1 in 3 young Canadians use AI once a month for mental health, report shows

Young Canadians are turning to generative artificial intelligence tools as a regular part of their mental‑health toolkit, according to a new survey released by the national mental‑health network Jack.org. The findings, published on 9 October 2026, reveal that one in three respondents aged 15‑29 report using AI‑powered chatbots at least once a month to support their emotional wellbeing. The data, while highlighting a growing reliance on digital aids, also raises questions about privacy, efficacy and the need for open dialogue between young people, families and health professionals.

Scope of AI use among youth

The Jack.org survey shows that generative AI tools have moved beyond novelty to become a fairly routine resource for many young Canadians. Roughly 33 per cent of participants said they “regularly use” these tools at least once a month for mental‑health purposes. The frequency suggests that AI is being woven into daily coping strategies rather than being reserved for occasional curiosity.

Among those who do use AI, the survey uncovered a notable pattern of secrecy: nearly half of respondents have not disclosed their AI use to anyone. This reticence may reflect concerns about stigma, uncertainty about how to frame the technology, or simply a desire to keep personal coping mechanisms private. The lack of open conversation could limit the support network that young people otherwise rely on.

Why young people turn to AI

When asked about the reasons for turning to AI, three out of five participants indicated they use the tools to navigate specific situations. The most common contexts involved social relationships – friendships, romantic partnerships and family dynamics – where advice on communication, conflict resolution or emotional processing is often sought. Academic challenges also featured prominently, with many respondents using AI to organise study plans, manage stress and develop self‑care routines.

These findings align with broader trends in digital health, where young users gravitate toward platforms that offer instant, personalised feedback. The survey suggests that AI is perceived as a convenient, low‑cost adjunct to traditional support, especially in moments when human help may be unavailable or perceived as judgmental.

How AI is being used

The survey broke down usage patterns into three broad categories. The largest share – 41 per cent – treat AI like any other online search engine, employing it for quick answers or general guidance. About 18 per cent described a more reflective approach, using AI as a personal journal to process and organise thoughts. This journal‑like use points to a therapeutic dimension, where the technology serves as a sounding board for internal dialogue.

Another 11 per cent reported that interacting with AI feels “like talking to a real person who understands me,” while a further 11 per cent were unsure how to characterise the experience. These responses highlight the varied emotional resonance AI can have, ranging from functional tool to quasi‑human companion.

Expert perspectives on safety and efficacy

Jack.org’s president and CEO, Michael Braithwaite, warned that policymakers and caregivers need to understand how AI is affecting youth. “If we want to support young people, we need to understand how these tools are affecting them and have open conversations about it. We don’t want them to feel like they have to figure this all out alone,” he said. Braithwaite’s call for dialogue echoes the survey’s finding that many users keep their AI use private.

Medical experts caution against treating AI as a substitute for professional therapy. Dr. Peter Selby, an addiction‑medicine physician and senior scientist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), stressed that AI tools are “meant to keep people engaged” but lack the capacity to challenge or push back on harmful behaviours. He advised users to discuss AI‑derived insights with trusted humans – friends, counsellors, parents or physicians – to verify the legitimacy of the advice.

Research on AI bias and risk

External research underscores the potential pitfalls of relying on AI for emotional support. A 2025 Stanford University study identified instances where AI chatbots introduced biases that could lead to dangerous outcomes. While the Jack.org survey does not quantify adverse events, the academic findings serve as a reminder that algorithmic recommendations are not neutral.

The American Psychological Association (APA), in a June 2026 statement, reported that 77 per cent of therapists observed their patients using AI tools, citing accessibility and affordability as drivers. However, the APA also warned that for vulnerable individuals, AI‑based emotional support may be unsafe or even counterproductive. The association highlighted the “sycophantic nature” of many chatbots, which can affirm unethical or harmful behaviours and discourage corrective action.

Implications for Canadian mental‑health policy

The Jack.org data arrives at a moment when Canada is grappling with rising demand for mental‑health services, especially among youth. Provincial health ministries have been expanding tele‑health options, yet wait‑times for in‑person therapy remain long in many jurisdictions. AI tools, while not a replacement for qualified clinicians, could serve as a bridge for early‑stage support, provided safeguards are in place.

Policy makers might consider integrating AI literacy into school curricula, ensuring that students understand both the benefits and limitations of generative tools. Public health campaigns could also encourage open conversations about AI use, reducing the stigma that appears to keep many young people from sharing their experiences with trusted adults.

Looking ahead: balancing innovation with caution

The survey’s revelation that a third of young Canadians are regularly turning to AI for mental‑health support signals a shift in how the younger generation seeks help. As the technology evolves, its role in the broader mental‑health ecosystem will likely expand. Yet the same data underscores the importance of maintaining human connection as the cornerstone of emotional wellbeing.

For now, experts agree that AI should complement, not replace, professional care. Dr. Selby’s advice to “discuss what you found with a human, a real human, a trusted human” remains a prudent guideline. As families, educators and health providers become more aware of the digital tools shaping youth experiences, Canada can better navigate the promise and perils of AI‑enhanced mental health support.

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: Global News Canada; globalnews.ca; Global1.News (09 October 2026).

By Alex Thompson, Staff Writer