As Europe follows Australia's social media ban, the US opts for own way

As Europe and Canada follow Australia's social media ban for young people, the US moves another way Sun 19 Jul 2026 at 4:50am At less than a foot tall and looking more like a plush toy than a pet, Alexis Spence's dog Draco has a big responsibility. If he senses his 24-year-old owner could harm herself, he will intervene. "If I go to the bathroom by myself, he'll either scratch at the door or bark at the doors to try to get attention," Alexis told the ABC. "He will also alert before a panic attack and will interrupt self-harm behaviours. "I love my little guy. He really helps me." Alexis brought home the puppy, which would become her service dog and emotional support animal, eight years ago, after she spent time in hospital with depression, an eating disorder and thoughts of suicide. A lawsuit filed on her behalf alleges her mental health battles stemmed from an "addictive" use of Instagram, and a harmful algorithm that offered tips for bulimic purging and extreme weight loss. The case claims Alexis was able to create her first account at age 11, without her parents' knowledge, despite the platform's minimum age of 13. "At 11 years old I was getting weight loss tips on my explore page, and then it shifted into anorexia,"she said. By 15, she was receiving emergency psychiatric treatment. Alexis's family is now suing Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, for damages, along with hundreds of other people who say the platforms have harmed them or their loved ones. But the family also wants national action, and is calling for the US to follow Australia's lead and bring in a social media ban for children. Following Australia's lead Since Australia's ban for under-16s took effect last December, countries including the UK, Canada and Indonesia have announced similar plans. The EU this week said it would also develop a policy for social media age restrictions in the 27-member bloc. But the US — home to the companies that run the platforms — remains a hold-out. The legislation governing social media in the US is piecemeal and varies from state to state. A bill for a national ban on under-13s using social media was introduced to the US Congress last June. It has backers on both sides of politics, but has so far failed to progress and may never go to a vote. Loading...Instead, the House of Representatives last month passed an alternative law that would require platforms to "limit design features that encourage compulsive usage" and give parents some controls over their children's accounts. But it is not clear if the bill will pass the Senate. Many advocates view it as too weak, and some fear it will stymie tougher state-based action. The attorneys-general from 44 US states and territories have written to Congress to oppose the bill, saying it would "insulate Big Tech from appropriate oversight and accountability and imperil the young people it purports to protect". 'They knew what was going on' In the absence of effective national action, Alexis's parents have found themselves at the forefront of the fight to hold social media platforms to account. Kathleen Spence said she fully understood what was happening to her daughter after discovering the "Facebook Papers" — leaked internal documents that revealed Meta knew its platforms were fuelling mental illness among users, especially teenage girls. "We're sitting in the hospital trying to keep our daughter alive … between her suicidal ideations and between her eating disorder and [while] Meta was doing research that said one in three girls who use Instagram have body dysmorphia," Kathleen said. "So they knew what was going on." The family's lawyer, Matthew Bergman, is representing more than 1,200 clients in similar social media cases, including some in Australia. He recently advised British officials on the UK's ban for kids, and believes it is only a matter of time before the US takes similar action. "Giving kids a little bit more time to develop cognitively, neurologically and biologically, it gives them at least a fighting chance of resisting the malign material that they're being fed day and night," he said. "I think we are inspired by the work that was done in Australia, and now the work that was in the UK." Debating the evidence The social media bans sweeping across the globe are driven by concerns based on the idea that platforms are harming young people's mental health. But some evidence paints a more complicated picture, including studies from Harvard and Yale that point to social media's mental health benefits and suggest some warnings about its harms are oversimplified. Adam Omary, a psychologist specialising in social media at the libertarian Cato Institute, argues the claims linking social media to poor mental health have a weak scientific foundation. He believes it is a matter of correlation rather than causation. "In reality, what usually happens is people who have pre-existing vulnerabilities seek out the technology and find it enriching," he said. A ban like Australia's — which has been criticised as ineffective, with many teenagers finding ways around it — could create its own risks, Dr Omary argues. "Many children are still finding ways to access social media, and particularly less regulated platforms, which might mean greater risk of exposure to the supposed harmful content." Mr Bergman has a different view on the shortfalls of Australia's ban. "To me, the fact that you don't have 100 per cent compliance just is testimony to how powerful these platforms are," he said. Social media behemoths are driven by profit, Mr Bergman said, so any legislative reforms must have "very strong financial teeth". "It has to be more expensive for them to continue to make dangerous platforms than to reform," he said. Meta defends claims Earlier this year, a California court found Meta and Google liable for $US3 million ($4.3 million) in damages after a 20-year-old woman sued the companies for causing harm by designing addictive platforms. Jurors later recommended another $US3 million in punitive damages. The court found the companies knew, or should have known, their platforms posed a danger to minors. The finding is expected to influence hundreds of similar pending cases, but Meta last week filed a notice of appeal, telling the LA Times that teenagers' mental health "is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app". "It's been our clear policy that people under the age of 13 are not allowed," Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told the court during the trial. "There's a distinction about whether someone is allowed to do something and whether we've caught them for breaking the rule." As Alexis Spence awaits an outcome in her case, she has no doubt an enforced age-based ban is what would have helped her when she was younger. "There's restrictions for buying cigarettes, there's restrictions for gambling … but there's no age restrictions for the algorithm that's being pushed, and it's promoting these [harmful] things."