The social media ban for under-16s means it’s out of my hands – what a relief

The Independent's journalism is supported by our readers. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn commission. The social media ban for under-16s means it’s out of my hands – what a relief Some parents are over the moon about the under-16s social media ban. Like Charlotte Cripps, who finds arguments with her young daughters impossible and wonders if Keir Starmer could ban doom-scrolling adults next - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments My daughter, Liberty, is only eight and I am already sick of the exhausting arguments at home about online harm. So I’m delighted by the news that the government plans to ban social media in the UK for under-16s. It’s taking the responsibility out of parents’ hands and instead of “I hate you, Mum” when I take away my daughter’s iPad, I’m looking forward to hearing, “I hate you Keir Starmer”. It’s largely my fault Liberty ever found YouTube and looks upon her iPad as her “bestie”. She might only be watching squishy unboxing videos or ones of cute pets at this stage of her young life, but now when I restrict her usage or try to ban it, she has an epic meltdown, telling me I’m “the worst mum in the world”. I naively used it as a “digital nanny” to keep her quiet and entertained when it suited me – and when she was a toddler, I discovered our childminder used to give her and her sister, Lola, now 10, an iPhone to watch kids’ TV shows, which explained their emerging American accents. Lola has somehow managed so far to come out unscathed, as she is a bookworm, but her primary school has sent her home with a login and password for an AI-driven online educational platform to master the UK Key Stage 2 curriculum at home, and that means using my laptop. It’s worrying me as she closes my laptop shut as I go to check on her, asking me, “Mummy, why don’t you trust me?” I know that she could easily discover the huge, wide world of the internet – a sinister kind of Narnia with none of the whimsy of the CS Lewis books – and it could rob them of their childhood. It terrifies me. So Starmer’s decision to “stand up for parents and put children first” by banning under-16s from sites including TikTok, Instagram, Threads, Facebook, X, YouTube, Snapchat and Reddit is a huge relief. Until now, the response I get from my youngest daughter when I try to limit her use is one of bafflement; a refusal to believe that the harm is real. Now I can tell her that it is illegal – and what that offers me, especially as a single mum, is another voice of authority. The government said it didn’t intend to include messaging services like WhatsApp in the social media ban, which is a small mercy for my daughters as they can still send their friends emojis and GIFs now and again. But I am aware that any interaction with a phone is training them for a future glued to it. Australia was the trailblazer on this front, banning under-16s from social media in late 2025. The UK ban, which will take effect in early 2027, will go a step further, restricting under-18s from role-playing and simulating sexual relationships with AI “romantic companion” chatbots, as well as harmful features online such as live streaming. It will also impose a curfew for under-18s, in an attempt to end unhealthy late-night scrolling. It all sounds great, but I can’t help wondering about the rest of us over-18s. I can’t stop scrolling late at night either. It is highly addictive. Platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and X are designed to trigger the brain's dopamine reward system through unexpected “likes”, comments, or engaging videos, making it very hard to put the device down – and as we all know, when you are truly addicted, your choice is taken away. And for the parents of Gen Z kids who have been allowed social media freely until now, it’s a hard pill to swallow. The free rein on social media has been an experiment, partly at their expense, leading to us realising how toxic and corrosive it is. But you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube, and, for this cohort, I guess we have to accept that the damage has been done. But at the moment, a lot of teenagers simply don’t even fully comprehend the harm that social media can cause – including loneliness, anxiety, depression, cyberbullying, misogyny, addiction and brain rewiring – because it is so freely available. YouGov have released polling showing that three-quarters of parents support a social media ban for under-16s, even though more than half of parents do not think a ban will be effective. And no doubt it’s true that the ban won’t be as simple to roll out as we would all like to hope. It will probably prove hard to enforce among a generation of digital natives able to set up accounts with fake dates of birth. But while banning under-16s from social media may not be “the silver bullet solution” and it requires a “basket of measures” to protect children online, as culture secretary Lisa Nandy has said, it’s a wonderful start, not least because it is an irrefutable comment on the harm that it can cause. And for parents like me with Gen A kids, a blanket ban on social media simplifies things because it is simply not an option. It also helps to educate them on the pitfalls of falling down a social media rabbit hole – and makes them sit up and take it seriously. It also means I can relax when they spend time with other kids. I live in fear of my children going round to friends’ houses and lying on a bunk bed watching TikTok videos for hours without any adult knowing, partly because I know that this happens. But this ban will also shake up more laissez-faire parents. I literally can’t wait to tell Liberty that she has to wave goodbye to YouTube until she’s 16. I think the best plan is to remove her iPad and tell her Starmer says we have to give all iPads back to the government HQ. Today is a great day for me – and for many other parents. For once, Starmer seems to have done something right. Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments