Smartphone bans alone do not give children healthy tech relationship
Banning smartphone and social media access alone fails to equip children for the healthy use of technology in the future, a group of international experts has argued.
Writing in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), the collection of academics argued there is a lack of evidence that blanket bans helped children and such approaches were 'stop-gap solutions' that 'do little to support children's longer-term healthy engagement with digital spaces across school, home, and other contexts, and their successful transition into adolescence and adulthood in a technology-filled world'.
Instead, the experts call for a rights-based approach to technology use, where children are better protected from harm by age-appropriate design and education while using technology to develop skills to help them participate in the modern, digital world.
Victoria Goodyear, from the Institute for Mental Health at the University of Birmingham, and colleagues from Harvard, the University of Cambridge, the Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences, and the University of Sao Paulo said governments and regulators should instead focus on improving legislation designed to ensure children can use phones and social media safely.
The intervention comes as debate continues over whether mobile phones should be banned in schools in England.
On Wednesday, the chief inspector of Ofsted said smartphones should be banned in schools in England, which followed an exchange between Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch on the issue during Prime Minister's Questions.
Mrs Badenoch questioned why the Government opposed a Tory amendment to the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill to require schools to ban the use of phones.
In response, the Prime Minister described the proposal as 'completely unnecessary' as he claimed 'almost every school' already bans phones, and instead said the focus should be on the content children were consuming.
Schools in England were given non-statutory guidance under the former Conservative government in February last year intended to stop the use of mobile phones during the school day.
In their article, the experts said a recent evaluation of school smartphone policies in England reported that restricted access to phones in school 'was not associated with benefits to adolescent mental health and wellbeing, physical activity and sleep, educational attainment or classroom behaviour'.
They added: 'In addition, this study found no evidence of school restrictions being associated with lower levels of overall phone or media use or problematic social media use.
'Technology-free moments and spaces are nevertheless important for children because increased time spent on phones and social media is generally linked with worse physical, mental, and educational outcomes.
'However, approaches that focus on simply restricting access to devices can undermine children's rights to technology design and education that will help them thrive as adults in today's world.'
Rather than approaching the issue in the same way as banning people from smoking, the experts said a more 'constructive' approach would be to look at how society has responded to safety concerns around cars.
'In response to increasing injuries and deaths from car crashes, rather than banning cars, society built an ecosystem of product safety regulations for companies (seatbelts, airbags) and consumers (vehicle safety tests, penalties), public infrastructure (traffic lights), and education (licences) to support safer use,' they said.
Hashtags

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


Bloomberg
36 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Starmer Says No Obstacles Left in Finalizing US-UK Trade Deal
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said there were no 'hiccups or obstacles' remaining in the way of finalizing a trade deal with the US and indicated that an agreement would likely come soon. 'I'm hoping that we will complete it pretty soon,' Starmer said in an interview with Bloomberg News on Friday, referring to the deal. 'There's nothing unexpected in the implementation, and so we haven't got any hiccups or obstacles.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
LILLEY: Carney's public safety minister can't skip terror file
Is it wise to have a minister of Public Safety who has to recuse himself from files related to banned terrorist groups? The obvious answer is no, that's an untenable position and shouldn't be allowed to happen. Welcome to Canada in 2025, though, where Gary Anandasangaree is the minister in charge of the terrorism file but has to step out of the room for any decisions related to two banned terror groups. As first reported by Global, Anandasangaree can't be part of decisions on Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) or the World Tamil Movement (WTM). The LTTE, or Tamil Tigers, were part of a deadly civil war in Sri Lanka, engaging in assassinations and suicide attacks. The World Tamil Movement was a group set up in the 1980s to serve Toronto's large and growing Tamil community but was designated a terrorist group by the federal government for their funding of the LTTE. Why did Anandasangaree recuse himself? That's unclear, to be honest. He was asked about this by Conservative MP Frank Caputo in the House of Commons on Thursday but didn't offer much in the way of detail. 'In all national security decisions, my utmost concern is that of the safety of Canadians,' Anandasangaree said. 'I will support law enforcement and national security agencies who do their work impartially and effectively.' That's a boring boilerplate answer that doesn't tell us much. Neither does the second half of his answer. 'In an abundance of caution, and to ensure that there is no perception of any conflict, I have asked the public safety officials to implement a screen on national security issues relating to the Tamil community,' he added. If Anandasangaree has no ties to the LTTE or WTM, there should be no need to recuse himself from decisions about these organizations. Simply being Tamil, as Gary Anandasangaree is, doesn't mean he can't make informed decisions. Of course, if the Carney government were looking to lift the terrorist designation on the LTTE and WTM, having a minister of Public Safety who was born in Sri Lanka and is Tamil could have a bad look. Is that the reason for Anandasangaree to declare that he won't take part in decisions about these groups? It's an idea that has been pushed by many in the Tamil community for years, noting that the civil war ended in 2009 with the defeat of the Tigers. In April 2022 while campaigning for the leadership of the Conservative Party, Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown said he would lift the ban if elected. It would be a foolish move for Prime Minister Mark Carney to make but in keeping with a longstanding tradition for Liberals that winning over votes of specific ethnic groups is what really matters. Another possibility is the allegation that Anandasangaree has ties to the LTTE. That allegation was made back in 2014 as Anandasangaree was seeking the Liberal nomination in Scarborough-Rouge Park. Stories from diaspora media stated as fact, repeatedly, that Anandasangaree was part of the Tamil Tigers network. Many of those stories were posted to the website of the Sri Lankan government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and are still available there. That's not proof that Anandasangaree is or was part of the Tigers, nomination races can be nasty affairs and in ethnic diaspora politics, this is especially true. It is equally true that Anandasangaree has to answer more questions on this front and that the Sri Lankan government's actions should also be called into question. Questions about this matter sent to Anandasangaree's office on Thursday resulted in a one-line response regarding LTTE involvement. 'That statement is categorically false,' said spokesperson Alice Hansen. Questions to Carney's office about having a minister of Public Safety having to recuse himself and facing allegations on a Sri Lankan government website were met with bland, general statements. 'Minister Anandasangaree has been a lifelong advocate for his community to ensure it is supported and represented. He has made clear that his utmost concern in all national security decisions is the safety of Canadians,' said the reply. That doesn't quite seem good enough, transparent enough. Either Anandasangaree can do his job fully, or he should be replaced. blilley@
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Badenoch calls for end to oil and gas windfall tax
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has called for an end to the windfall tax on oil and gas companies and said new licenses should be issued for drilling in the North Sea. Addressing the Scottish Conservative party conference in Edinburgh, Badenoch said the tax - known as Energy Profits Levy - should be scrapped before its current 2030 expiration. The levy was brought in by the previous Conservative UK government but Badenoch said her party had got this wrong. The Tory leader also claimed that Scotland had "declined" under left wing parties and that the SNP had wasted millions on "independence propaganda". What is the windfall tax on oil and gas firms? UK government to end North Sea windfall tax in 2030 Fears over energy tax rises as business confidence falls The Energy Profits Levy was introduced in May 2022 after oil and gas companies recorded skyrocketing profits due to a sharp rise in energy prices, in part due to the war in Ukraine. It has since been both extended and increased, with the current scheme due to end in 2030. The oil and gas sector says the windfall tax is holding back investment. Badenoch told the Scottish Conservative conference that as part of renewing her party she would be "standing up for our oil and gas". She claimed the windfall tax on the sector is wrong as "for months there has been no windfall to tax". The Tory leader said: "The strikes overnight in the Middle East remind us of how vital it is that we can rely on our own energy security, our own natural resources." Badenoch said Labour's extension of the tax is "killing the oil and gas industry". To applause from the conference, she said a Tory government would "scrap the ban on new licences". Scottish Conservatives leader Russell Findlay earlier said it would be a "complete act of national self-harm" not to continue drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea. He told the BBC's Good Morning Scotland programme: "We are the party who completely support the North Sea oil and gas industry. "The SNP in Edinburgh are completely hostile to any form of new exploration, and it's exactly the same with Sir Keir Starmer and Ed Miliband in London. "They want to leave this oil and gas in the North Sea and import oil and gas from further afield. It makes absolutely no sense." Responding to Badenoch, Simon Francis of the End Fuel Poverty Coalition said her comments were "out of touch", adding: "Even with the windfall tax in place, the energy industry made over £115bn in profits in 2024 alone. "Meanwhile, average household energy bills remain hundreds and hundreds of pounds higher than they were before the energy crisis started." SNP MSP Kevin Stewart said: "The Tories wrecked our economy, presided over soaring household bills and ripped Scotland from the EU against our will." Dame Jackie Baillie, the deputy leader of Scottish Labour, claimed the Tories are on the side of oil and gas companies "rather than working Scots".