AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material (“AI-CSAM”): new guidance and practical implications for youth justice practitioners in England & Wales

18th August 2025

Understanding and responding to AI-Generated CSAM 

The National Crime Agency (“NCA”) and Internet Watch Foundation (“IWF”) have issued companion publications[1] and commentary[2] offering practical guidance for professionals on the evolving problem of AI-CSAM (collectively, the “Guidance”). These clarify the current legal position, outline safeguarding and evidential duties, and suggest step-by-step general response protocols in England & Wales. 

Details

Current legal framework

  1. The distribution and possession of AI-CSAM is illegal in England & Wales: Section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978[3] criminalises the taking, distribution and possession of an ‘indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child’, and Section 62 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009[4] extends the offence to ‘prohibited images’ that are non-photorealistic, including cartoons, illustrations and animations.
  2. The method of creation of AI-CSAM is irrelevant: whether the image is fabricated by a generative model or manipulated from existing material, the offence is complete upon possession or distribution, as applicable.
  3. Children producing or sharing AI-CSAM are liable to prosecution, although the same diversionary principles that apply to other child offences, such as youth cautions under the out of court disposals framework under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012[5], remain available.

Threat landscape

  1. The Guidance suggests that practitioners are generally encountering AI-CSAM in two scenarios:
    1. peer-on-peer ‘nudification’ or ‘undressing’ of classmates; and
    2. sexual extortion (where an offender creates a fake sexual image to coerce a child into real-world abuse or money transfers).
  2. The IWF recorded a 380% year-on-year increase in actionable AI-CSAM reports between 2023 and 2024 and, with continual improvements to text-to-image technology, this is only expected to rise.

Safeguarding and response protocols

The guidance includes a number of safeguarding response protocols for professionals working with the child victims of AI CSAM. These include a recommendation that wellbeing support is provided to the child in question. Importantly, the guidance notes that where the suspected perpetrator is a child, it may also be necessary to follow the same safeguarding process[6]. 

Commentary

While the Guidance provides simple to follow steps responding to AI-CSAM incidents, there are practical takeaways that can be extrapolated from it and the further information cross-referred to[7] for practitioners working with children who are subject to, or have created or accessed AI-CSAM:

  1. Matter scopes/assessments – relevant referral forms should be updated to note if the child been involved in creating, sharing or being depicted in AI-generated sexual imagery. Early identification better prepares for safeguarding and avoids inadvertent possession by practitioners.
  2. Evidential handling – while children involved in AI-CSAM incidents should not delete ancillary evidence, they can feel empowered to seek the removal of the AI-CSAM from web platforms hosting the material. Practitioners should otherwise liaise with their DSLs to ensure there is no inadvertent possession or dissemination of AI-CSAM, too.
  3. Victim liaison – where the child appears only in an AI-generated image, do not assume absence of trauma. Referral to therapeutic services (e.g., Childline, local Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) should be offered in the same way as for contact-abuse survivors.

 

This guidance will be of particular use to Youth Justice Services and other agencies supporting children in contact with the criminal justice system. Defence solicitors will find the guidance useful to bolster representations made on behalf of their young clients involved in AI-CSAM offences, including ensuring that their own trauma and safeguarding needs are properly responded to and the growing prevalence of this type of indecent image recognised. 


 

[1]Professional Guides: Understanding and Responding to AI-Generated Child Sexual Abuse Material

[2]Professionals working with children given ‘vital guidance’ to tackle threat of AI-generated child sexual abuse material

[3]Protection of Children Act 1978

[4]Coroners and Justice Act 2009

[5]Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012

[6] Section 2.5. Sharing nudes and semi-nudes: advice for education settings working with children and young people, UK Council for Internet Safety

[7] See ‘Further info’ section in the Guidance.