Phone-free schools NOW. There is absolutely no reason students should be recording each other or TEXTING kids they are in the same physical building as.
This example also highlights how kids/phones/social media really are a collective action problem--it's not enough to do the right things for your own children--you need other parents to be doing the same. Otherwise those kids become the "insiders"/ bullies, and the kids without phones/social media/etc. become the "outsiders"/victims.
It's a terrible name. We need take a clue from how the Left treats shootings. This bill should be immediately renamed "Carson's Law". (I'm not kidding. If anyone knows someone who knows someone on the staff of Richard Blumenthal or Marsha Blackburn, pass it on.)
I am truly so sorry for what you and your family have experienced. As a parent of two teenagers, we've pretty much done what you did, as far as phone and social media restrictions go. Our kids say that we're considered the strict parents among their friends. Fine by me.
But you were too. I can't help but think of your son Carson and then think of mine, who is a bit shy and awkward, and completely unprepared for the ruthlessness of the Wild West Web.
I actually teach social media ethics too; the stories I hear from my students (especially those who have kids) just make me more and more troubled.
Sorry to hear that, and I'm very sorry for your loss. My condolences. May a megadose of karma come to those cyberbullies and their enablers. That said, KOSA still has too many problems with it in it's current form to be fit for purpose:
Just what I came here to say. This story is a terrible injustice, but not one that KOSA is the right answer to. We need a solution that holds corporations responsible for the harms caused by their products without enabling mass censorship.
This is really hard to read. I’ve been encouraged by how bipartisan these things have been, in the US and up here in Canada. Hopefully this spurs change soon.
This Mother's Day may many grandmothers, mothers, and daughters everywhere reach the inflection point about tech risks and harm. I am so sorry for your loss, and grateful to you and everyone working to confront the Late Lessons from Early Warnings.
We have thoroughly discussed how parents might establish guidelines for how children use their phones. But now let’s have a similar discussion, about how parents might establish guidelines for how children handle their pet rattlesnakes. To our questionable credit, nearly everyone would immediately identify that the discussion is misguided by the word “how.” The obvious point is whether children should have a rattlesnake at all. Duh. And so it is with phones. Mic drop, please. Children—with their developing cognitive skills—should be prevented from owning a rattlesnake at all, rather than being regulated about the handling of one. There is no more doubt—thanks to Jon Haidt and others—about the horrifying social, emotional, and mental health risks of children using phones, so why do we keep discussing the guidelines of phone use? Parents, let’s not allow the rattlesnakes in our homes in the first place. No rattlesnake handling for our children, and—while we’re at it—let’s limit our own snake handling. Surely we have learned from experience that the government will never accomplish what we want in this matter. Nor will social media platforms, who couldn’t possibly assume the responsibility for every potentially hurtful post on their sites. No social solution will raise safe and happy children.
So what are the real solutions, simply expressed?
1. No phones or social media at all—no unobserved use of the Internet at all—for any minor child living at home. The kids simply don’t need it.
2. Teach parents how to unconditionally love their children, which very few parents can do. No indictment here, they just don’t know how. Controlling children or enabling them is not loving them. And parents don’t have to figure out unconditional love and guidance on their own. Just go to the free and agenda-free websites RealLove.com and RealLoveParents.com. I have nothing to sell. But I do offer thirty—30—years of intense experience with teaching parents and children all over the world. It’s love they need, not social media or phones or indulgence or entertainment. It’s loving and teaching, and it works.
Not realistic at all. In other posts, you also imply that *adult* (over 18) children living at home should also be prohibited from these things as well. LOL, how the hell are you gonna enforce that? All that will do is 1) force it underground and make it even MORE dangerous, and/or 2) kick the can down the road so they drown themselves in their newfound freedom later on. Better to introduce tech to kids the way European parents introduce their kids to alcohol, NOT the way Americans do!
(And rattlesnakes as pets are a terrible idea at any age, lol)
While I do agree that children should be more protected online, specifically their privacy, I have to comment against the KOSA bill. KOSA is a censorship bill with a co-sponsor, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, stating a goal of the bill is to "protect minor children from the transgender." She says it in an interview found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg21OdmUj1g
I am so sorry. We almost lost our son too as he was being cyber bullied just as you describe. Only he didn't tell us. I thought I was doing everything right too. This has to stop.
No more phones in schools. We need to change the culture, though, as laws will not work. It starts at the local and community level, not in Washington.
Your Grace under pressure is admirable. I agree with everything you’re doing and have gone further to argue that Section 230 needs to be revised. It is one thing to say that a company can’t be responsible for every individual post, but no one considered:
a) that kids would be exposed to content which legacy media would lose their license over,
b) because the only way for them to profit would be to generate clicks, not quality clicks, but clicks out of fear, anger, or lust and they’d design algorithms to amplify this content.
c) that the powerful would exploit Social Media’s neglect due to Section 230, and spend unlimited dollars to spread rumors and lies (because of the Citizen United decision to reverse campaign finance reform caps)
Although I know that it is controversial, I believe the intentions behind The Communication Act of 1934’s creation of the FCC recognized the risk of mass media to do all of the above.
Thank you for sharing your heartbreaking story, Kristin. I am so sorry you lost your son. I can only imagine the pain you carry. And thank you for channeling that toward protecting other kids from the insidious influence of social media. Together, we will change this.
There are no words 😓 I am humbled by your leadership in response to the horrific loss of your beautiful boy. Thank you for working so hard to keep all children safe 🙏
This so horrible it is hard to digest… I can’t imagine what Kristin and her family goes through.
Actually, I can, but only a little bit. My own teen struggled with suicidal ideation up until recently and it all started from her witnessing bullying of the boy in her class by other boys. After several years of struggle the boy ended up leaving the school. We also left that school and eventually we left the country. I realized I couldn’t help my teen to get out of all this mess while we are surrounded by it. Last summer we left United States, hopefully temporarily, till she gets stronger.
In one of the parenting books written about ten years ago, right before the raise of the social media I have read an advice to always monitor your teen’s phone and to also be transparent about it. This is non intuitive in our western culture, and seems to violate privacies, but this unapologetic monitoring actually provides a teen with a layer of protection. It’s not her / or him who now needs to fight the mob but it is rather an “evil parent who deprives this teen of privacy.”
Please be this evil parent, it is your parental responsibility, urged the author.
Of course the older our teens get the harder it becomes for us, parents to monitor their phones and ALL their conversations. And it will be harder on teen boys than in girls and can itself become a reason for bullying. However, in my case that advice felt liberating. I told my daughter I was reading all her texts. It was hard for me to bring myself to it, but many times I did and I hope it did give her that crucial layer of protection the author of the book was talking about. My daughter is better but we are still not ready to return to the US.
The name of the author is either Leonard Sax, PhD (corrected) and his book “The Collapse of Parenting” or it is “Hold on to your Kids” by Gordon Neufield, PhD. Both books are magnificent even though they were written before the social media phenomenon. For all parents who are struggling with their teen mental health I highly recommend these two authors. Having said that, I do realise that we face an uphill battle with the social media platforms taking over our lives…
So at what age does this intrusive monitoring ever end? Or does it? Keep in mind that Gen Z is probably the most heavily monitored generation in all of recorded history. How is that working out for them? If you believe Haidt, Twenge, etc., not very!
(By the way, "The Collapse of Parenting" was written by Leonard Sax, not Jon Haidt.)
I totally meant to type Leonard Sax and then while multitasking got distracted and put in Haidt. I will update my comment after your correction to Sax. I am not in favor of online monitoring and in my inbox this article was right next to Matt Taibi's on Canada intrusive new C-63 Law. These intrusive new legislations worry me as much as our childrens' well-being. The last thing I want is that parents like Kristin and me become vehicles for establishing the surveillance state. However, going back to your actual question of putting boundaries to what children could freely do without being monitored. Some fifty years ago no parent let their children spend time at - say - Central Train Station where thousands of strangers pass by every hour, with zero accountability. Yet many kids roamed the streets of their cities and towns and nearby forests and meadows freely, because there was a community of people who more or less knew each other and kept an eye on each other. I grew up outside of the US and had a free roaming childhood full of exploration and independence starting a tender age of five. It was normal for parents at that time to let their kids be on their own. No one would ever think to monitor anything. This type of experience no longer exists, at least not in the US. And the World Wide Web is basically an equivalent of the metaphorical Central Train station, where thousands of strangers pass by unaccountable every day. This is where our kids ended up. So, forced to pick my poison I chose Sax advice to monitor my kids phone (I think it was Sax after all). What is the alternative to this? As someone who immigrated to the USA at the turn of the century after growing up in a more kids friendly environment I would say, change the city planning of the American towns and there will be no need to police the online world. But how soon do you think that would happen? So I monitored my daughters phone until I got sick of it and many other things, uprooted our life and moved my family to Europe. Will be back once she gets stronger emotionally to handle highly stressful US social climate or there are some positive changes in the American society.
Thank you. I am aware of his take on childhood independence and how important he deems it. I have been following Dr. Haidt closely for several years now; ever since he participated in the episode with Pinker on Jordan Peterson YouTube channel.
Phone-free schools NOW. There is absolutely no reason students should be recording each other or TEXTING kids they are in the same physical building as.
This example also highlights how kids/phones/social media really are a collective action problem--it's not enough to do the right things for your own children--you need other parents to be doing the same. Otherwise those kids become the "insiders"/ bullies, and the kids without phones/social media/etc. become the "outsiders"/victims.
Very sorry for your family's loss.
It is difficult for me to understand why phone free isn't the policy of every school in the country.
First, we have to say 'no' to progressives, for whom that is a dirtier n-word than even the other one.
😅
"The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA)"
It's a terrible name. We need take a clue from how the Left treats shootings. This bill should be immediately renamed "Carson's Law". (I'm not kidding. If anyone knows someone who knows someone on the staff of Richard Blumenthal or Marsha Blackburn, pass it on.)
I am truly so sorry for what you and your family have experienced. As a parent of two teenagers, we've pretty much done what you did, as far as phone and social media restrictions go. Our kids say that we're considered the strict parents among their friends. Fine by me.
But you were too. I can't help but think of your son Carson and then think of mine, who is a bit shy and awkward, and completely unprepared for the ruthlessness of the Wild West Web.
I actually teach social media ethics too; the stories I hear from my students (especially those who have kids) just make me more and more troubled.
Truly, I am so sorry for you and your family.
Sorry to hear that, and I'm very sorry for your loss. My condolences. May a megadose of karma come to those cyberbullies and their enablers. That said, KOSA still has too many problems with it in it's current form to be fit for purpose:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/05/us-version-kosa-still-censorship-bill
Just what I came here to say. This story is a terrible injustice, but not one that KOSA is the right answer to. We need a solution that holds corporations responsible for the harms caused by their products without enabling mass censorship.
This is really hard to read. I’ve been encouraged by how bipartisan these things have been, in the US and up here in Canada. Hopefully this spurs change soon.
This Mother's Day may many grandmothers, mothers, and daughters everywhere reach the inflection point about tech risks and harm. I am so sorry for your loss, and grateful to you and everyone working to confront the Late Lessons from Early Warnings.
We have thoroughly discussed how parents might establish guidelines for how children use their phones. But now let’s have a similar discussion, about how parents might establish guidelines for how children handle their pet rattlesnakes. To our questionable credit, nearly everyone would immediately identify that the discussion is misguided by the word “how.” The obvious point is whether children should have a rattlesnake at all. Duh. And so it is with phones. Mic drop, please. Children—with their developing cognitive skills—should be prevented from owning a rattlesnake at all, rather than being regulated about the handling of one. There is no more doubt—thanks to Jon Haidt and others—about the horrifying social, emotional, and mental health risks of children using phones, so why do we keep discussing the guidelines of phone use? Parents, let’s not allow the rattlesnakes in our homes in the first place. No rattlesnake handling for our children, and—while we’re at it—let’s limit our own snake handling. Surely we have learned from experience that the government will never accomplish what we want in this matter. Nor will social media platforms, who couldn’t possibly assume the responsibility for every potentially hurtful post on their sites. No social solution will raise safe and happy children.
So what are the real solutions, simply expressed?
1. No phones or social media at all—no unobserved use of the Internet at all—for any minor child living at home. The kids simply don’t need it.
2. Teach parents how to unconditionally love their children, which very few parents can do. No indictment here, they just don’t know how. Controlling children or enabling them is not loving them. And parents don’t have to figure out unconditional love and guidance on their own. Just go to the free and agenda-free websites RealLove.com and RealLoveParents.com. I have nothing to sell. But I do offer thirty—30—years of intense experience with teaching parents and children all over the world. It’s love they need, not social media or phones or indulgence or entertainment. It’s loving and teaching, and it works.
Not realistic at all. In other posts, you also imply that *adult* (over 18) children living at home should also be prohibited from these things as well. LOL, how the hell are you gonna enforce that? All that will do is 1) force it underground and make it even MORE dangerous, and/or 2) kick the can down the road so they drown themselves in their newfound freedom later on. Better to introduce tech to kids the way European parents introduce their kids to alcohol, NOT the way Americans do!
(And rattlesnakes as pets are a terrible idea at any age, lol)
While I do agree that children should be more protected online, specifically their privacy, I have to comment against the KOSA bill. KOSA is a censorship bill with a co-sponsor, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, stating a goal of the bill is to "protect minor children from the transgender." She says it in an interview found at this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg21OdmUj1g
I've written about the dangers KOSA creates on my substack, the post can be found here: https://open.substack.com/pub/cyberphilosophy/p/bipartisan-kids-online-safety-act?r=1r9ccy&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
Snapchat and Instagram are both Really bad for Children and Young Adults
I am so sorry. We almost lost our son too as he was being cyber bullied just as you describe. Only he didn't tell us. I thought I was doing everything right too. This has to stop.
My heart breaks for you and your family. I’m so sorry.
No more phones in schools. We need to change the culture, though, as laws will not work. It starts at the local and community level, not in Washington.
Your Grace under pressure is admirable. I agree with everything you’re doing and have gone further to argue that Section 230 needs to be revised. It is one thing to say that a company can’t be responsible for every individual post, but no one considered:
a) that kids would be exposed to content which legacy media would lose their license over,
b) because the only way for them to profit would be to generate clicks, not quality clicks, but clicks out of fear, anger, or lust and they’d design algorithms to amplify this content.
c) that the powerful would exploit Social Media’s neglect due to Section 230, and spend unlimited dollars to spread rumors and lies (because of the Citizen United decision to reverse campaign finance reform caps)
Although I know that it is controversial, I believe the intentions behind The Communication Act of 1934’s creation of the FCC recognized the risk of mass media to do all of the above.
Thank you for sharing your heartbreaking story, Kristin. I am so sorry you lost your son. I can only imagine the pain you carry. And thank you for channeling that toward protecting other kids from the insidious influence of social media. Together, we will change this.
There are no words 😓 I am humbled by your leadership in response to the horrific loss of your beautiful boy. Thank you for working so hard to keep all children safe 🙏
This so horrible it is hard to digest… I can’t imagine what Kristin and her family goes through.
Actually, I can, but only a little bit. My own teen struggled with suicidal ideation up until recently and it all started from her witnessing bullying of the boy in her class by other boys. After several years of struggle the boy ended up leaving the school. We also left that school and eventually we left the country. I realized I couldn’t help my teen to get out of all this mess while we are surrounded by it. Last summer we left United States, hopefully temporarily, till she gets stronger.
In one of the parenting books written about ten years ago, right before the raise of the social media I have read an advice to always monitor your teen’s phone and to also be transparent about it. This is non intuitive in our western culture, and seems to violate privacies, but this unapologetic monitoring actually provides a teen with a layer of protection. It’s not her / or him who now needs to fight the mob but it is rather an “evil parent who deprives this teen of privacy.”
Please be this evil parent, it is your parental responsibility, urged the author.
Of course the older our teens get the harder it becomes for us, parents to monitor their phones and ALL their conversations. And it will be harder on teen boys than in girls and can itself become a reason for bullying. However, in my case that advice felt liberating. I told my daughter I was reading all her texts. It was hard for me to bring myself to it, but many times I did and I hope it did give her that crucial layer of protection the author of the book was talking about. My daughter is better but we are still not ready to return to the US.
The name of the author is either Leonard Sax, PhD (corrected) and his book “The Collapse of Parenting” or it is “Hold on to your Kids” by Gordon Neufield, PhD. Both books are magnificent even though they were written before the social media phenomenon. For all parents who are struggling with their teen mental health I highly recommend these two authors. Having said that, I do realise that we face an uphill battle with the social media platforms taking over our lives…
So at what age does this intrusive monitoring ever end? Or does it? Keep in mind that Gen Z is probably the most heavily monitored generation in all of recorded history. How is that working out for them? If you believe Haidt, Twenge, etc., not very!
(By the way, "The Collapse of Parenting" was written by Leonard Sax, not Jon Haidt.)
I totally meant to type Leonard Sax and then while multitasking got distracted and put in Haidt. I will update my comment after your correction to Sax. I am not in favor of online monitoring and in my inbox this article was right next to Matt Taibi's on Canada intrusive new C-63 Law. These intrusive new legislations worry me as much as our childrens' well-being. The last thing I want is that parents like Kristin and me become vehicles for establishing the surveillance state. However, going back to your actual question of putting boundaries to what children could freely do without being monitored. Some fifty years ago no parent let their children spend time at - say - Central Train Station where thousands of strangers pass by every hour, with zero accountability. Yet many kids roamed the streets of their cities and towns and nearby forests and meadows freely, because there was a community of people who more or less knew each other and kept an eye on each other. I grew up outside of the US and had a free roaming childhood full of exploration and independence starting a tender age of five. It was normal for parents at that time to let their kids be on their own. No one would ever think to monitor anything. This type of experience no longer exists, at least not in the US. And the World Wide Web is basically an equivalent of the metaphorical Central Train station, where thousands of strangers pass by unaccountable every day. This is where our kids ended up. So, forced to pick my poison I chose Sax advice to monitor my kids phone (I think it was Sax after all). What is the alternative to this? As someone who immigrated to the USA at the turn of the century after growing up in a more kids friendly environment I would say, change the city planning of the American towns and there will be no need to police the online world. But how soon do you think that would happen? So I monitored my daughters phone until I got sick of it and many other things, uprooted our life and moved my family to Europe. Will be back once she gets stronger emotionally to handle highly stressful US social climate or there are some positive changes in the American society.
I should note that one thing that Haidt, and Lenore Skenazy, both support is the "Let Grow" movement.
https://letgrow.org/
Thank you. I am aware of his take on childhood independence and how important he deems it. I have been following Dr. Haidt closely for several years now; ever since he participated in the episode with Pinker on Jordan Peterson YouTube channel.
You're very welcome 😊