Why Parental Consent Policies for Social Media Do Not Help Families.

As governments around the world act to protect kids online, many — including the EU and several US states — are considering age minimum policies that include parental consent provisions. These policies typically allow kids in specific age brackets (e.g., 13- and 14-year-olds) to create accounts on social media platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat, and Instagram with parental permission. This can sound like a reasonable middle ground in the debate over kids and social media. Why not let each family decide? But parents and policymakers should not be fooled.

These models fail parents and kids in three significant ways:

1. They perpetuate the collective action trap in which parents feel they must allow their children access to risky or harmful social media platforms so they won’t be socially isolated.
2. They fail to protect kids through puberty. The kids who “win” the argument with their parents are exposed to addictive and manipulative designs, harmful content (e.g., suicide and self-harm encouragement), and unwanted contact with adult strangers during a time when they are undergoing rapid brain development.
3. Parental consent does not make addictive products safe for children.

Policies should instead mandate strong and enforceable age minimums for harmful and addictive social media platforms; mandate safer design and only allow companies to provide their service to minors once they’ve proven it is safe; and shift the burden of enforcing restrictions away from overburdened parents and onto the companies. If we want to protect kids on these platforms, we need actual reforms, not a codification of the status quo.

Read the full Tech Policy Press article.
___
Jonathan Haidt is the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership.