‘You're constantly compared to Instagram models': event told online content affecting teenagers' mental health
Being bombarded with bad news and 'constantly' compared to edited images of models online is having a negative impact on young people's
mental health
, in particular teenage girls, an event at the
Department of Health
was told on Tuesday.
More than half of girls (57.6 per cent) and 35.2 per cent of boys reported feeling low on at least a weekly basis,
according to a new report
.
The Irish Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) survey monitored the health behaviours and outcomes of young people every four years between 1998 and 2022. More than 70,500 children aged 10-17 have been surveyed as part of the research, including more than 8,000 people in 2022.
In 2022, 15-year-olds in Ireland were below the international HBSC average for reporting high life satisfaction (a score of 7/10 or higher). Ireland ranked 44th out of 45 countries, with 43 countries reporting a higher percentage of high life satisfaction.
READ MORE
Speaking at the launch of the report, 15-year-old Anna Adler said that spending so much time online is having a detrimental impact on young people's mental health.
'I have witnessed first hand its effect on young people and myself,' she said, citing a common habit of 'waking up and grabbing your phone' and scrolling through a mix of content about
climate change
, politics and entertainment.
[
Should parents be checking their teenagers' phones?
Opens in new window
]
The teenager said women in particular 'have always been scrutinised' but 'with the age of the internet, you get constantly compared to edited Instagram models'.
'It's only natural that everyone, and not just women, are going to feel negative about their appearances.'
She said young people are 'falling victim' to online trends, with some girls as young as nine feeling pressured to buy skincare.
Prof Colette Kelly, who co-led the research at the University of Galway, said the number of those reporting feeling low is 'definitely worrying'.
The survey doesn't ask children why they feel low, noted Prof Kelly, but she said young people are consuming information about war, climate change and the
cost-of-living crisis
. They are also dealing with the long-term impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, she added.
The report also found an increase in the number of children and teenagers feeling pressured by school work (up from 32.9 per cent to 47.8 per cent between 1998 and 2022), and increases in the number of children who reported experiencing headaches (up from 26 per cent to 38.2 per cent) and sleep disturbances (30.9 per cent up to 46.3 per cent).
The research found the proportion of young people smoking, drinking and using cannabis had reduced in recent years. There has been a small decrease in the proportion of 15- to 17-year-olds who have had sex.
One in five teenagers (19.6 per cent) who took part in the survey in 2022 said they had already engaged in sexual intercourse, compared with a quarter (25.5 per cent) in 2010.
Of those who reported having sex, there was a decrease in the proportion who reported using a condom the last time they had sex. In 2010, 78 per cent said they used a condom, compared with 55.2 per cent in 2022.
[
Opinion: Social media has a limited effect on teenage mental health
Opens in new window
]
Older teenagers were asked certain questions about their sexual habits as part of the research. The authors of the Irish study have noted that the data in the most recent report relates to condom use only and not that of other contraceptives.
The figures in the 2022 report were collected in the first half of that year, before the launch of the Free Contraception Scheme, for which 17-year-olds are eligible.
The HBSC is an international study carried out in 51 participating countries and regions in collaboration with the World Health Organisation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Ireland's plan to weaken legal protections for waterways will push many of them beyond recovery
If I went to my doctor with a cancerous tumour that was treatable and curable, and he shrugged it off and told me to accept it – knowing that without treatment, it would eventually kill me – I'd think he had lost his mind. Yet this is how the Irish State plans to treat some of our most treasured rivers, lakes and estuaries. According to a proposal from the Department of Housing , certain iconic stretches of waters on the likes of the Shannon, Boyne and Blackwater rivers will no longer be viewed as needing restoration. Instead, they will face a future as engineered channels. In the 1980s and '90s, Europeans began to recognise that their rivers were in severe decline due to decades of neglect. Naturally meandering waterways were straightened, drained and dammed; chemicals, pesticides and untreated sewage poured into them unchecked. The problem was cross-border: the Danube, which flows through 10 countries, became saturated with pollution. In 1986, a fire at a chemical warehouse near Basle, Switzerland, caused the Rhine river to turn red with mercury and dyes, as vast amounts of toxic waste flowed hundreds of kilometres downstream into Germany and the Netherlands. Drinking water supplies were shut off, and aquatic life, such as European eels, was decimated. What was clear was that Europe needed a unified, legally binding approach to water protection that set out common rules, clear responsibilities and shared goals. By 2000, a plan was in place that aimed to safeguard waterways not only for aquatic life but also as a source of drinking water, transport and leisure for humans. This law, known as the Water Framework Directive, has a clear objective: to ensure all waterbodies reach at least 'good status', meaning they are clean, healthy and safe for swimming and drinking. Built into the plan is a legal recognition that some waterbodies, especially in highly industrialised countries such as Germany, have been altered so extensively that returning them to their natural state would be impossible or potentially harmful to human interests and security. These are placed in a special category, called 'heavily modified water bodies', and are legally exempt from the requirement to achieve 'good' status. They include reservoirs supplying drinking water, canals designed for navigation or drainage, urban rivers confined within concrete channels or culverts, ports, harbours and rivers drained for agricultural use. READ MORE While they cannot be used as dumping grounds for pollutants, the law accepts that these waters will never be restored or naturalised. For that reason, the principle guiding 'heavily modified' designation should be balanced and factor in whether it serves the widest possible interest: their number should be kept to a minimum, and where ongoing engineering and management is necessary – for example, in a reservoir or port – they must deliver significant benefit to the public. Ireland has 33 heavily modified water bodies, including Poulaphouca reservoir, which provides drinking water to Dublin; Cork Harbour for industrial activity; and New Ross Port in Wexford, run by the council as a transport route. But under the department's proposal, released in March, this number will increase by 1,312 per cent. It includes 122 waterbodies that run through some of Ireland's unique natural areas. It includes stretches of the Nore, Brosna, Maigue, Liffey, Fergus, Mulkear and Carrowbeg rivers; lakes such as Lough Corrib and Lough Derg; and estuaries like Lower Suir. [ Pollution on the Liffey: Algal blooms at Blessington a threat to Dublin's drinking water Opens in new window ] Why does the State want to all but give up on these waters? The problem stems from a law dating back to 1945, the Arterial Drainage Act, which gives the State sweeping powers to carry out large-scale drainage works, such as deepening, widening, dredging and straightening. Eighty years ago – when we knew nothing about climate warming – the law was viewed as progressive; today it clashes with the Water Framework Directive because this extent of drainage causes severe damage, irreversibly stripping rivers of their natural life and course. Ireland cannot abide by one law with the other. As long as these waters are drained, they will never meet the standards set by EU water law. Reservoirs, ports, canals and harbours must be operational, and as such, designating them as 'heavily modified' is in the public interest, as their functional demands cannot be fulfilled while simultaneously attempting restoration. But in the future, who'll benefit from the continual dredging of the Clare river in Galway, once one of our most natural rivers and now, in many parts, a canalised channel? Or the river Brosna, whose waters followed a meandering course through Offaly before its curves were straightened and its channel deepened? And how is it justified in the public interest, given that drainage makes our towns and cities more – not less – vulnerable to flash flooding? Instead of reshaping drainage policy so that it's fit for the critical challenges we face – not least, the chaotic mix of water shortages and drought, extreme weather events and rapidly warming waters – what's proposed is simply remove these waters from any hope of being restored to full health. Never before have our waterways needed climate and nature-proofed policies more. Our waters are warming at levels never seen before – for example, in Lough Feeagh in Mayo, the heat in the water has been above the long-term average (recorded since 1960) since January. Sea temperatures have soared. This is the future for which we need to rapidly prepare. Under the Nature Restoration Law, we're required to restore at least 20 per cent of our land and sea areas by 2030, increasing to 90 per cent by 2050. That includes rewetting organic soils, like those at the headwaters of the river Boyne, which are currently drained. Instead of giving up on our waters and relegating them to a lower standard – all for the sake of an outdated, 80-year-old law – now is the time to put energy into nature-based solutions, which are proven to be effective and cheap as a way to reduce flood risk, improve soil health and meet climate, nature and water goals without abandoning the land. We can't ignore the facts: our waterways are facing immense pressure, and some are already critically ill. Even if our only concern was water security, the urgent need for restoration is clear. This proposal to weaken their legal protections will only speed up their deterioration. Across Ireland, communities are volunteering to revive the life in their local waters. If this legal loophole is allowed, their efforts will be in vain. In effect, the State would be like a doctor unfit to practice – turning its back on the patient instead of providing care. As a result, many of our most treasured rivers and lakes will, without question, slip beyond recovery.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
HSE was aware of report on allegations of toxic culture and waiting list irregularities, CHI tells Minister
The Health Service Executive was made aware of a controversial report containing allegations about a toxic work culture and potential irregularities in the operation of schemes to tackle waiting lists, Children's Health Ireland (CHI) has told the Minister for Health . The Irish Times understands CHI, which runs children's hospitals in Dublin, said the contents of an internal report on issues in one of its hospitals had been 'discussed' with a senior HSE executive. CHI maintained in correspondence with Minister for Health Jennifer Carroll MacNeill that the report had been raised as part of performance review meetings. The assertion was made last week as part of a submission to the Minister, who had asked questions about the background to the internal report. CHI did not reply to a series of questions submitted by The Irish Times about the internal report. READ MORE The report was drawn up by Children's Health Ireland in late 2021 and early 2022 but never published. The document caused consternation in Government after parts were first revealed by the Sunday Times a fortnight ago. HSE chief executive Bernard Gloster , who took up office in 2023, said he had never been told about the document. He described the allegations in the CHI report as 'absolutely shocking'. The HSE this week referred the report to gardaí. The report raised questions over whether a series of clinics run by a consultant at CHI on Saturdays for patients on waiting lists were necessary. It said the consultant had been paid an additional €35,800 under the National Treatment Purchase Fund (NTPF), which buys care for patients on long public waiting lists. [ CHI consultant at centre of review did not fulfil on-call hours for three years due to 'health issues' Opens in new window ] The Irish Times reported this week that the CHI document maintained that there were 'significant concerns relating to the prudent and beneficial management of NTPF funding and lack of oversight of access initiatives which are ultimately not in keeping with the memorandum of understanding between CHI and the NTPF'. The report also said Children's Health Ireland had a 'broken culture – created by dysfunctional relationships and challenging behaviours'. The National Treatment Purchase Fund said that on learning of the allegations a fortnight ago, it suspended, pending a review, arrangements at CHI – known as insourcing – that saw hospitals and staff receive additional payments for treating patients on waiting lists outside core working hours. The Department of Health said on Friday that it believed NTPF funding for waiting list initiatives at Children's Health Ireland would recommence imminently. The NTPF said it took the issues around insourcing raised by the Children's Health Ireland report very seriously and was working closely with the department and HSE on this matter. 'It is completely unacceptable that there would be any misuse of public money and that children would wait longer for surgery when the whole purpose of the National Treatment Purchase Fund is to ensure faster access to treatment for public patients. The NTPF will fully reserve its position in relation to any proven misuse of public money and explore all options for restitution while ensuring public patients get the treatment they deserve.' It said that following initial reports about the CHI internal report, it immediately placed a temporary pause on all insourcing work with the children's hospital group 'while it initiated a review of this work to gather the necessary assurances regarding compliance, value for money and appropriate use of funding mechanisms'. 'This work is ongoing at the highest level with CHI to obtain and review these assurances. The intention is that the temporary pause will be lifted as soon as the NTPF is satisfied with the assurances given by CHI in this review so as to minimise any disruption to children and their families.' It said media reports that claimed 'thousands' of children would face surgery delays due to this pause were inaccurate, ill-informed and very disappointing to read.
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Changing surnames after marriage: ‘If it's good enough for Amal Clooney, it's good enough for me'
Timothy Harnedy, a data engineer, didn't have to think twice about changing his surname to that of his wife Deirdre's after getting married in 2014. The decision was 'quick and easy', he says, as it was important to him that they had a shared family name and important to his wife that she kept her name. Harnedy, from Cork, is just one of many readers who wrote to The Irish Times to share their opinions on women changing their names after marriage following a recent column by Áine Kenny , who bemoaned what she considers the 'normalisation of symbolic control' in heterosexual relationships. Harnedy explained how, in the internet age, he realised his name was not a unique identifier. So the 'simple solution' to adopt his wife's surname made them both happy. Some people close to him continue to struggle with their decision, Harnedy says, and they still receive post on occasion addressed to Mr and Mrs with his birth surname. READ MORE It is thought that women have been changing their surnames to their husband's upon marriage since as far back as the 15th century. A 2023 study conducted by the US-based Pew Research Centre found that 79 per cent of women took their husband's last name, 14 per cent kept their own last name and 5 per cent went for a double-barrelled option. Small studies show that among LGBTQ married couples, the majority of individuals opt to keep their own last name, followed by double-barrelled names. Catherine Crichton, who lives in Dublin, chose to change her surname after getting married. 'I thought feminism was about a woman's right and freedom to make her own decisions in life? That must include what name she wishes to be known by after marriage,' Crichton says. Catherine Crichton in Glasnevin, Dublin. Crichton chose to change her surname after getting married. Photograph: Dara Mac Dónaill In her opinion, taking a new surname is an 'equally valid decision as keeping her previous one', pointing out that in many cases the 'original' name will have come 'from the woman's father'. 'Every woman's decision and the reasons behind it should be respected, and not criticised by other women,' Crichton says. 'If it's good enough for world renowned human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, it's good enough for me.' Amal Clooney changed her surname from Alamuddin when she married the actor George Clooney in 2014. When Liam Garvey and his wife Áine Halpin got married 25 years ago, she said 'I suppose I'll change to Garvey', he recalls, to which he replied: 'Why on Earth would you do that?' 'Mrs Garvey was my mother; Áine Garvey was my sister; Áine Halpin was the woman I fell in love with and wanted to spend the rest of my life with,' he says. Garvey is occasionally assumed to be 'Mr Halpin' while his wife is sometimes thought to be 'Mrs Garvey'. 'Having a single family name is practical, but it does not have to be the husband's,' he says. Garvey and many other readers suggested adopting double-barrelled surnames as an option, pointing to Spain where children are often given both their mother and father's last names. Traditionally, the father's surname was first followed by the mother's, but since 1999 Spanish law has allowed parents to choose the order of their children's names. Academic Dr Deirdre Foley says that as a historian of women and gender in Ireland, changing surnames is a 'constant frustration' as women are 'harder to trace in archives and can erase their personal identity'. Referring to one well-known activist couple from Irish history, Dr Foley says: 'I have long admired how Hanna and Francis Sheehy-Skeffington chose to double-barrel their name, but they were certainly lucky that the names flowed well together.' Dr Foley acknowledges how some women may change their last name following family trauma or estrangement, but says the tradition is a 'hetero-patriarchal norm' and 'a huge inconvenience for women who do make the switch'. Dr Foley considers this issue as one that women 'can opt out of', unlike other 'greater inequalities such as rape culture, unequal pay, maternity leave and the staggering cost of childcare'. Hanna Sheehy-Skeffington with her husband Francis Growing up in Tipperary, Nuala Woulfe says she was 'never too fond' of her first name but felt her surname was 'more interesting' and 'part of her identity'. For that reason, after getting married, she chose to keep her maiden name. 'I would have seen losing my surname as a blow,' Woulfe says. 'Keeping my maiden name has been a way to reconnect with my younger self, I haven't disappeared into my relationship nor do I belong to my husband. I think keeping your name makes a relationship more interesting.' Woulfe adds that should any of her three daughters choose to take their husbands' surnames, that would be fine by her. 'Women should do what they want, it's nobody's business but their own,' she says. Dave Barry, who lives in London, says he and his wife Zara Qadir have had 'zero issues' since his wife chose to keep her maiden name after they married 13 years ago. However, some family and friends continue to refer to his wife using his surname on Christmas cards and wedding invitations, despite being corrected, he says. Barry believes this behaviour 'stems from an underlying, insidious belief that a woman retaining her identity after marriage is somehow incorrect, or that in using her maiden name, she has somehow absent-mindedly forgotten her new name'. In the past he has been asked: 'How will people know you are married?' Barry feels the obvious response is: 'How is that anyone's business but ours?' [ The rise of the wedding content creator: 'I didn't want to spend so much money on a two-hour video that I'm never going to watch' Opens in new window ] Today, some women may choose to take their husband's surname for many different reasons. Perhaps they value having one 'family unit' name; they may be estranged from their birth family; they may prefer their husband's surname; or they may have fears about travelling with their children with different last names. One reader, who wishes to remain anonymous, recalls being stopped at passport control while travelling with her child and asked how she was related to her son. 'It was unnerving, you're thinking how do I prove it's my child,' she says. Once she showed his birth certificate, the problem was resolved. She always carries the birth certificate with her while travelling now, although she has not been stopped since. When getting married, she didn't change her name, explaining it would have felt 'weird' to do so. 'The tradition perpetuates the notion that a married man is the head of the household,' she says. In this day and age, she feels it is lazy to assume parents and children will have the same surname with so many examples of married women who keep their birth name; unmarried parents; same-sex parents and divorced or remarried parents. 'I understand passport officers need to be careful but there's no excuse for anyone else to presume,' she says.
