“Our kids are the first generation to grow up shared.”[1]
For years, millions of social media users watched children like Wren Eleanor grow up online before she was old enough to understand what social media was. Her popularity sparked concerns from critics who argued that a child is too young to understand social media could not meaningfully consent to becoming an internet personality.[2]
These examples raise our core question: Can a parent create a digital identity for a child before the child is capable of choosing and, more importantly, consenting to one? The concern is not limited to influencer families. A 2021 survey found that more than 75% of parents shared information about their children on social media, while fewer than one in four sought their child’s consent before posting.[3]
As parents increasingly document their children’s lives online, a practice commonly known as “sharenting”, questions of privacy, autonomy, and digital rights have become impossible to ignore. While parents traditionally make decisions in their children’s best interests, should that authority extend to creating a permanent digital footprint that may follow a child for life, and should the law recognise and protect a child’s right to digital privacy against excessive sharenting?
INTRODUCTION
Before a child can speak, walk, or even understand what social media is, their private moments may already be shared online. Parents have always documented important milestones, be it first steps, first days, birthdays, or family vacations, but now, instead of residing in family photo albums, it is frequently posted online for a much wider and relatively unknown audience. This growing practice of parents sharing photographs, videos, and personal details about their children on social media has come to be known as “sharenting”.[4]
WHY DOES CHILDREN’S DATA DESERVE SPECIAL PROTECTION?
Many parents and caregivers share photos of their children, and often without their knowledge or consent, because they want to celebrate important moments and stay connected with family and friends. However, in the age of social media, these posts are no longer just digital keepsakes. Every photograph, video, or caption can reveal more information than intended, from a school logo in the background to details about a child’s daily routine. Together, these pieces of information create a digital footprint that can follow a child for years.
Children are among the most vulnerable and active internet users because they often cannot fully understand the long-term consequences of sharing personal information online. This makes them particularly susceptible to privacy violations, profiling, and other forms of misuse. For example, personal information may fall into the hands of individuals seeking to exploit or harm children.
One of the most concerning consequences of sharenting is the loss of control over content once it is shared online. Photographs and videos uploaded by parents can be downloaded, copied, altered, or repurposed by strangers without their knowledge. In some cases, images may be used in harmful ways, including creating memes that portray a child negatively or producing deepfakes using artificial intelligence. A recent study conducted by Perspectus Global found that as few as 20 images of a child may be sufficient to create a deepfake video. In comparison, parents upload an average of 63 images of their children to social media every month.[5]
Embarrassing photos or videos, such as when they were a toddler in silly clothes or throwing a tantrum, can have a negative impact, especially if they are shared widely and without the child’s consent. Content can persist on servers indefinitely, even if deleted from the original profile. Sharenting can also increase the risk of identity theft and online fraud. Parents often share sensitive details without realising that this information can be exploited. According to Barclays, by 2030, nearly two-thirds of identity fraud cases could be linked to information shared online by parents about their children.[6]
THE INDIAN LEGAL CONTEXT
These concerns raise an important question: does Indian law adequately protect children from the long-term consequences of sharenting?
Privacy refers to be the right to be left alone, it includes the right to keep certain aspects of one’s life confidential and to decide who can access personal details about them.[7]
In India, the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment described privacy and its importance in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India in 2017[8] by recognising the right to privacy as a fundamental right since it is intrinsic to life and liberty, a natural right, and thus, comes under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023[9] requires Data Fiduciaries to obtain verifiable parental consent before processing a child’s personal data. This legislation recognises children as a specially protected category of data principals and is intended to ensure that a parent or lawful guardian makes decisions regarding a minor’s personal information and not the child directly.
So, privacy concerns are particularly significant for children, who often cannot fully understand or consent to the sharing of their personal information online.
INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORKS
The issue of children’s digital privacy has also received attention internationally. Article 16 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child[10] acknowledges a child’s right to privacy and protection against unlawful attacks on their honour and reputation.
In the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 17, guarantees individuals a right to erasure, allowing teens or older individuals to request the deletion of data their parents posted when they were minors.[11]
France has emerged as one of the leading jurisdictions addressing sharenting through the Children’s Image Rights Law[12] and the Child Influencers Law[13]. These measures recognise children’s digital rights, require parents to respect their privacy, allow courts to intervene where content harms a child’s interests, and provide safeguards for child influencers. Such developments reflect a growing recognition that children should have greater control over their digital identities.
LEGAL ANALYSIS
Sharenting intersects with several areas of law. It raises privacy concerns, particularly where children have little or no say in how their personal information is shared online. Nowadays, many parents have begun commercialising on the fame of their children on social media, as evident by the rise of “kidfluencers”, earning money through advertising, sparking questions about labour rights, financial exploitation, and whether existing laws adequately protect children.[14]
The issue has even reached family courts. In a notable Dutch case in 2020, a grandmother was ordered to remove photographs of her grandchild from social media after the child’s mother objected to them being shared online.[15]
At present, India does not have legislation specifically regulating sharenting. As a result, issues arising from sharenting are generally examined through existing legal principles, such as in the Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India.
Although Indian law, such as The Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP), 2023, acknowledges the importance of protecting children’s privacy and personal data, it has yet to directly address questions about whether parental consent alone is always sufficient to safeguard a child’s interests, particularly when parents may themselves contribute to the child’s digital exposure.
Unlike commercial entities, parents are generally viewed as acting in their child’s best interests. However, sharenting complicates this assumption because the parent is both the decision-maker and the source of the child’s digital exposure.
This creates a difficult legal dilemma. On the one hand, parents are generally presumed to act in their children’s best interests and enjoy freedom in making decisions regarding their upbringing. On the other hand, sharenting allows parents to create a permanent digital footprint on behalf of their children, often without their knowledge or consent. As children’s online identities become increasingly important, the law may eventually need to strike a better balance between parental authority and a child’s right against excessive disclosure.
CONCLUSION
No matter our age, we all value a sense of autonomy. Whether it is a young child insisting on wearing the pink dress instead of the purple one, or a teenager deciding what they want others to see online, these choices matter. While young children cannot give informed consent to online sharing, their feelings and future preferences should still be considered.
India may need to give greater consideration about giving more weight to what children themselves want, especially as they get older and more aware of what’s being shared about them, this matters even more when parents are posting publicly or, worse, making money off their kids’ images. Guidelines encouraging responsible online sharing by parents and stronger protections for child influencers may also help find a middle ground between letting parents make their own choices and actually protecting kids online.
Children have an interest in privacy, but this often conflicts with a parent’s right to raise their children and freedom of expression. While they may believe they are acting in the child’s best interests, the child may one day feel differently. Ultimately, the debate around sharenting is not just about parenting choices but about whether children should have a greater say in shaping their own digital identities.
Author(s) Name: Tabitha Koshy (Tamil Nadu National Law University)
References:
[1] UNICEF, ‘What You Need to Know About Sharenting’ (UNICEF Parenting) <https://www.unicef.org/parenting/child-care/sharenting> accessed 10 June 2026.
[2] News, ‘Parents Remove Videos of Their Kids from TikTok after “Wren Eleanor” Warning – ABC News’ (<i>ABC News</i>) <https://abcnews.com/GMA/Family/wren-eleanor-tiktok-trend-sees-parents-removing-photos/story?id=87486106> accessed 10 June 2026.
[3] ‘Parents’ Social Media Habits: 2021 | Security.Org’ (<i>Security.org</i>) <https://www.security.org/digital-safety/parenting-social-media-report/> accessed 10 June 2026.
[4] ‘Sharenting: Characteristics and Awareness of Parents Publishing Sensitive Content of Their Children on Online Platforms – PMC’ (<i>PMC Home</i>) <https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11290302/> accessed 10 June 2026.
[5] News, ‘Expert Warns Parents over AI Deepfakes of Children’ (<i>RTE.ie</i>, 20 May 2025) <https://www.rte.ie/news/2025/0520/1513901-ai-children-deepfakes/> accessed 10 June 2026.
[6] Sean Coughlan, ‘“Sharenting” Puts Young at Risk of Online Fraud’ (<i>BBC Home – Breaking News, World News, US News, Sports, Business, Innovation, Climate, Culture, Travel, Video & Audio</i>, 21 May 2018) <https://www.bbc.com/news/education-44153754> accessed 10 June 2026.
[7] (Right to privacy – an overview | sciencedirect topics) <https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/right-to-privacy> accessed 9 June 2026
[8] Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Anr v Union of India and Ors, (2017) 10 SCC 1.
[9] Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, s 9(1).
[10] Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted 20 November 1989, 1577 UNTS 3 (entered into force 2 September 1990), art 16.
[11] Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 (General Data Protection Regulation) [2016] OJ L119/1, art 17.
[12] French Law No. 2024-120 of 19 February 2024 (commonly referred to as the Children’s Image Rights Law).
[13] French Law No. 2020-1266 of 19 October 2020 (commonly referred to as the Child Influencer Law).
[14] ‘Monitor on Psychology’ (Monitor on psychology) <https://www.apa.org/monitor/2026/06/parents-children-sharing-online> accessed 8 June 2026
[15] News, ‘Grandmother Ordered to Delete Facebook Photos under GDPR’ (<i>BBC Home – Breaking News, World News, US News, Sports, Business, Innovation, Climate, Culture, Travel, Video & Audio</i>, 21 May 2020) <https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52758787> accessed 10 June 2026.