Research challenges the effectiveness of simple warnings for teenagers about sharing sexual images

New research from the University of Surrey warns that traditional warnings preventing teenagers from sharing sexual images may be counterproductive, advocating for more nuanced safeguarding strategies that focus on emotional safety and trust.

Warnings that tell teenagers simply not to share sexual images may be doing more harm than good, according to new research from the University of Surrey. The study argues that blanket messages such as “just say no” can leave young people feeling ashamed, blamed and less likely to ask for help when they have been harmed by image-based sexual abuse. Researchers say the problem is not limited to self-produced images, because artificial intelligence now makes it possible for a young person to be targeted with sexual images even if they have never created one themselves.

The findings, published in the journal Sexualities, suggest that schools, child protection services and the justice system are often responding to these cases in ways that are fragmented and overly punitive. According to the University of Surrey, professionals can become fixated on confiscating phones, preserving evidence or protecting institutions from embarrassment, while paying less attention to the emotional and social harm experienced by the young person. The researchers also warn that confused legal and safeguarding boundaries can mean the same incident is treated very differently depending on who handles it.

The article is based on a review of existing evidence and on a 2025 workshop involving 38 professionals from education, law enforcement, frontline services, academia, policy and the technology sector. In the paper and in the university’s account of it, the authors say current responses often fail to reflect how digital intimacy actually works in young people’s lives, where image-sharing can be tied to relationships, trust, pressure and experimentation as well as abuse. They also highlight newer threats such as sexual deepfakes and sextortion, the latter involving blackmail linked to sexual images.

To address that gap, Emily Setty and Jonny Hunt propose what they call “safe uncertainty”, a framework that aims to balance decisive action with a more careful reading of each case. Rather than relying on rigid checklists, they argue that schools and safeguarding staff should consider coercion, breached trust, shame, peer pressure and the young person’s emotional safety before deciding how to respond. Setty said in the university’s release that “Telling young people to ‘just don’t send nudes’ is no longer a credible child protection response”, adding that professionals need to meet disclosures with care rather than suspicion. Hunt and Setty argue that the priority should be restoring safety, dignity and trust.