Response to ‘Benefits and Harms of Proposed Social Media Legislation’

The issue extends beyond legislation; it’s about recognizing the impact of these technologies on children.

Health Viewpoints

In reviewing the ongoing debate surrounding social media legislation for teens, it’s clear that we are not taking child development and the associated harms of teen social media use seriously enough.

In the article, Benefits and Harms of the Proposed Social Media Legislation published on July 22 in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, Dr. Megan Moreno and Dr. Jenny Radesky argue that policy approaches that inadequately support adolescent autonomy “may do more harm than good.”

Examples of harmful legislation these doctors list include those that shut down particular social media sites, impose age restrictions for social media use, or require parental permission for social media.

“It is important to recognize that there are multiple complex factors that contribute to adolescent mental health, and technology-based legislation alone will not solve the current mental health crisis,” notes the JAMA article.

The issue is not entirely about legislation, however. It is about acknowledging the true effects that these technologies have on children. In that regard, Drs. Moreno and Radesky, co-medical directors of the American Academy of Pediatrics Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health, may not be cautious enough.

The Crux of the Problem

The crux of the problem lies in social media’s addictive nature and the teen brain’s underdeveloped judgment center. Until these two facts are taken seriously, a consensus on the solution will remain elusive.

Teen brains are not the same as adult brains. Teens are more likely to take risks, compare themselves with others, and struggle with impulse control, which is why prolonged exposure to social media is harmful to this age group.

Medically speaking, teens are the recipients of the most harmful aspects of social media. From anxiety, stress, predators, and lack of sleep, teens get the short end of the deal when it comes to social media use.

Many of the proposed legislative points outlined in the JAMA Pediatrics article are valid:

Technology platforms should be designed around teens’ developmental needs
Include privacy protections from predators and drug dealers
Make accounts private by default
Offer better control settings
Verify ages
Allow control over personal content and algorithms

However, even teenagers are not fully prepared for the full effects of unlimited social media exposure, just as we wouldn’t consider them ready for unrestricted access to alcohol or firearms. It doesn’t matter what we do to alcohol or guns, their basic nature creates risks that teens are not ready to face on their own. Suggesting otherwise is like saying that smoking wouldn’t be bad for teens if we could get rid of the smoke.

Having such an extensive list of necessary protections indicates that social media is just not suitable for teenagers. We need to come together as a culture and acknowledge the obvious: Laws or no laws, social media is not a good fit for teenagers.

The Overprotective Argument

The JAMA piece states that caregivers can face a challenge contending with teen demands for greater independence.

“Adults want to protect them while their self-control and thinking skills are still developing, while also providing enough autonomy and support that teenagers can independently launch themselves into adulthood,” it notes.

However, the authors argue against age restrictions on social media: “Some policy approaches—particularly those that fail to support adolescent autonomy—may do more harm than good.”

In particular, they point out that “teenagers from marginalized communities benefit from affirming online communities when they do not perceive such support in their home or school.”

When it comes to social media, however, the idea of overprotection by parents can easily be exaggerated. After all, teenagers also are harmed by online communities, and the activity in these spaces can become a major source of anxiety.

Teens are in a mental health crisis, and parents who limit their teens’ online activities are not trying to shield teens from real life but rather from the short-term harm and long-term addiction caused by screen overuse.

Guiding teens away from the most toxic screen platforms—social media and pornography—is not about parental overprotection; it’s about safeguarding the well-being of teenagers, the job of every parent and caring adult.

Skipping social media during adolescence isn’t overprotective, but it is prudent. Teens lack the maturity to navigate addictive behaviors on their own—they need the support of parents and sometimes lawmakers. As much as we might wish otherwise, we can’t force maturity.

The Autonomy Argument

Teenagers do need autonomy, of course, but autonomy must be experienced in the real world. Autonomy within a social media platform—where content is algorithmically curated to manipulate users—is not autonomy. It is fake autonomy. Healthy autonomy is gained through real-world experiences, not artificial digital environments. It is gained through self-control, not exposure to technologies that compromise self-control.

Supporting adolescent autonomy should not involve placing them in harm’s way but directing them toward healthy, safe avenues where they can grow and learn without unnecessary risks.

The Independence Argument

True independence for teens means they develop their own sense of identity, confidence, and life skills. Every minute spent scrolling social media erodes these qualities, making teens less independent and more dependent on the screen “drug” and susceptible to anxiety and depression.

We must dispel the myth that phone use equates to independence. Excessive social media use fosters dependency on external sources for “independent thinking,” undermining the development of critical thinking skills and self-reliance.

Teens relying on social media for validation and answers to life’s questions become less sure of themselves and their place in the world. They become more weak and dependent, not more strong and independent.

Laws vs. Education

Drs. Moreno and Radesky make some great points about how social media platforms should be adapted to be less problematic, but it’s hard to make a clear-cut case that requiring parental permission for social media use would be harmful.

Online activities can be akin to a form of self-medication among teens. The teenage brain is not equipped to handle such responsibilities independently—that’s why they have parents to guide them for 18 years. The alternative to unrestricted social media access is not “restrictive,” but rather, it offers the freedom to experience a healthy adolescence free of toxic influences. Social media is not essential for anyone, least of all teens.

This issue is not complicated. If we approached it with the same rigor as teen smoking, drug, or alcohol use, the path forward would be evident. We wouldn’t dream of allowing teens to exercise autonomy with drugs or alcohol just because a few might handle it well or have “unsupportive homes or schools.”

More Laws vs. More Education

Are more laws the solution, or do we need more education?

Whether or not we need laws to set guardrails and help our teens, we need education even more. With enough information, parents can base their decisions on facts, take a stand, and skip social media altogether during the teen years.

Since awareness is the cornerstone of every cultural change and solution, parents must get educated. Next, they must educate their tweens and teens and, like a good coach, explain the new game plan so that children can thrive during the short season of adolescence and not be burdened by social media.

Laws or no laws, ultimately, parents must weigh the risks and benefits of teen social media use. And we don’t have much time—the 48 months of high school are over in a flash.

The scales are not balanced, the risks far outweigh the benefits of teen social media use. It’s time to stop the suffering and stand up for our teens’ well-being. Let’s protect them, educate them, and allow them the freedom to grow up without the burden and the pain of social media.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.

Source link