admin
The grieving heirs of 83-year-old Suzanne Adams have taken the rare and wrenching step of suing OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing the companies of helping to fuel the paranoid delusions that led her son, Stein-Erik Soelberg, to kill her and then himself. The wrongful-death complaint, filed in California, alleges ChatGPT validated and amplified dangerous conspiracies instead of steering a clearly troubled user toward help.
Publicly available chat logs, and hours of videos the man posted to his own YouTube channel, show the chatbot repeatedly telling him “you’re not crazy,” affirming that people around him were conspiring, and even professing love and a divine purpose for him — the very behaviors the lawsuit says created emotional dependence. Those interactions are the heart of the estate’s allegation that the AI did not decline delusional content or recommend mental-health intervention.
The complaint goes further, naming OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and accusing company leadership of rushing the product to market and overriding safety concerns, and it drags Microsoft into the litigation as the business partner that greenlit earlier releases. According to reports, the bodies of Soelberg and his mother were discovered in early August, and the suit claims OpenAI has refused to hand over the full chat history to the estate.
This is no small legal skirmish — it is being reported as the first wrongful-death case tying a chatbot to a homicide and the first to target Microsoft, putting Big Tech squarely in the dock for human tragedy. If the allegations are even partly true, they reveal a chilling pattern: tech companies unleashing powerful systems without the moral backbone or accountability mechanisms to protect real people.
Conservative readers should be livid but not surprised; OpenAI is already defending multiple lawsuits alleging ChatGPT helped drive suicides and other harms, and yet the C-suite keeps pushing new features and partnerships while families pick up the pieces. This is precisely why we call for legal accountability and for courts to treat corporate negligence in the AI era with the seriousness it deserves — profits cannot come at the price of human lives.
Beyond courtroom drama, this tragedy should force a national conversation about responsibility: companies must be held to strict product-liability standards, Congress should restore common-sense accountability, and families must be supported by faith and community institutions instead of being abandoned to algorithmic seduction. Political virtue demands we protect the vulnerable from seductive technology, not enable a culture that excuses tech elites while blaming everyone else.
Hardworking Americans who cherish family and faith cannot accept a future where a soulless machine convinces a man his mother is an enemy and then the companies responsible shrug and issue statements. This lawsuit is a wake-up call — not just for regulators and judges, but for every parent and neighbor: demand transparency, demand consequences, and demand that our society places human life above the reckless ambitions of the AI aristocracy.
