
Social media curfews for children WON'T work - and could even create divides in friendships and lead to isolation, experts warn
The government's proposed social media curfew won't make children any safer online, experts have warned.
Ministers are considering implementing an 'app cap', to reduce teenagers' exposure to harmful online content.
However, scientists have told MailOnline that there is no evidence to suggest these restrictions will have any positive effects.
In fact, such restrictions could actually harm children by increasing isolation and facing more social problems during the day, the experts say.
Technology Secretary Peter Kyle suggested children's social media time could be cut down by law to two hours per day outside of school time and before 10 pm.
Studies have shown that using social media shortly before going to bed can lead to poor sleep patterns, falling academic achievement, and poor mental health.
While that might make a curfew appealing, the scientific evidence suggests that curfews don't actually help children reduce their screen time or get more sleep.
Professor Peter Etchells, an expert on the effects of digital technology from Bath Spa University, told MailOnline: 'If we're worried that social media is harmful, bans don't fix those problems - they just delay access.'
The idea of a social media curfew has been raised as a possible solution to the serious harms that can be caused by excessive social media use.
A study of nearly 10,000 teenagers aged between 13 and 16 found that excessive social media use disrupts positive activities like sleep while increasing exposure to harmful content, especially in the form of cyberbullying.
This can lead to teenagers experiencing increased anxiety, depression, falling grades and even physical health issues.
A recent survey conducted by BSI found that 50 per cent of British young people felt that a social media curfew would improve their lives.
Likewise, there is very strong evidence that taking breaks from social media can have pronounced positive impacts.
Dr Rachel Kent, a leading digital health expert from King's College London and host of the podcast Digital Health Diagnosed, told MailOnline: 'There is a wealth of evidence that suggests restrictions and boundaries can be incredibly beneficial.
'Short periods of time away from our devices can drastically reduce the stress and anxiety that comes from increased screen time.'
Dr Kent says that the curfew would be a 'good thing' because it signals to children that they need to have boundaries in their relationship with technology.
However, as Dr Kent acknowledges, a curfew would be extremely difficult and highly impractical to implement at a national level.
It isn't clear how the Government intends to enforce any proposed curfew, but it is likely that many 'digitally native' children would find a way around any restriction.
In 2011, South Korea implemented the 'shutdown law' which prevented under-16s from playing online video games between midnight and 6am.
Years later, research showed that children were only getting 1.5 minutes of extra sleep per night and had simply shifted their online activity to other points in the day, leading to the ban being repealed in 2021.
Professor Etchells says: 'It's not clear that it had any positive effect, even though at face value it feels like it should work.
'I think curfews feel like they are a good solution, but we don't have good evidence to suggest that they would work in the way that we want them to.'
Recently, a Youth Select Committee report on the effects of social media found that social media bans were 'neither practical nor effective'.
Experts have also raised concerns that a ban might create inadvertent consequences that cause more harm than good.
WHAT ARE THE GUIDELINES FOR CHILD SCREEN TIME?
There are no official guidelines for screen time limits. But there are calls for interventions to be put in place due to growing concern about the impact of screen time, and social media use, on the mental health and well-being of young people.
The Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health and American Association of Pediatrics give guidance for parents:
For children younger than 18 months, avoid use of screen media.
Parents of children 18 to 24 months of age who want to introduce digital media should choose high-quality programming, and watch it with their children.
For children ages 2 to 5 years, limit screen use to 1 hour per day of high-quality programs.
Parents should view media with children to help them understand what they are seeing.
Designate media-free times.
Social media expert Rhea Freeman told MailOnline: 'For everything that's bad about social media, there are many good things too- finding like-minded people, chatting to friends, connection to family.
'Restrictions could potentially create divides in friendships and lead to isolation if people's allocated usage doesn't line up, I could see this being an issue.'
Likewise, studies conducted among university students found that interventions designed to limit social media use led to negative effects like fear of missing out (FOMO).
However, experts' biggest concern with the potential curfew is that this restriction doesn't solve the underlying problem of harmful content on social media
As Professor Etchells points out, bans and curfews only delay access to social media rather than making the internet any safer for children.
The Online Safety Act has passed into law, and from this year will require tech platforms to follow new Ofcom-issued codes of practice to keep users safe online, particularly children.
However, experts say that adding a curfew won't solve the gaps and weaknesses of this regulation.
Dr Kent says: 'I would argue that the curfew misses the point. The point is about making sure that the tech companies are taking accountability for the circulation of harmful content, moderating it, censoring it.
What is the Online Safety Act?
The Online Safety Act is a set of laws intended to protect children online.
The act places a duty of care on online platforms, making them responsible for protecting users from harmful content.
Sites must take measures to remove harmful or misleading content and change their algorithms to avoid sharing pornography and material promoting suicide or eating disorders
They will also be required to introduce 'highly effective' checks to block under-18s accessing age-restricted sites.
Ofcom has the power to fine technology firms up to £18 million or 10 per cent of their global revenue if they breach their duties under the landmark Online Safety Act.
However, the act has been criticised for not doing enough to keep children safe from addictively designed apps.
'Tech companies need to be held to account and the government needs to be enforcing this.'
Mr Kyle was asked on Sunday morning whether he would look at limiting the time children spend on social media to two hours per app after the Sunday People and Mirror reported the measure was being considered by ministers.
'I'm trying to think how we can break some of the addictive behaviour and incentivise more of the healthy developmental… and also the good communicative side of online life,' Mr Kyle told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg show.
This came after the government was criticised by the father of a teen who took her own life after viewing harmful content.
Mr Ian Russell, whose 14-year-old daughter Molly died in 2017, said that 'sticking plasters' would not solve the problem of harmful content online.
Andrew Burrows, CEO of the Molly Rose Foundation, told MailOnline: 'It's welcome to hear Peter Kyle look to strengthen online safety protections, but these measures would not change the dial on the harmful content that continues to be bombarded at children.
'Unless Ministers fix the structural issues that have hamstrung the Online Safety Act, even if it is effective at reducing time spent on platforms, a code of practice on addictive design will be just another sticking plaster.'
What experts would like to see instead is more focus on educating children and carers on how to stay safe online and manage their own social media usage.
Children should be taught how to recognise harmful content online and know what to do when they encounter it, the experts argue.
Professor Etchells says: 'What we need to be talking more about is how we better prepare children and young people for a world saturated with technology.
'Hard-and-fast bans don't have much weight of evidence behind them to support them.
But we do know that talking to kids, developing their digital literacy and resiliency skills, developing their communication skills and support networks - these are things which will lead to more sustainable long-term outcomes.'
The Department for Science Innovation and Technology has been contacted for comment.
Children as young as two are using social media, research from charity Barnardo's has suggested.
Internet companies are being pushed to do more to combat harmful content online but parents can also take steps to alter how their children use the web.
Here are some suggestions of how parents can help their children.
Both iOS and Google offer features that enable parents to filter content and set time limits on apps.
For iOS devices, such as an iPhone or iPad, you can make use of the Screen Time feature to block certain apps, content types or functions.
On iOS, this can be done by going to settings and selecting Screen Time.
For Android, you can install the Family Link app from the Google Play Store.
Talk to your children
Many charities, including the NSPCC, say talking to children about their online activity is vital to keep them safe.
Its website features a number of tips on how to start a conversation with children about using social media and the wider internet, including having parents visit sites with their children to learn about them together and discussing how to stay safe online and act responsibly.
There are tools available for parents to learn more about how social media platforms operate.
Net Aware, a website run in partnership by the NSPCC and O2, offers information about social media sites, including age requirement guidance.
The World Health Organisation recommends parents should limit young children to 60 minutes of screen time every day.
The guidelines, published in April, suggest children aged between two and five are restricted to an hour of daily sedentary screen time.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The 100-year saga of one man's attempt to pay off the national debt
Gaspard Farrer may be just a footnote in history, but he will be remembered fondly by Rachel Reeves. A £585m fortune held by the wealthy banker, who died aged 85 almost 100 years ago, has finally been donated to the public purse after a seven-year legal battle. Mr Farrer, a former partner at the now-defunct Barings Bank, is thought to have left £500,000 in 1927 as a gift to the nation in response to the UK's huge national debt after the First World War. But rules stipulated that the so-called National Fund, established in 1927, could only be made available when it was enough to pay off the national debt in full. It means that for years, the fortune has been locked away from successive governments. However, a 2022 High Court ruling ordered the funds to be released – a decision upheld after the fund's trustees lodged an appeal. They were finally paid to the Debt Management Office (DMO) in the financial year ending in April, according to a Freedom of Information request seen by The Telegraph. The DMO offers a little-known scheme that allows taxpayers to voluntarily contribute to paying off the national debt. Last year, donations reached a record £585,112,933 – almost entirely due to the payment of the 1927 National Fund. It was one of 16 donations – three of which were left in wills and 13 were one-off payments. In the nine years prior, just £175,000 per year on average has been donated to the scheme. The legal wrangling for Mr Farrer's money began under Theresa May's government which successfully used a niche legal argument to prise open the savings pot. The bid to tap into the pot used cy-près jurisdiction – meaning 'as near as possible' – which is applied primarily to charitable trusts whose original purpose became impossible to fulfil. The funds were being looked after by Zedra Fiduciary Services who acted as the defendant in the case. The Telegraph contacted representatives for Zedra for comment. The cash is now on the Exchequer's balance sheet, but will make just a 0.02pc dent in Britain's £2.7 trillion national debt, which has grown to the same size as the entire economy. The funds were originally set aside as a £500,000 investment in assets, including gilts, by a donor who remained anonymous for decades. After the government of the day lodged its legal bid to obtain the money in 2018, Mr Farrer's identity was at last revealed. The fund quietly grew in value for years until its transfer to the Treasury was revealed in a request made to the DMO by accountancy firm RSM. The documents confirmed it had received Mr Farrer's fortune. Chris Etherington, partner at RSM, said: 'It is generosity of a level that the Chancellor could not have expected. It could provide some inspiration as to how additional revenues could be generated for the Exchequer.' 'No prospect of the fund ever paying off national debt' When Mr Farrer's donation was first made, Sir Winston Churchill said the money was 'inspired by clear-sighted patriotism and makes a practical contribution towards the ultimate – though yet distant – extinction of the public debt.' But doubts have grown over the years that the money would ever actually fulfil its original purpose. John Glenn, a former culture minister, said in response to a parliamentary question in 2018 that 'there is no realistic prospect of the fund ever amounting to a sum sufficient to pay off the whole of the national debt'. Mr Farrer's donation was held in the form of a charitable trust and was on paper one of the most well-endowed of its kind in the country. John Picton, a reader in law at the University of Manchester, said using the fund to pay off national debt would be a 'missed opportunity' to donate to more worthy causes. He added: 'It's a missed opportunity because the fund could have been kept in charity. I think it's unimaginative, personally.' Mr Picton suggested the money could go towards a charitable fund for the Armed Forces, or to support the work of the country's museums and art galleries. He said: 'In Gaspard Farrer's time, the national debt was associated with war debt and paying it off had a patriotic motivation and that's long lost.' 'But now the national debt, rather than having patriotic sentiments attached to it, is just a large number we all live with and grows throughout time. It's unthinkable now that people would want to voluntarily pay to reduce it.' Mr Farrer's only other surviving legacy is his 11,438 square foot mansion in Kent. He commissioned the legendary architect Sir Edwin Lutyens to design the property, which was built in 1911. The eight bedroom house was recently placed on the market for £3.5m.


Daily Mail
17 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Academic at University of Sydney makes vile post calling for Jews to be 'executed'
The University of Sydney has launched an investigation into one of its academics after he shared a post calling for 'Zionists to be executed like we executed Nazis'. Palestinian activist and sessional academic at the University of Sydney Fahad Ali shared the post to X on Thursday. 'F**k sanctions, I want Zionists executed like we executed Nazis,' Mr Ali wrote. The social media platform marked the post as breaching its rules against violent speech. However, Mr Ali took a screenshot of the hidden post and republished it on Friday, slamming the platform's rules. '"Violent speech" – people are on this website every single day celebrating the burning children alive, don't tell me wanting to see these people hanged like the Nazis were post-Nuremberg is "violent",' Mr Ali wrote. Mr Ali's profile has since been deactivated from the platform. The post received a barrage of criticism, with many urging the University of Sydney to fire the academic. 'Why are you employing a person who openly encourages Jews to be murdered? What are you doing to protect Jews, Israelis and their friends on campus?,' one person wrote. Another person wrote the university chose to 'turn a blind eye to Fahad's breaches of the university's Code of Conduct'. A third added: 'One of the main pro-Palestine leaders in Australia just called for the mass executions of Jews. Should Fahad Ali live in Australia? Should we let him stay in our country while acting like this?' In a statement, a University of Sydney spokeswoman said the institution was 'appalled' by the comments and had immediately launched an investigation. 'We're appalled by these comments and consider them utterly unacceptable, and are immediately undertaking a review,' the spokeswoman told the Daily Telegraph. 'As this is a personal account, determining whether they might constitute illegal activity would be a matter for police. 'Support is available for every member of our community who may need it.' Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Jewish Association Robert Gregory told Daily Mail Australia the post was 'reprehensible'. 'This post is reprehensible and appears to be calling for violence. Police and the University of Sydney need to take these threats seriously,' Mr Gregory said. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry slammed Mr Ali's post and called for decisive action. 'We have seen some despicable statements these past few years but a call for Zionists to be executed made by someone linked to one of our top universities reaches a new level,' Co-CEO Alex Ryvchin said. 'There is a fundamental question here of safety to students and staff, the reputation of the university, and the standards of human conduct that we either accept or reject.' Mr Ryvchin praised the university for immediately launching a review into the post and Mr Ali. 'We are pleased that the university has swiftly condemned this but a call for Zionists to be executed warrants decisive action,' Mr Ryvchin said. It post comes after the university's chancellor David Thodey and vice-chancellor Mark Scott admitted they did 'not get everything right' when handling protests on campus. Mr Thodey and Mr Scott's comments were published in the university's annual report earlier this month and highlighted the institution's response particularly to the pro-Palestinian encampment. Protesters flooded the university's quadrangle and set up tents, which remained for about eight weeks before they were ordered to evacuate. 'Many universities around the globe did not fully anticipate the impact on their campus life of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East – and the University of Sydney was no different,' Mr Thodey and Mr Scott wrote. 'We did not get everything right as we responded to widespread protests triggered by the events of October 7 2023 and their aftermath and there are clearly differing views on our responses to certain events, particularly the encampment on our quadrangle lawns. 'We have committed to learn from these hugely challenging and complex events – and the experiences of other universities around the world – and to listen to those who would work with us to ensure our campuses are safe and welcoming for all.' Last month, the university also faced backlash after a group of students were photographed turning their back on a Jewish speake r who denounced Hamas. During the Student Representative Council's general meeting, the group Students Against War called to reject a nationwide definition of antisemitism. Adopted by Universities Australia, the definition has said criticism of Israel can be antisemitic 'when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel'. The university also faced criticism in 2024 when a photo of students almost unanimously refusing to condemn the October 7 Hamas attacks was shared. The photo showed nearly all hands raised at a packed lecture theatre where the Sydney University's Student Representative Council AGM overwhelmingly voted down a motion condemning the Hamas attacks. Instead the roughly 600 students in attendance passed a motion supporting Hamas in their 'armed resistance' against Israel.


The Sun
20 minutes ago
- The Sun
Our brave Jasper is slowly losing the ability to walk – a drug could change that but the NHS cruelly won't fund it
THE family of a 10-year-old boy who's losing the ability to walk have described the 'nightmare' battle they face with the NHS to access a free drug for help. Rosie and Pete Day from Horsham, West Sussex have been fighting for the drug givinostat for their son Jasper who has Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). 4 4 Duchenne is a genetic muscle wasting condition that causes progressive muscle weakness. In the UK, an estimated 2,500 people are living with the condition The Day family have twins Jasper and Arabella, and two older daughters. Both Jasper and his twin sister Arabella have Duchenne, with Arabella a carrier and Jasper the most affected - as the condition mostly affects boys. Givinostat, developed by ITF Pharma UK, can slow progress of Duchenne - keeping children on their feet for longer - and is being offered for free by a drug firm while it goes through the process of NHS approval. Only some NHS trusts across the UK, and few in England, are giving out the drug despite it being part of an early access programme since November. Families are now facing a "cruel" postcode lottery over who gets the medicine and are in a race against time, according to the charity Duchenne UK. Some NHS trusts are refusing to supply the drug while others delay it by drawing up lists of who they think should get it first. NHS trusts say they need to pay for monitoring the drug - around £1,900 per year per patient - out of their own budget. Rosie said: "We try and live in the moment and, in this moment, there's an opportunity to make a massive change to Jasper. Toddler, 3, left fighting for life after 'going off his food' - as killer cocktail of common viruses attacked his heart "We're not going to cure it, but this drug gives him the best chance of having the early life that he wants to have and what every parent wants to give their child. "It's so close - and yet we're stuck. "We're stuck in this process where there's something in reaching distance that could make a huge difference to keep him walking, keep him active, keep him with his siblings in the garden, keep him walking up the stairs, all of those things, and it just feels that we can't quite get there. "We're on the finishing line to get something that will make a difference and we can't quite get there because of the system we're in. "The drug is not going to cure it, but it will give him the childhood you would wish to give your child - to keep them playing football, coming on dog walks, being able to walk up the stairs, playing the French horn, all of those things that you dream your child is going to get to do.' She added: "It feels like a nightmare, because you know that the doctors want to give it, but when it comes to getting the drug in his mouth and seeing what it would do, we're stuck. "It's a lottery, basically, depending on where you are in the country ... and within NHS trusts themselves." 'When will I get the drug, mummy?' Jasper is under the care of the Evelina London Children's Hospital, which is only now starting to contact patients and is drawing up a priority list for who gets the drug first. "Every day that passes by is a day that we can see Jasper decline and see him struggling with his muscles," Mrs Day said. "Two weeks ago, he asked me, 'When will I get the drug, mummy?' "We're stuck in a situation over who's going to make those decisions regarding who gets the drug - of whether Jasper gets it or another boy. "For every boy it's heartbreaking, because someone ultimately is not going to get the drug at that moment based on the current criteria." She continued: "If Jasper stops walking, we're not going to get that back. We're stuck in a situation over who's going to make those decisions regarding who gets the drug - of whether Jasper gets it or another boy Rosie Day "Every day matters. Six months ago, Jasper could walk up and down the stairs easily. He can't do that now and Pete has to push him up the stairs every night. "Yet we can't give him something that is as simple as two spoons full of medicine and a blood test, and a little bit of maybe resource looking at the blood test results - that is what is standing in our way." Rosie said it was unclear how the Evelina is "going to make a fair choice" because knowing who will lose mobility is not an exact science. And she said the process is "hugely subjective" because there is no linear decline in the condition and the decisions made by NHS trusts could end up being "completely wrong". According to Duchene UK, boys whose condition is getting worse risk falling off the list entirely while waiting for the drug. Around 500 boys in the UK are eligible for givinostat, which can be taken at home like Calpol, with hospitals then doing follow-up blood tests of around eight in the first year, followed by twice a year thereafter. 4 Children may also need an ECG, though these are already part of routine Duchenne monitoring. Emily Reuben and Alex Johnson, founders of Duchenne UK, said: "As time ticks by, more boys are losing out on their chance to access givinostat. "This is a simple treatment, which can be easily managed at home, and requires uncomplicated blood tests to monitor. It's free to the NHS and could offer real hope for patients and their families. "The delays are cruel and the postcode lottery is unjustifiable. We are calling on the NHS to urgently make this available to both ambulant (walking) and non-ambulant boys." To date, all health boards in Scotland are rolling out the drug, alongside those in Swansea and Cardiff. Leicester Royal Infirmary was the first trust in England to give the drug, but the Evelina has not yet, and neither have trusts in Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle. Great Ormond Street Hospital is working to supply the drug. A spokesman for the Evelina said: "We have begun contacting families of all existing Evelina London patients who may be eligible for givinostat and are working to set up appointments in the next few months. "Our clinical team are working through our patient lists and are currently prioritising children who need the treatment most urgently, or are at a higher risk of losing movement (ambulation) soon." An NHS spokesman said: "The first National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) committee meeting to consider this treatment is scheduled to be held in July 2025, and if manufacturer ITF Pharma can offer a cost-effective price to enable Nice to recommend its use, the NHS will be ready to work with the company to explore fast-tracking access for patients. "NHS England has published guidance on manufacturer-led early access schemes, which require trusts to cover substantial costs and find additional clinical resources to administer new treatments, and we understand a number of trusts across the country are preparing to offer givinostat via such a scheme." Parents have met with Health Secretary Wes Streeting to try and speed up access. Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) Muscular dystrophies (MD) are a group of inherited genetic conditions that gradually cause the muscles to weaken, leading to an increasing level of disability. Duchenne MD (DMD) is one of the most common and severe forms, it usually affects boys in early childhood; people with the condition will usually only live into their 20s or 30s. The condition primarily affects boys because it's an X-linked recessive condition. This means the faulty gene responsible for DMD is located on the X chromosome, and boys have only one X chromosome. Early symptoms often involve delays in walking, difficulty getting up, and enlarged calves. Over time, as the disease progresses, it can impact various parts of the body, including the heart and lungs. Treatment focuses on managing symptoms and slowing the progression of the disease, as there is no cure. Corticosteroids are a mainstay of treatment, and new gene therapies are also available for certain patients. Givinostat (trade name Duvyzat) is a treatment for DMD that has been approved for use in boys aged six and older, regardless of the specific genetic mutation they have. It's a non-steroidal drug that works by inhibiting histone deacetylase (HDAC), which helps to reduce inflammation, muscle loss, and scarring. While not a cure, givinostat can potentially slow down the progression of DMD and preserve muscle function.