Would banning social media for teens protect them or push them further online?

“Social media is killing our children. I don’t even know if banning it will fix things. I worry about what my boys see on their phones all the time. I feel like I have no control.”

These fears belong to a single mother, who asked to remain anonymous, raising two teenagers, aged 14 and 17, in a township on the East Rand.

Last year the police arrived at her home after her Grade 11 son was charged with stalking a neighbour online. Because he was a minor he was referred to counselling at the Teddy Bear Clinic and monitored for six months.

“I don’t think it’s only social media,” she reflects. “But when boys constantly see naked women on TikTok or Facebook it fuels their fantasies. Some apps ask for consent, but these kids know how to get around it. At school, phones are banned, yet they still sneak them in. In the township we deal with things on our own. I don’t talk to other parents because I don’t want to humiliate my son.”

Since therapy he is doing better. Still, she reminds him that he is walking a fragile path and must first build a future for himself.

She is certainly not alone, and her fears echo those of many parents.

A young woman, who also asked not to be identified, says she still struggles to talk about losing a friend, seven years ago, when they were 12 years old.

“My friend was already going through a lot at home,” she recalls quietly. “Then her best friend replaced her and she felt completely alone.” Looking for an escape, she turned to the online game Roblox. After accepting a friend request, a stranger began harassing her.

“He told her she was stupid and useless.” It pushed her over the edge. “She felt there was no hope. Parents don’t realise what their children are carrying.”

Around the world, similar experiences are prompting psychologists, lobby groups, parents and governments to ask whether social media should be regulated to protect vulnerable teenagers.

How this should be done remains unclear. Researchers warn that social media is only one factor among many shaping adolescent mental health. Still, a growing body of evidence links frequent social media use with higher levels of anxiety, depression and body image concerns.

Policy proposals

Recently, some countries have moved the discussions beyond awareness campaigns to concrete policy proposals.

In December last year Australia passed a law banning children under 16 from holding accounts on major social media platforms including Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, Facebook, YouTube, Reddit and X.

Technology companies are required to introduce stronger age verification systems and safeguards to prevent under 16s from accessing their platforms.

France now requires parental consent for users under 15, while the UK’s Online Safety Act obliges platforms to introduce stronger protections against harmful content. Spain and Denmark are considering similar measures.

Critics warn that bans alone cannot solve the problem. For SA, where many children grow up in environments shaped by poverty, fractured families and limited supervision, the question is not only whether to restrict access but to find ways to protect vulnerable teens.

So what would actually help to protect teenagers online?

Daily Maverick asked four local experts for their perspectives.

Roshni Parbhoo-Seetha, project manager for education at the South African Depression and Anxiety Group (Sadag) says its’ school programmes, helplines and WhatsApp support groups are seeing a rise in mental health distress among young people.

Cyberbullying, fear of social exclusion, body comparison, sleep disruption, addiction, depression and self-harm are increasingly reported by teenagers seeking help.

Parbhoo-Seetha explains that teenagers today are exposed to an overload of adult information, constant comparison and global crises at a developmental stage when their emotional regulation systems are still forming.

The distress is real. While social media doesn’t necessarily cause mental health problems it often amplifies existing vulnerabilities.

Raising the age of access may help delay exposure for younger teens whose emotional regulation is still developing. But Parbhoo says the issue is more complex. Teenagers frequently bypass age restrictions. Bans may push them into private groups or less regulated spaces.

Regulation should therefore focus on helping families build healthier boundaries rather than relying on fear-driven policies.

Why age-gating will shift power back to parents

South African media lawyer Emma Sadleir says stronger age-gating measures play an important role. Through school talks she gives to parents and learners, she sees how quickly online harm can escalate. Her office receives as many as 20 calls a day from families dealing with bullying, sextortion or coercion.

She warns that AI-generated sexual images are becoming increasingly common, and that some platforms make the spread of such material alarmingly easy.

WhatsApp can be particularly difficult to police. Its Channels feature allows images to circulate widely, while tracing the original sender can be extremely difficult.

Age-gating could shift some power back to parents by changing the default age at which children enter these spaces.

“Parents underestimate the pull of algorithms,” she says. “No matter how good a parent you are, you are competing with systems designed to keep children hooked.”

She also reminds parents that under South African law teenagers over 14 can be held criminally liable for sharing explicit images. Personally, she says she would not give her own children smartphones until high school and would then strictly limit screen time and monitor usage.

Adolescents brains are still developing

Dr Serahni Symington, a registered trauma counsellor, agrees that a ban alone will not solve the problem.

Restricting access could, however, help protect teenagers while their brains are still developing. It also gives parents leverage to prohibit social media until their teens are older. She also believes a nuanced approach would be best.

Schools should revive conversations about values such as integrity, responsibility and respect for oneself and others. Any policy should take adolescent brain development into account.

The prefrontal cortex, which governs judgement, impulse control and emotional regulation, only fully matures in the early twenties. Teenagers are therefore more impulsive and sensitive to peer approval. Expecting them to resist risky online content consistently is unrealistic.

Easy and constant access can set them up for making poor decisions, which is why age limits combined with values-based education could offer some protection.

Symington also points to developmental psychologist Erik Erikson, who described adolescence as the stage when young people ask who they are and where they belong.

Traditionally, teenagers explored this through real-world relationships and experiences. When much of that exploration happens online, identity can become shaped by algorithms, influencers and the pursuit of “likes”.

Instead of discovering who they are, teenagers may begin performing versions of themselves designed to win approval. This can lead to identity confusion, anxiety and low self-esteem.

Symington says lectures and angry confiscations rarely work. They simply push teenagers to hide their online behaviour. Instead, she encourages parents to build trust and conversation.

Her motto for teenagers is simple: “Stop before you post. Think before you post. Pause before you post.”

Parents should talk openly about manipulation, digital pressure and the risks of sharing images. Encouraging offline friendships and activities remains one of the strongest protections.

Why strict bans may not work in practice

Child psychiatrist Dr Alicia Porter says policing age bans is difficult because teenagers lie about their age, use siblings’ accounts or move to less regulated platforms where there may be even greater risks.

At the same time she cautions that strict bans could also block access to positive communities and valuable information.

Instead she encourages structured boundaries such as agreed screen times, no phones in bedrooms at night and parents taking an active interest in what their children are consuming online.

Where do we go from here?

As concern about teenagers and social media grows around the world, one thing is becoming clear: there are no simple solutions.

Teenagers are growing up in a digital world that offers connection, creativity and learning. Yet constant comparison, endless scrolling and sleep disruption can undermine confidence and mental wellbeing.

Because social media platforms are designed to maximise engagement and profit, they cannot be relied on to prioritise teenagers’ wellbeing.

Meaningful safeguards will require a coordinated effort between parents, schools, communities and government. Around the world this debate is already prompting discussions about phone-free schools, delaying access to social media and stronger age verification.

In SA, civil society groups such as Smartphone Free Childhood SA are beginning to lead the way. The organisation supports parents, lobbies for phone-free schools and is helping to bring the conversation about teenagers and technology into communities across the country.

Social media is not going away. The task now is to build the guardrails that help teenagers navigate the digital world safely. DM