The Australian government’s social media ban for under 16s is set to come into effect on 10 December. While the idea has been welcomed by many in terms of youth physical and mental health, there are also concerns about potential harm from the ban in terms of driving young people to less regulated spaces.
Additional concerns include the rushed nature of the legislation and question marks about how it will be enforced, impacts on marginalised young people who rely on social media for connection and belonging (regional/rural, disability, LGBTQIA+, etc.), and lack of engagement with young people in the development of the legislation.
Experts weigh in
Professor Marie Yap is a psychologist and parenting expert at the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health in the Monash School of Psychological Sciences . She says parents have a key role to play in helping children understand and adapt to these changes.
‘Particularly for those who spend a lot of time on social media now, the changes are likely to come with a range of emotions, from anxiety or grief to anger,’ she said.
‘If social media is already a big part of their lives, they may struggle to find replacements that meet their needs in the same way, including the need for connection, self expression, and to seek support, especially if they’re unable to find support offline.
‘The first thing you should do, before even raising the topic with your children, is to do your research. Equip yourself with accurate information and know how to answer their questions or correct any dis or misinformation they may bring up.
The Australian eSafety Commissioner’s website is a great place to start.
‘When speaking with your children, be mindful of your tone and your own view of the changes. If they sense you are judgemental or forceful, they may not be honest about how they really feel. Also try to avoid reacting negatively to any emotional outbursts your children may have. ‘
Empathy and open dialogue
‘The focus should be on showing empathy, validating their feelings and keeping the dialogue open,’ said Professor Yap. ‘Be aware of who is influencing their opinions on the topic. This could be friends, public figures, or even social media influencers. That insight will help you understand their logic and can inform your discussions.
‘For some parents, these kinds of conversations will be new. Not all families talk openly about their online lives. This is a great opportunity to develop a more open and trusting dialogue with your children on this topic.
It’s possible, if this is the first time you are discussing it with them, that you may be surprised by your child’s social media usage. Please try to pause and breathe before reacting. Again, you don’t want to shut that door and make your children think they have to hide things from you for fear of upsetting or angering you.
‘Creating a safe space for your children to talk openly will strengthen your relationship and enable you to help them navigate the dynamic digital world they are growing up in.’
Offline support needed to fill the void
Professor Paula Gerber is with Monash’s Faculty of Law . She says LGBTIQA+ youth in Australia rely heavily on social media for mental health support, connection, community building and identity development, which means it’s vital that these resources will now be accessible offline, especially in rural and unsupportive environments.
‘Almost three-quarters of young trans Australians report that using social media makes them feel better about themselves and 91 per cent of LGBTIQA+ youth in a national survey said social media helped them connect with others like them,’ said Professor Gerber. ‘A ban is likely to sever these crucial lifelines.
‘For queer youth, the ban may reduce the immediate risks associated with social media, such as exposure to homophobic or transphobic cyberbullying, harmful content and predatory behaviours. However, this positive impact is contingent on the availability of strong, supportive offline communities and resources (which are all too often lacking for queer youth, especially in regional and remote communities).’
Isolation
‘Restricting access is likely to deepen isolation, hinder self-expression and limit participation in civic and cultural life, which are rights protected under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, an international treaty that Australia has ratified,’ said Professor Gerber.
‘While the ban aims to protect children from online harms, it risks disproportionately affecting vulnerable youth who are already facing discrimination and exclusion offline. Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises children’s rights to freedom of expression and access to information (Article 13), and to participate in matters affecting them (Article 12).
‘The Convention also recognises the importance of ensuring children’s access to diverse media, including content that supports their well-being (Article 17), which can include LGBTIQA+ affirming resources and online communities.
‘The social media ban potentially violates these international laws that are in place to protect the rights of children,’ said Professor Gerber.
Enforcement falls to parents
Associate Professor Eric Windholz is also with Monash University’s Faculty of Law .
He said, ‘Regulation to protect minors (and consumers more generally) from making choices that may be harmful to themselves is commonplace in Australia. The social media ban, however, represents a significant extension of past regulation, and a new high water mark in the state’s paternalism.
‘Within it there also is an irony. The social media ban is a statement by government that parents are unable or unwilling to regulate their own children’s behaviour. At the same time, while primary responsibility for enforcing the ban lies with social media platforms, effective enforcement also will depend on those same parents educating children about the ban and encouraging (if not enforcing) compliance.
‘And beware the “forbidden fruit effect”. Regulatory prohibitions and restrictions entice the rebellious and curious to experiment with the prohibited activity – many children will seek to circumvent the ban. And the unscrupulous and criminal will exploit the opportunities this presents.
‘Prohibition has a poor track record of success,’ said Associate Professor Windholz.
Are bans the answer?
Dr Clare Southerton, from Monash’s School of Education Culture & Society, says there are valid reasons to be concerned about unsafe social media spaces and practices, but argues that bans do nothing to help young people to learn safe social media use.
‘It is possible that the ban may encourage young people to access social media platforms through illicit means, thereby exposing them to more dangerous practices,’ she said.
‘Young people may be reluctant to report anything dangerous they experience when accessing social media when they shouldn’t be.
‘It is important that young people learn to engage critically with social media and digital spaces, to develop digital literacy and algorithmic awareness. Delaying their engagement will not scaffold this and imagines that they will develop these skills by ageing alone.
‘This is not evidence-based, we know that children must be taught these skills,’ said Dr Southerton. ‘It is important to talk to your children about social media, and build trust with them so that when they encounter something inappropriate or unsafe they feel comfortable talking to you about it.
‘It is also important to remember that social media can play a significant role in young people’s social lives. Having this taken away may be upsetting and parents should be prepared for that reaction,’ she said.
‘I would encourage parents to take their children’s feelings seriously. Remember that children growing up now don’t tend to have the same freedom to roam as you might have had growing up, so social media may have filled the social gap for some young people.
‘Try not to dismiss any feelings and consider ways for children to connect with peers, even if they aren’t physically nearby.’
Big picture
Monash Professor Jon Rouse has 39 years’ of experience in Australian law enforcement and worked to combat child sexual abuse and exploitation as part of Task Force Argos.
Professor Rouse said, ‘If implemented well, the legacy of 10 December should not simply be that children were kept off certain platforms, but that industry incentives were shifted, and that measurable improvements in children’s mental health, safety and participation become the standard against which digital services are judged.
‘The introduction of the social media age restrictions for children on 10 December mark a long-overdue recalibration of responsibility in the digital environment. For years, technology companies have been presented with clear research, regulator guidance and survivor testimony about the harms experienced by children on their platforms.
‘They have had ample warning and time to embed safety by design, yet responses have too often been piecemeal and reactive,’ said Professor Rouse.
‘In practice, we have seen a pattern where growth and revenue have been prioritised, and children’s safety has been treated as a secondary consideration – a classic case of profit over protection. In that light, the new restrictions are not an overreach; they are a response to a systemic failure of self-regulation,’ he said.
‘The challenge now is to ensure that this delay is accompanied by rigorous age-assurance, independent oversight of platform practices, and investment in education and support for families.’
