Reviewed and updated 20 August 2026 to reflect the Crime and Policing Act 2026 and current UK law on AI-generated intimate images and nudification tools.
AI nudification, dishonour abuse, and why children must be protected now
By Aneeta Prem MBE
AI-powered “nudification” tools can turn an ordinary photograph into a fake nude or sexualised image. The person in the photograph has not agreed to it, yet the result can look convincing enough to shame, threaten, bully or blackmail them.
For a child, the fact that the image is fake does not make the harm unreal. A fabricated image can still be shared at school, posted online, used for extortion or believed by other people.
This is not a future risk. It is already part of the safeguarding landscape.
What is AI nudification?
AI nudification is the use of software or an online service to create a purported nude or intimate image of a real person from a non-intimate photograph.
A child does not have to take or send an intimate image for abuse to occur. A school photograph, sports picture, selfie or social-media image can be copied and manipulated without consent.
UK law already treats AI-generated child sexual abuse imagery seriously, and the Crime and Policing Act 2026 has strengthened the law further by targeting the tools themselves.
Why this matters for safeguarding
Traditional online-safety advice often tells children not to send intimate photographs. Nudification changes that equation. A child may do nothing more than appear in an ordinary photograph and still become the target of sexualised image abuse.
That means adults must be careful not to blame the child whose image has been manipulated. The responsibility sits with the person who created, requested, shared or used the image to harm them.
The technology also creates new opportunities for sextortion. An offender may use fabricated sexual imagery to frighten a child into sending real images, paying money or complying with further demands.
Shame as a weapon
I use the term dishonour abuse because shame is often used to control, silence or punish women and girls. There is nothing honourable about abuse. The dishonour belongs to the abuser.
AI nudification can follow the same pattern. A girl may be targeted not because of anything she has done, but because somebody wants to damage her reputation, frighten her or make her feel that her body is no longer under her control.
That is why this is not simply a technology story. It is also a safeguarding story, a consent story and, in many cases, a violence-against-women-and-girls story.
Boys and young men matter too
Boys can be victims of sexual-image abuse as well. They can also be drawn into online cultures where creating or sharing humiliating images is treated as a joke, a dare or proof of belonging.
That is why prevention has to include boys and young men. It is not enough to tell girls how to protect themselves. Boys need clear messages about consent, dignity and the consequences of creating or forwarding sexualised images of another person.
“Not in my name” should mean refusing to join in, refusing to forward the image and refusing to laugh when somebody else is being humiliated.
What the law says in the UK
The legal position has changed significantly.
- AI-generated indecent images of children can fall within existing child sexual abuse imagery offences.
- UK law also criminalises specified forms of creating and requesting purported intimate images of adults without consent.
- Section 99 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced offences covering the making, adapting, supplying or offering to supply tools or services designed for generating purported intimate images — commonly described as nudification tools.
- The 2026 Act also strengthens the wider response to non-consensual intimate-image abuse and online platforms.
The important point is that the law now targets not only individual acts of abuse but also the creation and supply of tools designed to enable it.
If this happens to a child
If somebody creates or shares a fake nude image of a child, the child should not be blamed for the original photograph or for what somebody else did with it.
Useful steps can include:
- telling a trusted adult, teacher or safeguarding lead;
- keeping evidence where it is safe to do so rather than repeatedly forwarding the image;
- reporting the content to the platform;
- using the Internet Watch Foundation’s Report Remove service where appropriate; and
- seeking support from Childline or another trusted safeguarding service.
If there is an immediate risk of harm, contact the emergency services.
What schools and parents need to say
Children need language that is simple enough to remember:
A fake image can still be abuse. Consent still matters online. Do not create it. Do not request it. Do not forward it. Tell someone if it happens.
Adults also need to resist the temptation to turn every incident into a lecture about selfies or social media. A child who has been targeted needs safeguarding first.
Final word
AI nudification tests whether we are willing to treat digitally manufactured sexual humiliation with the seriousness it deserves.
Technology may have changed the method, but the safeguarding principle has not changed: no child should be shamed, threatened or controlled through an image created without their consent.
Not in my name.
Sources and support
- GOV.UK: Crime and Policing Act 2026 factsheet
- Crown Prosecution Service: communications offences and intimate-image law
- Internet Watch Foundation: Report Remove
- Childline
