“I was recently at a forum in Santander about screens and adolescence,” says Gemma Martínez, researcher with the European group EUKids Online at the University of the Basque Country. “I perceived a new wave of concern focused on the risks of minors; there was not even a moment of discussion about the opportunities that new technologies provide,” she adds. This new wave is already a huge movement with parents organizing themselves in WhatsApp and Telegram groups, US prosecutors suing Meta for “taking advantage of children’s pain” and concern about news about runaway chats featuring teenagers and experts who insist that cell phones are an indescribable danger for young people.
It is difficult to deny that the use of mobile phones implies new risks. The evidence is clear: more internet equals more risk. But the real world is also full of risks and mobile phones are inevitably part of it. Leen d’Haenens is a member of the academic group ySkills, funded by the European Union, which wants to strengthen the digital skills of young people. “Our research at ySkills reveals two notable findings. One, possessing advanced digital skills often leads to behaviors on-line more risky. Two, that despite being very competent in things such as searching for information, communicating or creating content, these young people have difficulties avoiding content and contacts that represent risks to their mental well-being,” he develops.
Anyone who wants to define cell phones as a risk therefore has evidence in their favor. The problem is that a complete restriction also includes problems. In Europe there are two large research groups that study the digital experiences of minors and their families: EUKids Online, founded in 2006, with academics from 34 universities across the continent and at the origin of which is Sonia Livingstone, perhaps the greatest global expert in the sector. EUKids has a global child, and another European one more focused on skills, ySkills, made up of 16 institutions. EL PAÍS has consulted three experts from both groups about this wave and what to do with mobile phones.
1. At what age is it possible?
The big question about the age of the first mobile phone is such a persistent debate because it has no answer. In Spain, 12 years has been established as the accepted age because ESO begins. What should parents do whose children turn 12 and ask for their cell phone because “everyone has one”? The academy’s answer is: neither yes, nor no.
“You can’t generalize,” d’Haenens summarizes. “Parents should base their decision on individual circumstances and the child’s readiness for the responsibilities that come with a cell phone.”
Ellen Hespers, a digital inequality researcher at the London School of Economics and member of Global Kids Online, says one of the great truths little admitted in this debate: “Being a parent is not easy.” And she continues: “A 15-year-old boy can be very different from another 15-year-old boy and no solution works for everyone.”
2. Some practical criteria
Although there is no universally precise age to have a mobile phone with internet, the academy does give some clues to clarify in each home. There are four of them, according to d’Haenens. One, maturity, to see if the child knows how to handle screen time, safety on-line and your privacy. Two, communication needs, in case a cell phone is necessary to talk to family or friends. Three, educational purposes, if at school they work with apps, you need to research things on the internet or there are tasks that require connection. And four, physical security, to be able to communicate with adolescents if problems arise.
These four criteria are complemented by parental control options that can be negotiated with minors. From technological tools such as apps to monitor the use of free and constant communication with the children. “Setting rules and limits around screen time and content is vital to encouraging healthy habits,” says d’Haenens.
3. Is it easier not to give it to him?
It is not at all clear. Many families have already decided not to give mobile phones to 12-year-olds and have strict internal rules about the use of screens at home. They have a strategy and they share it with their children, although the opinion of the little ones is not always accepted. “One thing that fails in Spain is not counting on the kids,” says Martínez. “In one of the last studies we did between Portugal, Italy and Spain, Spanish minors between 9 and 17 years old were the ones who felt the least listened to at home.”
This exclusion, although it allows one to isolate oneself from the risks of mobile phones, adds others: “Completely excluding a child from using mobile phones depends on individual circumstances and parenting philosophy,” says d’Haenens. “In general, a balanced approach is preferable for most families,” she summarizes.
4. The problem does not go away at 16
The intention of parents who do not want to give a cell phone to 12 is not to limit it forever. There is some consensus that 16 is a good age. But those four years don’t happen in a vacuum.
It is true that it eliminates risks and also possible opportunities, but it ignores the needs of that adolescent: “There is a risk, as with everything at that age, that the prohibition will lead young people to access content in different ways, without supervision and receiving ideas from less informed peers, that they start hiding things from adults, which could potentially have very negative consequences,” explains Helsper.
For this specialist, the answer is an attitude called “active mediation”: “It has proven to have a positive impact on young people by avoiding harm from risks and allowing them to take advantage of opportunities.” Because waiting until 16 can cause unforeseen dramas: “Restricting and prohibiting does not allow young people to understand the risks and puts them at greater risk of harm when they finally begin to interact with technologies.”
5. “The hot potato” of mothers and fathers
The difficult decision of whether or not to give cell phones to these teenagers falls on the parents. But the responsibility for the proper use that your children make depends on many uncontrollable and distant factors: the algorithms of the large platforms, the proper use of the tools in school. on-lineintrusion into your privacy from the data industry, messages from harassing adults, or easy access to adult content.
The limitation of these problems depends on European, national and school legislation. Gemma Martínez has dubbed this problem the “hot potato.” The administration, parents and schools have a challenge with cell phones and no one can solve it. “Teachers are roasted right now,” says Martínez. “They get a lot of problems of this type, from cyberbullying, sexual images. They say that they can’t take it anymore, that it is a family problem and if they don’t start educating them at home, what are they going to do? This gap in responsibility is the “hot potato.”
They are complex solutions: because the consequences take a long time to arrive, as in legislation, or because knowing exactly what to do is a hassle for families: “I recently participated in a national campaign aimed at families. We called 50-70 parents in secondary education institutes in Madrid of a medium-high socioeconomic status. How many came? Two,” Martínez laments. These campaigns aim to allay fears, but they do not seem to work.
6. The apocalypse in the media
In this quagmire, the stories of digital calamities published by the media work quite well, both about unusual real cases and from experts with strong opinions. The world that these headlines reflect provokes reasonable fear: “Reading all these headlines also scares me,” says Martínez.
“When I see the media and I see the parallel world in which I am working, I wonder how to make ourselves heard. Until now, when we had an interview, we said ‘how lazy, I’m sure they’ll give me such a headline’, but the time has come to get rid of the laziness,” she adds.
In this void there are people who detect interest and see that there is room to grow, with research that may have biases or prejudices: “There are pseudo-researchers who very subjectively interpret data and release it to the media and can be annoying. quite the serious work of others,” Martínez reproaches. A repeated criticism is that using more mobile phones harms physical activity, because there is no evidence: “Our ySkills research, based on a three-wave longitudinal survey, did not reveal a correlation between digital use and decreased physical health,” says d’Haenens.
7. The comparison with alcohol
Many parents who want to delay the cell phone age compare it with products regulated until 18, such as drugs, alcohol or cars.
In the academy they believe that it is a wrong comparison. “It is not comparable to drugs or alcohol, which can have detrimental physiological effects on the brain development of young people. Its use is also problematic for adults with excessive drugs and alcohol or without a driving license. Taking away their cell phones is more like not letting young people walk or ride a bike alone on the street,” summarizes Helsper.
A more reasonable comparison is with sugar, says Helsper: “There are certain apps or contents which could be equivalent. “Parents will restrict what children eat so they are not exposed to too much junk food or sugary drinks, but they will not stop them from eating healthy things or drinking water.”
The complexity of distinguishing between sugary drinks and water on mobile phones is not easy. For that you have to be on top, chat with teenagers and be interested in their social life. “The world we live in is inherently digital, and excluding children from it means they will lose crucial digital literacy skills they need to become intelligent and critical citizens,” says d’Haenens.
You can follow EL PAÍS Technology in Facebook and x or sign up here to receive our weekly newsletter.
#age #child #cell #phone #experts #speak