This story is about suicide. If you or someone you know needs support now, call, text or chat the 988 Lifeline.

A Michigan mother whose 12-year-old daughter died by suicide after being exposed to self-harm content online urged lawmakers Wednesday to pass a package of bills aimed at curbing what supporters call addictive and exploitative social media practices targeting children.

Charay Gadd told members of the Senate Finance, Insurance and Consumer Protection Committee that her daughter, London, was drawn into harmful content through algorithm-driven feeds she encountered after opening social media accounts before age 13.

“When London searched for something harmless like alligator skin boots, platforms exploited her data and escalated what came next,” Gadd testified. “Harmful design features took her down a rabbit hole to darker content, self-harm and suicidal material that holds attention longer.”

Gadd spoke in support of the “Kids Over Clicks” legislative package, as the committee began hearings on the measures.

The bills, sponsored by Democratic Sens. Darrin Camilleri of Trenton, Kevin Hertel of St. Clair Shores and Dayna Polehanki of Livonia, would require social media companies to adopt “privacy-by-default” and “safety-by-design” protections for minors. The proposals also would restrict certain personalized feeds for minors without parental consent, limit notifications during overnight and school hours, require annual independent audits of companies’ practices related to minors and prohibit AI companion chatbots from encouraging self-harm, suicide or other dangerous behavior.

Senate Bill 760, introduced by Polehanki, would allow the attorney general to bring civil actions with fines of up to $25,000 per violation against companies whose chatbots encourage harmful behavior. It also would permit families to pursue civil damages if a child is harmed.

“When new technologies enter our lives, especially technologies that interact daily with young people, there’s a basic expectation that safety will come first,” Polehanki told the committee. “Unfortunately, that has not been the case with AI companion chatbots.”

Under another bill in the package, Senate Bill 758, which would impose strict privacy, safety, and data-minimization requirements on online service providers serving minors, violations could carry civil fines of up to $50,000 per violation beginning in 2027, and would be treated as violations of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act.

Supporters, including the Michigan Parent Alliance for Safe Schools, the Michigan Education Association, the Michigan PTA, the Michigan Center for Youth Justice, the Michigan League for Public Policy and the advocacy group Unspam, said the legislation would shift responsibility back to technology companies.

“I’ve had parents say to me, ‘I feel like I’m losing my child to their phone,’,” Jennifer Tuksal, an Oakland County parent and member of the Michigan Parent Alliance for Safe Schools, said. “It is a quiet confession from parents who feel like they are competing with something far bigger than themselves. And when a parent says that there is real fear in that sentence.”

Pediatricians and mental health professionals testified that children’s developing brains make them particularly vulnerable to addictive platform features.

Dr. Elizabeth Hill, a pediatrician in Ann Arbor, said social media platforms are designed to maximize engagement for adult users and can be especially harmful to children and teens, whose impulse control and emotional regulation systems are still developing.

“We know that kids who spend more time on social media are more likely to experience depression and anxiety, and they’re more likely to feel worse about their body image,” Hill said. “Asking families to stay up to date on all the latest technology and how it can affect their kids on top of all the other things that they’re doing to raise their children is unfair to them, and it’s an unreasonable ask.”

Julie Braciszewski, a Bloomfield Hills psychologist and director of Monarch Behavioral Health, compared current parental controls to “placing sandbags out for a tsunami” and said engagement-based algorithms monetize children’s vulnerable moments.

Also testifying were industry representatives and free-market advocates who warned the bills could violate the First Amendment and expose the state to costly litigation.

Bartlett Cleland, general counsel for NetChoice, a trade association representing major internet companies, said the proposals amount to content-based restrictions on speech and would likely be struck down in court.

“The courts have been very careful to articulate the categories where government can weigh in,” Cleland said. “If you approach the court with something that constrains free speech and it’s not the least restrictive method, it’ll be found unconstitutional.”

Cleland and other opponents argued that companies already provide parental control tools and that parents should bear primary responsibility for monitoring their children’s online activity, not the government.

Supporters countered that the bills regulate product design, not speech, and are narrowly tailored to reduce harm.

Nancy Costello, a clinical professor at Michigan State University College of Law and director of its First Amendment Law Clinic, told lawmakers that engagement-based algorithms are business practices, not protected speech.

“The only goal of an engagement-based algorithm is to keep users’ eyes watching social media for as long as possible so the platforms can earn billions of dollars in ad revenue,” Costello said.

Gadd, however, emphasized the human toll behind the legislation.

“London was not born for profit,” she said. “She was my daughter. She was 12.”