Charity hopes to ban smartphones in schools
A Bristol-based charity is hoping to make the city the first in the UK where smartphones are banned from all classrooms.
The charity Papaya - Parents Against Phone Addiction in Young Adolescents - is calling on parents to delay giving their children smartphones until at least the age of 14. Campaigners believe this could significantly improve young people's mental health.
The organisation is working with more than 100 schools in Bristol and has secured commitments from 10 institutions to implement stricter policies.
Dr Susie Davies, founder of Papaya, said: "We want them to have a phone-free environment in schools so they concentrate on their learning, but also socialising in breaktime."
Papaya predicts that by the start of the next school term, a majority of Bristol's secondary schools could be signed up to their smartphone-free initiative.
Dr Davies, who is also a Bristol-based GP, said: "We want Bristol to be a smart phone-free city, where children don't get their first smart phone until they're 14."
Papaya is supporting schools to enforce phone-free environments through tools like Yondr pouches and lock boxes.
"It gives young people an extra two to three years of childhood," Dr Davies explained.
"Time to play, to enjoy each other's company, and to concentrate on learning and social development without the distraction of constant notifications."
More news stories for Bristol
Watch the latest Points West
Listen to the latest news for Bristol
What began as a small local initiative is now part of a national movement, with communities across the UK joining in.
"Smartphone-free childhood is becoming a viral movement," said Dr Davies.
"Parents and school leaders are increasingly aware of the link between phones and poor mental health."
Papaya has created a template letter inviting schools to sign up to the campaign and encouraging teachers and headteachers to get involved.
One of the early adopters is The Orchard School in north Bristol, where headteacher Melanie Sweet introduced locking pouches for phones a year ago.
She said the impact has been transformative.
"We've been delighted," said Ms Sweet. "We've seen a drop in 'corridor defiance', which is when students refuse to hand over phones, and a huge increase in engagement with our personal development programmes.
"Pupils are joining more clubs and break times are now social, happy spaces."
The school's trust is now recommending that parents delay smartphones until secondary students reach Year 10.
"It's not a ban, it's a recommendation," said Ms Sweet.
"But as a mother and a headteacher, I feel like we've preserved a little corner of childhood. I'd urge other parents to consider it."
Some teenagers have also told the BBC that growing up without a smartphone has felt like a relief rather than a restriction.
"I think I'm just less addicted to my phone than a lot of my friends," said Sofia, 16.
"Because I didn't have social media drilled into my life early on, I don't depend on it. I can go out without it and not worry."
Issy, aged 16, said her parents gave her a "brick" phone with very restricted internet and which shuts down at 19:00 every day.
When asked about how she felt about her parents' decision, she said it has given her more time to spend on her hobbies.
"I'm quite relieved," she said. "I've got a very different relationship with my phone."
Dr Davies, who said she sees the effects of screen addiction daily in her clinic, believes the time for action is now.
"There's real appetite for change, from teachers, parents, and students alike," she said.
Follow BBC Bristol on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630.
Kids exposed to social media posts about violence and suicide
People 'will find a way' to harmful content - teens
Instagram still posing serious risks to children, campaigners say
Papaya Parents
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump to slash funding for flagship US HIV programme by 40pc
America is proposing to cut its flagship anti-HIV programme by almost 40 per cent next year, according to new budget details that reveal sweeping reductions to global health spending. Details from Donald Trump's 2026 budget request show nearly a two-fifths fall in funding for the United States President's Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar). The long-running programme is estimated to have saved more that 20 million lives in the past two decades, and is often cited as one of the world's most successful public health schemes. A recent analysis published in the Lancet found that as many as half a million more children could die from Aids by the end of the decade because of disruptions to Pepfar. The details on global health funding for the State Department, USAID agency, Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) also show deep cuts elsewhere. Analysis by the San Francisco-based KFF health policy charity found the government departments were planning a 55 per cent cut in separate tuberculosis funding, a 47 per cent cut in malaria funding and a 92 per cent cut in maternal health funding. The proposal also withdraws all £221m ($300m) given to Gavi, the vaccine alliance which provides jabs to children in poor countries. In total, the request for money for the American government's main global health funding account is £2.8bn ($3.8bn) in 2026, down from £7.4bn ($10bn) in 2025. Setting out the cuts, the State Department said the request for money 'eliminates funding for programmes that do not make Americans safer, such as family planning and reproductive health, neglected tropical diseases, and non-emergency nutrition'. Mr Trump's government upended US aid spending days after taking office, saying it would suspend all aid while projects were reviewed. It then proceeded to close hundreds of aid programmes, including Pepfar projects, resulting in lay-offs for thousands of health workers, particularly in Africa. The budget proposals now give a clear indication that Mr Trump intends to continue with sharp cuts and will quash any hopes that the funding taps could be switched back on again. A State Department explanation of the budget request uses the phrase 'America First' 37 times as it explains a new focus on cutting costs and protecting US national interests. For the 2026 fiscal year, which begins on Oct 1, the budget proposals request £2.1bn ($2.9bn) for Pepfar, a 38 per cent reduction from the £3.5bn ($4.7bn) requested in 2025. The State department said that after spending a total of £88bn ($120bn) in the past two decades, it was now focussing on finding a responsible 'off ramp' to hand over responsibility for the campaign against HIV to countries themselves. 'This [budget] request will allow the United States to accelerate the transition of HIV control programmes to recipient countries and increase international ownership of efforts to fight HIV/Aids.' Some projects may still be paid for by other government funds, but overall the KFF analysis found the budget included 'significant reductions in global health funding including the elimination of some programs and activities'. The details will prove a severe disappointment to aid projects who had hoped that despite Mr Trump's rhetoric, there was a chance funding could be renewed in the new fiscal year. Public health officials argue that continuing to fund global health projects to stamp out infectious diseases is still in America's best interests as infections often cross borders. One executive at a major South African anti-HIV organisation said: 'Nobody wins unless we all win. No one can make it out of this alone. This is how we achieve epidemic control.' Protect yourself and your family by learning more about Global Health Security Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Beef jerky, snack sticks recalled: See list of affected products
Beef jerky, snack sticks recalled: See list of affected products Anyone concerned about an injury or illness should contact a health care provider, according to the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service. Show Caption Hide Caption Tips to help manage food recalls and prevent foodborne illnesses About 128,000 are hospitalized and 3,000 people die each year from preventable foodborne illnesses. Payton, USA TODAY Misbranding and an undeclared fishy allergen have led to the recall of more than 15,000 pounds of heat-treated shelf-stable ready-to-eat beef jerky and snack stick products, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). Springville Meat & Cold Storage Co. issued the recall on Tuesday, June 3, for the beef jerky and beef stick items produced on various dates from May 30, 2023, to May 30, 2025, the FSIS announced. In addition to the recall, the Springville, Utah-based company is voluntarily inspecting elk, venison and buffalo jerky products for misbranding and undeclared allergens, the government agency said. The allergen not declared on the meat products' labels is fish, more specifically, anchovies, according to the FSIS. The affected products, which were shipped to retail locations nationwide, have the establishment number "EST. 20528" inside the USDA mark of inspection. FSIS inspectors discovered the issue during product observations, which revealed that the Worcestershire sauce used in the jerky and snack sticks contained anchovies, the government agency said. The meat processor previously used Worcestershire sauce without anchovies, but the new Worcestershire sauce used for the products does contain the small fish, the FSIS said. The FSIS said there have been no confirmed reports of adverse reactions due to the consumption of the beef jerky and stick products. Anyone concerned about an injury or illness should contact a health care provider, according to the government agency. What should I do if I bought the recalled beef jerky, snack stick products? For anyone who may have the affected products in their pantries, they should not consume them, the FSIS said. Instead, consumers should throw away or return the products to the place of purchase, the government agency added. Product labels, lot codes for recalled Springville Meat items There are multiple product labels and lot codes associated with the recall, which can be viewed below:
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Maine has fifth-highest rate of emergency department visits nationwide
Editor's Note: The following story first appeared in The Maine Monitor's free health care newsletter, Health Monitor, that is delivered to inboxes every other Thursday. Sign up for the free newsletter to stay informed of Maine health care news. Maine has the fifth-highest rate of emergency department visits in the country, which hospital officials say could get worse with cuts to Medicaid and further contraction of services. Hospitals in the state saw 555 emergency department visits per 1,000 people in 2023, according to recent data from the American Hospital Association analyzed by KFF. The only states with higher rates were West Virginia with a rate of 596 per 1,000 people, North Dakota with a rate of 591, Louisiana with a rate of 589 and Mississippi with a rate of 567. Nevada had the lowest rate of 226, followed by Alaska at 258 and Arizona at 281 visits per 1,000 residents. Steven Michaud, president of the Maine Hospital Association, said Maine has had a high rate of emergency department visits for decades, which he said is largely because it is one of the most rural states and has limited access to primary care doctors, which can drive Mainers to the emergency department if they can't get timely access to primary care. 'A lot of it is not an emergency,' he said. 'They're using it as their primary care, which you just don't want to do because it's inefficient, it's expensive and all that.' While the trend is not new, this all comes at a time when Maine hospitals are merging, reducing services and even closing. Northern Light Inland Hospital in Waterville stopped its services on May 27. A California-based nonprofit announced plans to take over three hospitals through its purchase of Central Maine Healthcare. Northern Light Health reported a $156 million loss last year. Mount Desert Island Hospital announced it would close its birthing unit in July. MaineGeneral planned to end its pediatric psychological services last month. And on May 29, two Aroostook County hospitals said they would merge their management for a year to 'remain viable.' Michaud said these are 'unprecedented times,' and that these closures are happening across the state, even in smaller communities where they don't grab as much attention. For example, he said Penobscot Valley Hospital also had to end behavioral health services due to financial losses and paused payments after lawmakers failed to initially pass the supplemental budget. All these closures may not be the primary driver of the trend of emergency visits, but they're definitely a factor, he said. 'What happens when people get into a behavioral health crisis? Where do they go? The emergency departments,' Michaud said. Hospitals have tried to address the issue by creating walk-in clinics, he said, but that requires additional staff. Dr. Jay Mullen, CEO of BlueWater Health and a practicing emergency physician with experience in hospitals around the state, agreed with Michaud that the highest use of emergency departments is in the 'most rural areas where access to primary care, dental care and urgent care services are the most limited.' He added that Maine has a higher proportion of older adults and people with chronic conditions, which can contribute to emergency department visits. High use of emergency departments can strain resources, leading to longer wait times and potentially delayed care, Mullen said. 'For patients, this can mean fragmented care and less continuity, especially when (emergency department) visits are used in place of primary care,' he said. 'However, it's important to note that (emergency departments) in Maine are doing their best to meet these needs — often serving as the only accessible point of care for vulnerable populations.' And in some communities, Mullen said there can be benefits. High rates of emergency department visits can actually be a 'financial stabilizer' for rural hospitals by providing critical revenue to support broader hospital operations. 'Rural (emergency departments) operate with high fixed costs — staffing, infrastructure, and compliance requirements remain constant regardless of patient volume,' he said. 'When visit volumes are low, these fixed costs are spread across fewer encounters, making each visit disproportionately expensive. But when volume increases, even modestly, it helps offset those fixed costs and improves the financial viability of the department.' Both Mullen and Michaud said another factor contributing to high rates of ED visits is that many Mainers have coverage from MaineCare, the state's version of Medicaid. Nearly a third of all Mainers were enrolled in MaineCare last year, including two-thirds of nursing home residents and half of all children. This isn't limited to rural areas, Mullen said. Urban areas with a lot of people on MaineCare also see higher rates of emergency department visits, suggesting 'that both geographic and socioeconomic factors are at play.' People on MaineCare often struggle to find primary care providers who will accept them due to low reimbursement rates, Michaud said. As a result, they might end up in the emergency department. Michaud said expected federal cuts to Medicaid will only make this worse: 'Any time you reduce coverage, you exacerbate this.' U.S. House Republicans narrowly forwarded a bill last week that would reduce Medicaid spending by at least $600 billion dollars over 10 years and is expected to reduce enrollment by about 10 million Americans. Another factor impacting emergency department visits is that Maine sees high numbers of visitors, many of whom don't have doctors, so hospitals in destination towns along the coast often see surges in the summer, Michaud said. While Maine's rural nature may explain its high ranking for emergency department visits per capita, there were some rural states that had low rates. In particular, Michaud said he was surprised to see Alaska among the lowest rates. And Massachusetts, which has near-universal healthcare, still had the 14th highest rate of emergency department visits. Michaud said there are many factors that contribute to these trends and it's difficult to tell what might explain each state's ranking. It might be that some states have robust public health networks, unlike Maine, which has only two city public health departments in Portland and Bangor. 'Hospitals in Maine serve as the public health infrastructure,' he said.
