A new survey from Capita and YouGov reveals deep pessimism about artificial intelligence among American parents with children under 12—but the fear isn’t evenly distributed.
When it comes to artificial intelligence (AI) and the future of work, American parents are skeptical of the hype, according to an October 2025 survey from Capita and YouGov. In a reversal of the typical narrative surrounding technological progress over the long term, only 19% of parents believe that AI will increase their family’s long-term economic security. Nearly half—44%—expect it will reduce their financial security, while another 38% anticipate no meaningful change.
This pessimism isn’t an isolated finding. It reflects a broader national anxiety about AI’s role in daily life and the workplace. According to recent Pew Research Center data, workers are concerned about the impact of AI on work, and half of all Americans report feeling more concerned than excited about AI’s expanding presence in their lives—a significant increase from just 37% in 2021.
But not everyone is equally worried. Our survey data reveals a complex landscape of AI anxiety that breaks along demographic lines in unexpected ways, sometimes contradicting where experts say the real risks lie.
The Age Divide: Optimism of Youth, Pessimism of Experience
Younger parents are significantly more optimistic about AI than their older counterparts. Among parents aged 18 to 33, more than one in four (27%) believe that AI will boost their family’s economic prospects. That optimism nearly evaporates among parents over 45, with just under 10% viewing AI as economically beneficial, and roughly half (46%) perceiving it as a threat to their financial security.
This generational split likely reflects different relationships with technology itself. Younger parents came of age in a fully digital era, often embracing digital tools for productivity, creativity, connection, and convenience. They may see AI as just another tool to master—one that could open doors to new opportunities and flexible work arrangements.
Older parents, however, may view AI through the lens of economic disruption they’ve already witnessed. They lived through the dot-com bust as teens and young adults. Previous types of automation changed or eliminated many of their jobs. They’re understandably skeptical that this wave will be different. For these older parents, AI may represent yet another source of precarity threatening the economic security they’ve worked to build for their families.
The Gender Gap: Why Women See AI as a Threat
The most striking divide in the data is between mothers and fathers. More than one-quarter of fathers (26%) believe AI will increase their family’s economic security, while only 13% of mothers share that optimism. Nearly half of all mothers surveyed (45%) see AI as a threat to their financial well-being.
This isn’t just a fear—it’s an informed concern based on occupational reality. Women are disproportionately represented in jobs that are most vulnerable to AI automation. According to the Brookings Institution, 36% of women work in occupations where generative AI could automate at least half of their tasks, compared to just 25% of men. Administrative support roles, clerical positions, and office work—all fields heavily dominated by women—face some of the highest exposure to AI-driven automation.
The threat extends beyond job loss to the quality of jobs themselves. Many women already work in service-sector positions, which are often characterized by unpredictable scheduling, low wages, and economic instability. As AI systems increasingly power workforce management and scheduling tools, they could further erode job quality rather than enhance it. Women of color, who already experience the highest levels of scheduling volatility and workplace precarity, may be especially vulnerable to these shifts.
The International Labour Organization underscores the global dimension of this gender gap: in high-income countries, nearly 10% of women’s jobs face the highest AI-driven automation risk, compared to just 3.5% of men’s jobs.
The Shadow of Past Displacement: Parents in the Midwest and Small Towns Fear AI, Yet May Face Less Risk
Regional and geographic differences reveal another layer of AI anxiety. Midwestern and Northeastern parents are notably pessimistic, with only 16% seeing AI as economically beneficial, compared to 22% in the West. The urban-rural divide is even more pronounced: just 12% of parents in towns and 15% of parents in rural areas expect AI to improve their economic security, compared to 25% of parents in cities.
For the Midwest and rural communities, AI may feel less like innovation and more like déjà vu. These are the places that bore the brunt of previous automation waves—the factory closures, the manufacturing exodus, the hollowing out of industrial economies. When you’ve watched your community’s economic foundation crumble once, it’s hard to believe the next technological revolution will somehow be different. Furthermore, many of today’s young parents watched their own parents contend with the widespread job losses, foreclosures, and economic devastation of the 2008-2011 financial crisis. The weight of that economic devastation undoubtedly shapes the fears and anxieties of today’s young parents. Conversely, parents in the West may be more optimistic about AI because of their proximity to Silicon Valley, where their exposure to and immersion in the tech sector can make the possibilities and opportunities of technological change feel more tangible.
Small towns and rural areas also face structural disadvantages: smaller labor markets mean fewer alternative employment options when jobs disappear. Unlike urban workers, who might pivot to adjacent industries or roles, rural workers face steeper barriers to economic recovery after displacement.
But here’s the irony: experts suggest these communities may actually be less exposed to AI-specific automation than they fear. That’s because the jobs that are concentrated in these areas are more challenging for AI to replace. According to research by the Brookings Institution, the new automation landscape appears fundamentally different from previous waves of automation. Highly educated workers in major metropolitan areas—such as San Jose, San Francisco, New York, Austin, Raleigh-Durham, and Washington, D.C.—appear to be most exposed to generative AI. At the same time, less office-oriented economies, such as those in Las Vegas, midwestern cities like Toledo and Fort Wayne, and small towns and rural communities, face lower susceptibility.
This creates what might be called a “perception gap.” The Midwestern communities afraid of AI disruption may not be the ones most at risk, and those in the West (especially those in tech-oriented cities) who are the most optimistic may actually be the most exposed.
The Education Paradox: When More Credentials Mean More Worry
Perhaps counterintuitively, parents who are college graduates (those who graduated from college but have not pursued post-graduate studies) express the highest levels of AI pessimism. Nearly half (48%) believe AI will reduce their family’s economic security, compared to 39% with high school diplomas or less.
This anxiety has a basis in reality. Pew Research Center data shows that workers with bachelor’s degrees are more than twice as likely as high school graduates to hold jobs with high exposure to AI. College graduates typically occupy white-collar professional roles—such as analysts, researchers, content creators, and mid-level managers—that generative AI is specifically designed to augment or replace.
Meanwhile, workers with less formal education often hold jobs that require a physical presence, manual dexterity, or interpersonal skills, which AI systems do not replicate. A home health aide, construction worker, or restaurant cook faces less immediate AI displacement than a marketing coordinator or junior analyst.
The Broader Pattern: Fear Without Borders
Taken together, these findings paint a picture of widespread AI anxiety that transcends simple explanation. Whether you’re a working mother in Ohio, a middle-aged parent in rural Iowa, or a college-educated professional in the Raleigh-Durham area, there’s a good chance you see AI as a threat rather than an opportunity for your family’s economic future.
This pessimism influences how we approach and prepare for technological change. When communities fear displacement, they may resist innovation, fail to invest in relevant skills training, or disengage from conversations about managing the transition to AI. When specific groups—such as women, older workers, and residents of certain regions—feel particularly vulnerable, it can exacerbate existing inequalities and create political fault lines around technology policy.
The perception gaps are equally important. When the communities most afraid of AI aren’t the ones that are most exposed, it suggests a need for better public education about where risks actually lie. And if we ignore the advice of experts, those most exposed—urban professionals in white-collar roles—risk being unprepared for disruptions when they arrive.
What This Means for the Future
The survey data reveal that families are approaching AI with more trepidation than enthusiasm. That’s a stark contrast to the breathless optimism emanating from Silicon Valley and tech industry cheerleaders in Washington, DC.
But this pessimism may be a form of wisdom. Parents are thinking about their children’s future, their own job security, and the economic stability of their families. They’ve seen technological change disrupt communities and displace workers. They understand that “creative destruction” (the obsolescence of old businesses and business models through new technologies or business models) is easier to celebrate when it’s not destroying your own livelihood. In fact, much of the political earthquake of the last decade is a reflection of this anxiety.
We’d do well to follow the wisdom of these parents. We must heed the lessons of the last 50 years of deindustrialization, automation, and worker displacement; at the same time, we must listen carefully families’ needs, hopes, and aspirations. The challenge ahead isn’t just managing AI’s technical development but addressing the very real economic anxieties it generates. This means implementing policies that support workers through transitions, investing in education and retraining that align with actual market needs, and regulating and governing AI in ways that build multigenerational family economic prosperity, foster the common good, and protect communities from harm. Whether the pessimism of the parents in our survey proves prescient or misplaced, families’ concerns demand serious attention 
At Capita, we are rooted in our values of democracy, solidarity, and human dignity, and guided by our vision of loving, cooperative, and just societies. Working in solidarity with families and communities, we design and promote creative approaches that include everyone and are compatible with generational wisdom for advancing human flourishing. This requires us to listen carefully to the needs, hopes, and aspirations of all families. Through surveys, family roundtables, collaboration with state partners, and the work of Capita Forward members in deep community engagement, we strive to craft a more just society that is genuinely responsive to the voices of families. as we enter the next, AI-shaped half-century.