control Apps, Nat’l Cybersecurity All. (June 28, 2023), https://staysafeonline.org/programs/events/what-parents-should-know-a‌bout-parental-control-apps-webinar/ [https://perma.cc/7R48-S727] (“[A]n essential part of parenting in the 21st Century is monitoring your children’s digital lives . . . [so] parents can work to keep their kids safe.”); Top 10 Best Parental Control Apps (2025), Fam. Online Safety, https://www.familyonlinesafety.com/best-paretnal-control-apps [https://perma.cc/DHT4-5‌TXT] (last updated Oct. 2025) (“Parental control apps are fast becoming a must have for any parent.”). ↑
8.  Microsoft, Global Online Safety Survey
   

   2024,

   at 38–39 (2024), https://news.microsoft.co‌m/wp-content/uploads/prod/sites/40/2024/02/Microsoft-Global-Online-Safety-Survey-2024.‌pdf [https://perma.cc/R6WM-LFFY] (explaining that parents surveyed monitored children by receiving activity reports, reviewing friend requests, and reviewing and adjusting children’s privacy settings on accounts and devices). ↑

9.  Utah Senate, Senate Floor Audio on S.B. 152, Day 28, 2023 Gen. Sess., at 01:05:58 (Feb. 13, 2023) [hereinafter Utah Senate Audio (Feb. 13, 2023)], https://le.utah.gov/av/floorArchive‌.jsp?markerID=121381 [https://perma.cc/34RU-SG94] (statement of Sen. Kathleen Riebe). ↑
10.  See Geoffrey A. Fowler, Your Kids’ Apps Are Spying on Them, Wash. Post (June 9, 2022), https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/09/apps-kids-privacy/ (noting that by the time a person turns thirteen, “online advertising firms hold an average of 72 million data points” on them). ↑
11.  Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm’n, FTC Staff Report Finds Large Social Media and Video Streaming Companies Have Engaged in Vast Surveillance of Users with Lax Privacy Controls and Inadequate Safeguards for Kids and Teens (Sept. 19, 2024), https://www.ftc.gov/‌news-events/news/press-releases/2024/09/ftc-staff-report-finds-large-social-media-video-stre‌aming-companies-have-engaged-vast-surveillance [https://perma.cc/UUT7-RFES] (detailing “the data collection and use practices of major social media and video streaming services” to “incentivize[] mass collection of user data to monetize, especially through targeted advertising”). ↑
12.  Jamie Gorosh & Chris Wood, LGBT Tech & Future of Priv. F., Student Voices: LGBTQ+ Experiences in the Connected Classroom
    

    7

    (2023) (noting a 2020 survey by the Trevor Project that found “29% of LGBTQ+ youth have experienced homelessness, been kicked out of their homes, or have run away” (citation omitted)); see also Anne Collier, Why I Struggle Mightily with the New Utah Law, Net Fam. News (Mar. 30, 2023), https://www.netfamilynews.org/wh‌y-i-struggle-mightily-with-the-new-utah-law [https://perma.cc/L2AG-NDHR] (arguing that laws giving parents control over children’s online accounts “could end up supporting abusive parents who use it to monitor and punish children who use social media to get help”). ↑

13.  See generally Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity, and Love in the Digital Age, at xii–xiii (2022) [hereinafter Citron, Fight for Privacy]. Intimate privacy is a capacious privacy interest that is critical to identity development, self-esteem, and love; it has special importance because it helps youth learn the skills of autonomy, independence, and relationship building, which are essential for adulthood. See infra Section III.B. We focus on youth intimate privacy for practical and normative reasons. Much of what law regulates implicates youth intimate privacy, and the privacy that most matters to human flourishing involves the privacy around our intimate lives. See generally infra Part III. Because of its importance and because even prosaic personal data becomes intimate data when amassed, we use the phrase youth intimate privacy interchangeably with youth privacy unless we signal otherwise. ↑
14.  Citron, Fight for Privacy, supra note 13, at xii. ↑
15.  Danielle Keats Citron, The Surveilled Student,
    

    76

    Stan. L. Rev. 1439, 1457–60 (2024) [hereinafter Citron, Surveilled Student]. ↑

16.  See, e.g., Maxine Wolfe, Childhood and Privacy, in Children and the Environment 175, 189 (Irwin Altman & Joachim F. Wohlwill eds., 1978) (explaining that “children’s experiences with privacy feed back into their sense of self-esteem and help define the range, limits, and consequences of individual autonomy”); Ross D. Parke, Children’s Home Environments: Social and Cognitive Effects, in Children and the Environment, supra, at 33, 66–68 (explaining how children’s need for privacy increases with age and varies by situation and activity). ↑
17.  See W. Va. Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 637 (1943) (“That [public schools] are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual . . . .”). ↑
18.  Valerian J. Derlega & Alan L. Chaikin, Sharing Intimacy: What We Reveal to Others and Why 15 (1975) (explaining that children can and occasionally will claim zones of privacy and that when parents disrespect those zones, children lose the trust necessary for close relationships). ↑
19.  For a recent example, see Denise Witmer, Why Teens Need Privacy From Their Parents, Yahoo (July 29, 2024, 11:36 AM), https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/why-teens-privacy-paren‌ts-153635430.html [https://perma.cc/U2Q2-DNNV]. Part IV explores the rich social science literature in detail. ↑
20.  Ng, supra note 1 (“Researchers have found that parental monitoring apps . . . were associated with increased chances of teen online victimization, compared to teens whose parents didn’t use monitoring services.”); see Citron, Fight for Privacy, supra note 13, at 14–15 (explaining that some health apps pose risks to young women and girls’ health privacy and safety); Ari Ezra Waldman, Privacy as Trust: Information Privacy for an Information Age 62–78 (2018) [hereinafter Waldman, Privacy as Trust]. ↑
21.  Microsoft, supra note 8, at 39 (identifying mothers as more active in monitoring their children’s online activities). ↑
22.  Katie Joseff, Behavioral Advertising Harms: Kids and Teens, Common Sense Media 2–3 (2022), https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/featured-content/files/beha‌vioral_-surveillance-advertising-brief.pdf [https://perma.cc/N2S7-XFTK] (noting that the advertising technology industry has at least seventy-two million data points about each child before they are thirteen). ↑
23.  E.g., Harry Surden, Artificial Intelligence and Law: An Overview, 35 Ga. St. U. L. Rev. 1305, 1315–16 (2019). ↑
24.  Natasha Singer, Teen Girls Confront an Epidemic of Deepfake Nudes in Schools, N.Y. Times
    

    (

    Apr. 8, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/08/technology/deepfake-ai-nudes-w‌estfield-high-school.html. ↑

25.  The literature on notice-and-consent is voluminous. For discussions specifically connecting notice-and-consent with the presumption of rationality, see, e.g., Ari Ezra Waldman, Industry Unbound: The Inside Story of Privacy, Data, and Corporate Power 52–63 (2021); Woodrow Hartzog, Privacy’s Blueprint: The Battle to Control the Design of New Technologies 35–36 (2018). ↑

26.  See, e.g., Daniel J. Solove, Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma,

    126

    Harv. L. Rev.

    1880, 1882–93

    (2013). ↑