To wholeheartedly agree with Brianna Ghey’s mother

[Moonpig82]

I spotted this article this morning. We personally do not allow Tik Tok, Insta, Facebook, Snapchat. For our eldest who has just got a phone when starting Year 7. However we have succumbed to whatsapp.

What are people’s thoughts? How can we ‘police’ our children’s phones?

Or AIBU and there is no policing for social media? I know my Year 7 child’s friends do have these apps. Not all of them though.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68193103

That’s my son, but he’s not stood on the sidelines. His friends do chat about video games, but they also chat about other things and when they chat games, they just explain what they’re talking about.

I will feel sad when the other boys are chatting on Snapchat (if they are), but it won’t change my mind and cause me to allow my son to use it.

In some ways it sucks, but I feel I’m appropriately parenting him and that’s what matters to me. I also make sure I support him in maintaining friendships and give him friendships revolving around groups that don’t need to involve video game chats.

I do totally get where you’re coming from, but my explanation re. Social media use would be that I model pretty healthy adult use, frequently go through phases where I don’t use it at all and use it at an appropriate age.

The only reason why it wouldn't be possible is that marketing to children is extremely profitable. Personally, I don't see the need for a child to have a smartphone, but I understand that not everyone feels the same way. I think a happy middle ground would be a kid's social media platform, e.g. Facebook safe, with controls designed to protect kids. All videos must be checked and approved before they are allowed on the platform. Parents must register the account, and all activity can be monitored via their phone/laptop. Maybe even a limit on screen time? It shouldn't be hard to enforce, if underage kids are found using adult social media sites, IMO parents should be fined. If social media giants are failing to put adequate protection in place for child users, they should get lumped with a huge fine! As it stands, these companies are making millions out of kids, so there is no incentive to stop. I think that parents have a responsibility to protect their young kids; just because 'everyone at school has TikTok' doesn't mean they actually do, and it doesn't mean it's okay. For teens it is harder, for sure. I think the ideal is to have open conversations, to talk about what they are up to online, what funny videos they've watched etc. It's the secrecy that's the problem.

Just my views, and I feel quite passionate about this.

@QuillBill@Sususudio
I specifically mentioned single digits and kids, then got replies talking about teens lol. 😂

Having a family computer or family tablet with set allocated times and that aren't in the children's rooms is very different from children having their own smart devices, is it not? :S
I don't really see where what I said implied "absolute nothing, not even games". Just not their own devices.

Again, maybe I truly am just naive as I said in my original comment - but I don't think single digit kids "need" smart devices under really any circumstances tbh.
Supervised access to a family computer in a family space, fine. Their own smart devices? No. My own and my DP's experiences are enough for me to know that that's not how we'd like to do things regardless of whether other's kids have access to these things freely or not.

"And when they are twelve and using Snapchat to talk to each other and your child can't join in so gets left out of stuff then you will feel sad for him."
Snapchat, the app that has been historically used for sending nudes whilst underage?
Yeah sorry, not happening.
Even if "all their friends" have it, I won't be okay with my child having snapchat access whilst they're a minor to be completely honest.
Maybe that's prudish, but I know what my friends and I did with it when it first came out and I don't think any of our parents knew at all.
The entire appeal of that app originally was that it doesn't keep chat logs or image history after a set amount of time was it not?
I just don't understand how that's an appropriate app for minors to have access to - because of the filters? Because you can make funny faces with it?
Then do those things with them on your phone, they don't need their own.

That's not even touching on the less unsavoury aspect of SC giving people complexes about how they look with the filters that are designed to make you look more attractive.
There's entire swathes of people who grew up on Snapchat who now can't stand to look at their own face without a filter on and have even gone to such lengths as having plastic surgery to make themselves look like they do with a SC filter on. Sorry but that's not healthy in my book and I don't want my kid's brains to be warped by that type of thing.

My original comment was not from a "judging PoV" even if people want to take it that way, it was from an "I don't understand this PoV".
Did we not all grow up hearing the saying "You wouldn't jump off a bridge just because all of your friends do"?
Just because it's everywhere or "all of their mates have it" doesn't mean it's right or healthy for them :S

Snapchat is nothing compared to live streaming sites. Then there are all the games they can talk to others on, fitness apps… They communicate in all sorts of ways and have loads of options. You really have no idea how hard it is to monitor.

Indeed schools have a lot to answer for. As a former teacher I’ve seen how insidious the influence of over-use of tech has been not only on the student but also on making aspects of teaching even more burdensome for teachers. In the future I think we will see more and more tech free schools a la Steiner as I predict a significant minority of young millennial and Gen Z parents will want to prevent their children from the same harms they were exposed to.

While it's doubtful it will happen again, there was a need though during Covid.

WhatsApp might not be here soon! Unless they open up their end to end encryption.

Yup. I said that in the post you quoted

It shouldn't be up to companies to make social media/the internet safe, it's up to the parents to teach their children safety. No child should have a phone that's capable of accessing the internet. You can buy a phone from Tesco for £28, it makes calls & texts, that's all a child needs, any parent who buys their under 16 year old a phone capable of more than that is increasing their risk and should be ashamed of themselves.

It’s so disturbing to think how many millions of children worldwide are doing similar, while their parents are completely in the dark. The vast majority will not commit crimes but they are no doubt severely damaged as a result even if they may hide it well. Now think of the implications of this on a societal level. Makes you shudder.

WhatsApp might not be here soon! Unless they open up their end to end encryption.

Then they will use something else.

I agree with you wholeheartedly and know exactly how hard these things are to monitor - My parents had gone so far as to have legitimate spyware and keylogging and a myriad of other things on my devices and I STILL managed to get away with things I of course know they would be mortified if they found out I'd done/accessed.

Which is exactly why I'm of the strong opinion that they shouldn't have their own devices until they can pay for them themselves.
Again, family devices with actual "child and screen in eyesight" supervision, fine. Their own devices where they'll be able to find loopholes and workarounds? Absolutely not imo.

Studies have shown it’s a behaviour which is mimicked. So the parent needs to stop using them in reality.

So did he have a job to pay for his own phone bill or did you pay it for him? Who is actually in charge in your family? You the parent or your son the adolescent?

SpicyMoth
You just can’t enforce that with 15, 16 and even 14 year olds.

Collecting phones in and limiting screen time caused us years of misery and arguments as it was. Both of which were completely fruitless as regards protection.

Video sharing sites can certainly be regulated better. There are actual death videos, street fights, animal cruelty videos open for anyone to find that should really be taken down. Of course clicks are money for those sites though.

Jesús wept. Mum can use social media because she’s an adult. She also has an income to pay for the device and internet. Children don’t have an income and shouldn’t do certain adult activities because they are harmful to children. Using social media is one such example but there are plenty more. Should mummy also allow DD or DS to drink wine because as she does?

Alcohol is not comparible as 100 times easier to monitor.

I can see where you're coming from to an extent if you have someone immunocompromised within your household and want absolutely 0 contact with the outside world as much as possible, but aside from that I still don't really see it as a "need".
Schoolwork and communicating with friends can both be done on family devices with supervision, they don't need their own devices to do these things.

Those who were WFH were often given devices from their employers - computers or laptops or tablets, at least majority of my friends were - Other's were able to use their own smartphones/thing they already had if agreed with their employer.
I know a few who stretched the truth to their employers when asked if they had access to a computer or laptop to WFH, they'd say no even though they did just so they'd get a "free laptop" - Their words.
Those who weren't WFH obviously the above doesn't apply.

I understand just because this is my friends/my experience that it is not everyone's experience, but my point is more that there are alternatives to giving a child their own smart device - Even with Covid there still wasn't a need imho.

You seriously think you can let 14,15 and 16 year olds only communicate with friends under supervision on household devices. You’re deluded.

My year 11 child has no social media and shows no interest in it.

Great that’s your child. It isn’t the norm.

Agree about primary age but that’s the easy bit.

It’s when they are teens that the pips start to squeak. Your averagely sociable teenage girl without a phone is unheard of. I don’t know ONE - even the family that did not have a tv and swore their children would never have phones. They were very smug as their rather solitary older son didn’t even want a phone but even they gave in with their daughter. It’s not like the old days whether you approve or not the phones are pivotal to their social lives. I wish it wasn’t the case either but there is no way we could have not got ours smart phones from 13 plus. We held off until 12.

To be fair we had 11 years of inculcating our values and both ours use theirs to communicate with their mates. Dd1 never posts pictures on SM Dd2 rarely does. It’s seen as sad and desperate to do that. They are basically chatting to their mates on snap chat. It’s pretty much drivel - but harmless drivel with their actual friends. I see it as the equivalent to the long phone calls I had with my best mate on the land line. But both have active healthy social lives so they are not replacing that with an online life like some teens.

I hate Facebook, Insta etc but how would a ban on social media apps have helped?

The killers were friends from school and searched how to kill on the dark web, not on Facebook.

But having laws about it helps.