——- Studies show that excessive screen time and constant social media engagement are fuelling anxiety, depression, and emotional distress among young users.
The United Kingdom and France are weighing new restrictions on children and teenagers’ access to social media, reigniting a global debate over the platform’s impact on young people’s mental health.
The discussions follow Australia’s landmark decision to ban children under the age of 16 from accessing major social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and YouTube, making it the first country to adopt such sweeping measures. Proponents of tighter controls argue that urgent intervention is needed as evidence mounts of worsening mental health among adolescents.
In France, lawmakers are currently debating legislation that would bar children under 15 from social media platforms. One of the proposed bills has received backing from President Emmanuel Macron, signalling strong political support for tougher regulation. France’s public health watchdog, ANSES, recently warned that social media plays a role in the decline of adolescent mental health, particularly among girls, although it noted that it is not the sole contributing factor.
In the UK, the debate has gained momentum after reports that American psychologist Jonathan Haidt, a leading advocate of Australia’s policy, has been invited to brief government officials.
In his 2024 bestselling book The Anxious Generation, Haidt argues that heavy social media use is “rewiring” young brains and driving a rise in mental health disorders among children and teenagers. While the book has influenced policymakers, it has also sparked academic pushback. Canadian psychologist Candice Odgers has challenged Haidt’s conclusions, arguing that current evidence does not support claims of a widespread mental health crisis directly caused by social media use.
Other researchers adopt a more cautious middle ground. Michael Noetel of the University of Queensland said that even small negative effects of social media, when experienced by millions of teenagers, could have serious societal consequences. He described age-based bans as “a bet worth making,” citing substantial evidence of harm to adolescent wellbeing.
A large-scale review published in Psychological Bulletin, which analysed more than 100 global studies, found that excessive screen time including social media use and video gaming is associated with emotional distress among young people. The distress, researchers noted, can in turn lead to increased dependence on screens.
However, some studies suggest that moderation, rather than outright bans, may be more effective. Research led by Ben Singh of the University of Adelaide, tracking over 100,000 Australian teenagers over three years, found that both heavy use and total avoidance of social media were linked to poorer wellbeing, while moderate use was associated with better mental health outcomes.
French psychiatrist Serge Tisseron warned that while social media platforms can be highly toxic for young users, blanket bans may prove ineffective. He noted that tech-savvy teenagers could easily bypass restrictions and cautioned that bans might also weaken parental responsibility.
Tisseron instead called for balanced regulation and stronger digital education.
As governments in Europe and beyond consider stricter rules, the debate remains finely balanced between protecting young minds and ensuring policies are practical, evidence based and enforceable in an increasingly digital world.