Sign In / Register
In Part Three of our series on a possible Social Media Ban for U16s, we hear from the experts – two clinical psychologists from Warkworth, Linda Gow and Anelda Huisamen. Both specialise in the mental, emotional and social development of children, have supported under 16s and have seen the effects of social media on this age group first-hand. While they agreed with the parents interviewed in Part Two (MM Jul 7), that education and raising awareness about social media were important, they also wanted to see legislation introduced to complement this approach, such as some sort of ban. In other words, a multi-layered approach.
Gow says a growing body of research shows young people using social media can experience negative effects such as mental and physical symptoms, eating disorders, loneliness, and disrupted sleep.
“Obviously the children I see are the ones that are harmed by it. And that’s quite a number of kids,” she says.
“There’s a lot of mental health issues that are possibly being seen more now because of social media platforms. In particular, because they provide opportunities for children to be shamed online.”
Gow points to the depiction in the recent Netflix show ‘Adolescence’ as an example of how this can happen.
“It’s an extreme case but highlights the dangers of social media. She shames him online and so many kids get to see it. This can cause serious problems in the playground.
“This type of bullying has become an issue for some of the children I see because they’re suicidal or obviously struggling in school and being disruptive. All those kinds of things are happening.
“I’ve seen kids who said they were receiving messages online in class, so it’s good that there’s been a ban of phones in the classroom.”
Another problem, Gow says, is that children socialise virtually through social media platforms, which has had an impact on the development of social skills and the ability to interact with others.
“For some children they manage it with balance. But the research shows kids are on social media platforms a huge amount of time – up to four hours a day.
“Some of these children may not have really wanted to go out in the first place, but spending their spare time on social media in their bedroom instead of socialising just reinforces those patterns.”
She adds that after covid she saw kids that had “literally dropped out of school” because they had been isolated in their own rooms using social media for so long.
Gow says other problematic behaviour is sexting i.e. sending sexually suggestive messages or revealing photos and videos via social media.
“I’m encountering that all the time with the kids I see. This is a kind of currency between them, they send pictures to each other, sometimes nude photos.
“I’ve seen a lot of kids who are in that younger age group, 12 or 13 year olds, who are being preyed upon by 15-year-olds. That’s quite a big age difference when you’re that young. It’s a huge developmental change.
“And a lot of kids are watching pornography on social media – that certainly is what I’ve seen.”
Gow says that there’s also the potential for predators to use social media platforms to target children.
“These kids are pretty savvy on tech, but it does mean that they have the knowledge to get into some of these places where they then don’t realise how dangerous it is.”
The parents Mahurangi Matters spoke with for Part Two said social media was a useful way for their children to contact their friends, while the students we interviewed for Part One said it helped them find like-minded people.
However, Gow says kids don’t need to go on social media to stay in touch.
“There are other platforms such as messaging apps that can facilitate this. So it’s not like they’d be cut off.
“And there are multiple ways of finding like-minded people aside from using social media. It’s easier but
I don’t think it necessarily is the only way to do that. Kids can access those kinds of things at school, the library – there’s all sorts of places.”
Are education and raising awareness about the dangers of social media more practical than a ban for under 16s?
“It is not an either/or but a multifaceted approach that is required. A ban for under 16s has to sit in the context of other interventions. Also, this current generation of 13 to 15-year-olds accessing social media will grow out of the age range and the next group will accept and get used to this new limit as they will all be in it together. After a while a ban for under 16s will be the norm,” Gow says.
“There are a lot of things young people can’t do or don’t have access to until they are 16. There is a good reason for this – their brain is still in an early developmental phase. It is well known that the female brain is not fully developed until age 18 and the male brain until 25 years old. That puts the potential social media ban for under 16s in perspective.”
Gow adds, “Research suggests that, on balance, children actually do need these types of protections.
So I think that the government is trying to follow clinical advice.
“Not all parents, for a wide variety of reasons, are able to protect their kids from the dangers of social media. The next generation of parents will be much more savvy because they would have grown up with these technologies.”
Gow references the Public Health Communication Centre (PHCC) briefing from March 19, which says,
“Addressing the challenge of social media’s impact on youth requires a public health approach that is comprehensive and multi-layered.
“This should include policy change, messaging aligning with societal values, youth-led initiatives, parent and healthcare provider education, and the creation of more supportive online and offline environments.
“It will require collective action – from policymakers, health professionals, families and communities – to protect and improve the wellbeing of our young people.”
Gow acknowledges there could be a problem with policing a ban.
“This is why there is an onus on the developers of social media platforms to put those guardrails in place so that it limits what young people can access”.
Like Gow, Huisamen says interacting on social media virtually can affect a child’s ability to socialise in the real world, and also affect their broader emotional and cognitive development. Children do not have the neurodevelopmental maturity to responsibly navigate the complexity of social media independently, yet this happens way too often, she says.
“There are instances of children having difficulty fitting in at school, especially post-covid, who got themselves into a vulnerable position by posting inappropriate content about a school, teachers and themselves on their own social media accounts.
“Children can be encouraged to do this by their peers with the promise that they would be accepted into a group, but are often simply entertainment for the kids encouraging these actions.
“Because of their neurodevelopmental immaturity, kids don’t always realise the seriousness of sharing such content, and sometimes may simply be considered a behaviour problem by schools or families.
“However, it is deeply reflective of the potential damage the virtual social world can cause to not only social skills, but also identity and mental health in our children.”
Huisamen adds, “In the therapy context, we can work on supporting these kids to develop insight into their actions to minimise the chance of it happening again, but also trying to decipher what motivated the kid to engage in such out-of-character behaviour in the first place – the impact of social media on self-concept is often to blame for this.”
Huisamen says sometimes young people will share on social media without peer pressure, and later regret it.
“Children below 13 years old may create their own social media accounts by entering a fake age, and naively share inappropriate content, including sexual content, of themselves.
“What also happens all too often is adults or older children impersonate or have access to children virtually, and these children risk complying to inappropriate requests (for photos or videos).
“And it’s there forever. Mum or Dad can’t get it erased, and some children end up living in fear of these images resurfacing.
“This can have devastating impacts on the mental health of these children and families.”
It’s not just posting images and videos young people have created of themselves causing problems, it’s often being photographed or filmed by someone else, Huisamen says.
“It’s quite common that if something exciting happens, good or bad, it’s being recorded. And it all goes on social media.
“My observation is that kids still end up doing impulsive things knowing they’re being recorded and then deeply regret it afterwards. It is reflective of the vulnerable period of development they are in, and why they need guarding from social media in some form. The parts of the brain supporting true insight into how your behaviours might impact your future, are not fully developed yet. The child recording and posting will often have empathy or insight later on and deeply regret it.”
Does continuing to use social media despite negative consequences tick some of the boxes of addiction?
“If we think of it simply, you can say that, because it’s the same neurochemicals and neural pathways that could be activated as in addiction.
“Children who are typically very honest are seen being dishonest to get their phones when limits are implemented by caregivers, similar to what may be seen in addiction.”
“Even kids who don’t have a particular vulnerability to addiction can become habituated, which is dopamine mediated, similar to what is seen in addiction.
The problem is bigger than addiction, however, Huisamen says.
“Kids are simply not relating to others and themselves, or connecting, in a way that they are wired to do.
“Also sleep issues and phones are extremely common. Many kids have sleep onset issues because of social media. There’s no end point when you’re scrolling. It’s not like when you finish a chapter in a book, or the end of a film. It’s formulated to keep you going. Once they fall asleep, we see sleep quality being affected for the few hours they do get in.”
Huisamen says this can have a knock-on effect with pervasive impact.
“Because of poor sleep, kids are grumpy in the morning and run into issues with their family. They have difficulty staying focused in class, they’re falling asleep halfway through the day or just zoning out. It has a very real impact even on their attention even in therapy.”
While there are many negatives associated with under 16s using social media, Huisamen says there are also positives.
“Kids can use social media responsibly and I’ve seen the flip side where extremely strict limits on social media had left kids feeling quite excluded and ultimately isolated. Social media can help kids feel involved and connected.”
So do you support a social media ban for under 16s?
“Social media is not going anywhere. It has become part of the kids’ fibre. My concern is that if it needs to be hidden (because it’s illegal), there’s going to be even less support for these kids to navigate social media safely.
“But it should be more than just awareness and education. I do feel like the government has a part to play. It could definitely help people take children’s social media usage more seriously if there’s some legislation, even if there’s room for interpretation.”
Huisamen adds, “A ban for under 13s would be more realistic. Having said that, parents should still take the necessary steps to ascertain whether their kids are ready for it once they’re older. The government can provide concise guidance on what this may look like, and should implement compulsory safety measures in order for social media to be used.”
In Part Four we conclude our series by speaking with teachers from local colleges about the proposed social media ban for under 16s.
