Fines for Parents and Corrective Work for School Principals: New Ways to Counter Dangerous Internet Challenges Proposed in Parliament

The modern generation of children and teenagers undergoes socialization in conditions completely different from the experience of any previous generation. The term "screen childhood" has ceased to be merely a metaphor, transforming into a legal and criminological factor. A smartphone with unrestricted internet access is an integral part of a minor's living space, shaping their worldview, value orientations, behavior models, and social connections.

The main danger of modern cyberspace lies in the fact that it is governed by complex recommendation algorithms of major technological platforms (TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, Telegram). These algorithms are designed with a single commercial goal: to maximize user attention on the screen. For children and teenagers, whose psyches are still developing and whose critical thinking, emotional self-regulation, and risk assessment abilities are not yet fully formed, such a mechanism creates a particular danger. Approximately 25% of children have encountered calls to perform dangerous or humiliating actions disguised as "games" or "challenges."

Traditional social control and protection institutions—family, educational institutions, and law enforcement agencies—lag behind the pace of evolution of virtual threats. Parents often have a lower level of digital literacy than their children, schools are limited to outdated lectures about "safe internet," and the police mostly act post factum, when an offense has already led to irreversible consequences in the real world, such as self-harm, sabotage, or sexual exploitation.

Legislative Breakthrough: Registration of Projects 15395 and 15396

Two important bills have been registered in the Verkhovna Rada.

Project No. 15395: Amendments to laws to ensure psychological safety and protect participants in the educational process from destructive internet trends.

Project No. 15396: Amendments to the Code of Administrative Offences to counter such trends.

These initiatives aim to create a legal framework that will safeguard the educational environment from viral, dangerous games, and provide the state with effective mechanisms to address the spread of harmful content.

Project 15395 proposes amendments to the laws "On Education" and "On Complete General Secondary Education," focusing on terminology and staff responsibilities.

A definition of "destructive internet trend (game)" is introduced. This refers to a mass behavioural model in networks that encourages students to actions threatening their life, health (including mental health), or dignity. Importantly, this concept is clearly distinguished from bullying, as these trends often lack a specific victim and are instead aimed at "mass psychological infection."

The school principal will be responsible for measures to detect and prevent students' participation in such games. This applies not only to the school premises but also to distance learning and the use of school information resources.

Teachers will be obliged to conduct explanatory work and immediately report to management any instances of children's participation in dangerous challenges.

Schools are explicitly prohibited from using their premises or official resources for photo and video recording of destructive trends for the purpose of their dissemination. This is intended to prevent the creation of hype-driven content directly within the educational environment.

Project 15396 supplements the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO) with a new Article 173-3, which establishes a clear hierarchy of responsibility.

Involvement or coercion to participate in destructive games will incur a fine ranging from 50 to 100 non-taxable minimum incomes (850–1700 UAH) or community service.

If such actions are committed by minors (under 16 years), their parents will bear responsibility in the form of a similar fine. This reinforces the existing logic of Article 184 of the CAO regarding the duty to oversee a child's digital activities.

Concealment—failure to report to the police about students' participation in dangerous trends—will result in the head of the educational institution facing a fine from 100 to 200 non-taxable minimum incomes (1700–3400 UAH) or corrective labour. This aims to overcome the practice of concealing incidents to protect the institution's reputation.

Project 15395 instructs the Ministry of Education and Science to develop specific methodological recommendations for teachers on detecting and responding to such threats.

Adopting this package of laws will empower school administrations with the legal authority to stop destructive behaviour and enhance parents' digital literacy. The primary goal is to create a psychologically comfortable environment and reduce the level of child trauma and suicides caused by manipulative online games.

However, any attempt at state regulation of the internet space inevitably faces a legal dilemma: where does legitimate child protection end and censorship begin? By introducing liability for creating destructive internet trends, the legislator must act precisely to avoid limiting fundamental civil freedoms.

To build an effective legal protection system, it is necessary to clearly differentiate and classify key destructive trends that threaten Ukrainian teenagers in the digital environment.

From a legal perspective, the digital environment poses new challenges to criminal law and necessitates a re-evaluation of certain legal constructs. These include establishing the objective elements of a criminal offence, the place of commission, causal links, and offender identification. On the Internet, a criminal can act anonymously, operate outside Ukraine's jurisdiction, and utilise video content, streams, chatbots, hyperlinks, or other digital communication methods. Under such conditions, traditional investigation and criminal law qualification mechanisms require adaptation to modern digital realities to ensure effective child protection in cyberspace.

To build an effective legal protection system, it is essential to classify the main digital threats faced by Ukrainian teenagers. Five key areas can be identified: suicidal and self-harming communities that employ psychological manipulation and blackmail; dangerous viral challenges that encourage risky behaviour; cyberbullying, hating, and doxing related to systematic online harassment and the dissemination of personal data; sextortion, which combines sexual blackmail with financial extortion; and radicalisation and the involvement of minors in illegal activities, including sabotage, arson, and illegal drug trafficking via anonymous digital platforms. These phenomena pose not only criminological but also security threats, demanding comprehensive legal countermeasures.

International Practice: From Immunity to Multimillion-Dollar Payouts

Until recently, the USA operated under "Section 230," which exempted social networks from liability for user publications. However, recent court precedents demonstrate that if an algorithm itself selects and promotes a dangerous video to a child's "For You" feed, the platform becomes responsible for the consequences.

Venezuelan Precedent: The Supreme Court of Venezuela fined TikTok $10 million due to viral challenges that resulted in the deaths of three children. The company was mandated to open an official representative office in the country for prompt response.

K.G.M. Case (California): In March 2026, a jury found Meta (Instagram) and Google (YouTube) guilty of harming a girl's mental health, awarding $6 million in compensation. The court established that the app design (infinite scrolling, push notifications) was developed on the principle of slot machines to foster addiction.

Italian Tragedy: The parents of a 12-year-old girl proved that after the child began searching for depressive content, algorithms purposefully selected videos about self-harm for her over five months, ultimately leading to suicide.

School Districts vs. Tech Giants: Over 1500 lawsuits have been filed on behalf of schools (including Boston and Kentucky). Platforms are accused of disrupting the educational process and students' mental health. In Kentucky, social networks have already agreed to pay schools $27 million to settle claims out of court.

Ukrainian Realities: Parental Responsibility and National Security Threats

Currently, Ukraine lacks the practice of direct lawsuits against corporations such as Meta or TikTok. The main reasons are the absence of official representatives to serve rulings and the complexity of collective lawsuit mechanisms.

Current judicial practice in Ukraine is developing in three directions:

Parental Punishment (Article 184 CAO): Courts routinely fine parents for improper upbringing if children participate in dangerous challenges (e.g., making homemade firecrackers following TikTok instructions) or engage in cyberbullying.

Administrative Responsibility of Teenagers: For humiliating challenges or disrupting live lessons, teenagers receive punishment under the article "Petty Hooliganism."

Criminal Cases (Russian Sabotage): The most dangerous segment involves challenge-tasks on Telegram/TikTok curated by Russian special services. Teenagers are coerced into arson of military vehicles or relay cabinets. Courts issue real sentences under articles pertaining to treason and sabotage, including for challenge organisers.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua, follow SUD.UA on Google News , and join us on VIBER, WhatsApp, Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the important events.