Looking back, my youngest child’s tantrum over the iPad alarmed me at the time – but on reflection I’ve experienced similar performances over non-screen related activities: like when he was playing hide and seek with his brothers and didn’t want to get ready for bed.
Screen time comes up a lot in my conversations with other parents too. Some of us are stricter than others.
The official advice is currently inconsistent. Neither the US American Academy of Paediatrics nor the UK’s Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health recommend any specific time limits for children.
The World Health Organization, meanwhile, suggests no screen time at all for children below the age of one, and no more than one hour per day for under-fours (although when you read the policy this is aimed at prioritising physical activity).
There is a bigger issue here in that there is simply not enough science to make a definitive recommendation, and this is dividing the scientific community – despite a strong societal push to limit children’s access.
And without set guidelines, are we setting up an uneven playing field for children who are already tech-savvy by adulthood, and others who are not and are arguably more vulnerable as a result?
Either way, the stakes are high. If screens really are damaging children, it might be years before the science catches up and proves it. Or if it eventually concludes that it isn’t, we would have wasted energy and money and, in the process, tried to keep children away from something that can also be extremely useful.
And, all the while, with screens becoming glasses, social media regrouping around smaller communities, and people using AI chatbots to help with homework or even for therapy – the tech that’s already in our lives is rapidly evolving, whether or not we let our children access it.