Social media is designed to be addictive; known harmful. Why do your kids have it?

[Anonymous]

Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

[Anonymous]

I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

[Anonymous]

My teenagers have instagram since that is the means by which several of their high school clubs and friend groups communicate.

Lots of things can be harmful in the extreme, but just fine in moderation, and that includes social media.

[Anonymous]

Why do you have it and why are you on here if it is so harmful? That's the better question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My teenagers have instagram since that is the means by which several of their high school clubs and friend groups communicate.

Lots of things can be harmful in the extreme, but just fine in moderation, and that includes social media.

Hi! We are in FCPS.

Our 10th grader told us many school clubs communicate through Insta. We are holding out and not allowing it so far.

I wonder if FCPS should require schools to make any official info on clubs available through non-Insta portals, such as Google docs?

[Anonymous]

My boys have never been interested in social media thankfully. They do watch too much YouTube though. School clubs use private Discord channels, and I'm fine with that. When they were younger we monitored the friend chat on Discord and taught them the rules and perils, but at a certain age you need to stop eavesdropping on your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have it and why are you on here if it is so harmful? That's the better question.

I am an adult. Perhaps you misunderstood my question? And,

1) DCUMAD is not specifically designed to be addictive, and

2) DCUMAD has little in common with the forms of social media the 30 States Attorney Generals are suing, and

3) unlike the defendant social media companies named in the lawsuit, I am not aware of any peer-reviewed research demonstrating DCUMAD is harmful, particularly to children and teens (who generally do not use DCUMAD).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have it and why are you on here if it is so harmful? That's the better question.

Not OP but (1) I don't have social media anymore besides DCUM, (2) I hate my DCUM usage, and (3) the anonymous nature of DCUM negates a lot of the harmful aspects of social media.

Anyway, it's not actually the better question. I know a parent who has been trying to quit smoking for almost 15 years. He's made it as long as 2 year but he has a very high stress job (medical profession) and when things at work get really tough, he will still go buy a pack of cigarettes. He is well aware of how bad it is for him and hates that he does it. His kids know he struggles with it and he will point to that as the #1 reason for them to never start smoking -- "Look at me, I have been trying to break this habit since before you were born and still struggle. Don't ever start."

I struggle with screen addiction and I am open with my kid that I struggle with it and explain that this is a major reason that she doesn't have a phone or her own tablet and is not allowed screens in her bedroom. I also commit to going screen free in the evenings from 6pm until after she goes to bed, and we do screen free vacation days too. But when I'm working I have to stare at a screen and I find it incredibly hard not to open a tab for DCUM. I am working on it, but I'd like to spare my kid these issues to the best of my ability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you have it and why are you on here if it is so harmful? That's the better question.

I am an adult. Perhaps you misunderstood my question? And,

1) DCUMAD is not specifically designed to be addictive, and

2) DCUMAD has little in common with the forms of social media the 30 States Attorney Generals are suing, and

3) unlike the defendant social media companies named in the lawsuit, I am not aware of any peer-reviewed research demonstrating DCUMAD is harmful, particularly to children and teens (who generally do not use DCUMAD).

(unless Jeff isn’t telling us something lol).

Don’t try to compare DCUM to Insta, et al.; you only make yourself appear ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

Because like it or not, SM is a permanent part of our lives and I would prefer to have some oversight on their early interactions with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

Because like it or not, SM is a permanent part of our lives and I would prefer to have some oversight on their early interactions with it.

This is a good answer, kind of like parents who like to be the ones to introduce kids to responsible alcohol consumption in their teens by offering small classes of wine at family dinners or something. I can get behind this.

But I think I'd want to limit it a lot. What I really wish is that we could get more traction with parent communities and schools coming together to limit phone use and social media use along the same principles. Because that's what makes it hard. There are always some parents who give their kids early carte blanche access and even if your child doesn't hang out with those kids, it trickles down and creates a lower floor for what kids consider "reasonable" social media use.

So I'd love to hear what kind of oversight you have -- how old were your kids when you gave them access, which apps, what kind of use, how do you monitor, and do you ever worry that they are doing things you don't know about (like finsta accounts)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't. I'm hoping they thank me later. Oldest not yet in high school, though, which is when it may be hard to hold out.

My closest childhood friend works for one of the big Silicon Valley companies. Her kids go to "Forest School" and she tries not to let them see the parents on devices at all. She's seen into the belly of the beast and knows enough to be scared.

I work in tech in SF and our DD went to Forest School! Our kids had no screens except on 2+hour plane rides, and FaceTiming with relatives, until they were six. At six, they get screens when they're home sick. DH works in law, but the kids see us use screens mostly as tools - for directions, recipes, looking up stuff, etc. Phones are never out at mealtimes. Well before we even tried to get pregnant, DH and I talked about how our kids would never be the ones in a stroller with an iPad or iPhone watching videos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

Because like it or not, SM is a permanent part of our lives and I would prefer to have some oversight on their early interactions with it.

Interesting.

I think your response is reasonable. An analogy might be alcohol use: in Europe, society believes limited exposure can occur beginning at age 16 (legally), while the prevailing view in the US is people should not have access prior to age 21.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

Because like it or not, SM is a permanent part of our lives and I would prefer to have some oversight on their early interactions with it.

This is a good answer, kind of like parents who like to be the ones to introduce kids to responsible alcohol consumption in their teens by offering small classes of wine at family dinners or something. I can get behind this.

But I think I'd want to limit it a lot. What I really wish is that we could get more traction with parent communities and schools coming together to limit phone use and social media use along the same principles. Because that's what makes it hard. There are always some parents who give their kids early carte blanche access and even if your child doesn't hang out with those kids, it trickles down and creates a lower floor for what kids consider "reasonable" social media use.

So I'd love to hear what kind of oversight you have -- how old were your kids when you gave them access, which apps, what kind of use, how do you monitor, and do you ever worry that they are doing things you don't know about (like finsta accounts)?

Ha - you beat me to it by 2 minutes lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or rather:

- why do you give your children social media, when it is designed to addict them, and is known to be harmful to children and teens?

Because like it or not, SM is a permanent part of our lives and I would prefer to have some oversight on their early interactions with it.

This is a good answer, kind of like parents who like to be the ones to introduce kids to responsible alcohol consumption in their teens by offering small classes of wine at family dinners or something. I can get behind this.

But I think I'd want to limit it a lot. What I really wish is that we could get more traction with parent communities and schools coming together to limit phone use and social media use along the same principles. Because that's what makes it hard. There are always some parents who give their kids early carte blanche access and even if your child doesn't hang out with those kids, it trickles down and creates a lower floor for what kids consider "reasonable" social media use.

So I'd love to hear what kind of oversight you have -- how old were your kids when you gave them access, which apps, what kind of use, how do you monitor, and do you ever worry that they are doing things you don't know about (like finsta accounts)?

The parents who do the bolded are grossly ignorant about the risks of early alcohol consumption - which includes negative developmental impacts on the brain - and, moreover, the utter lack of evidence for that approach "working" in the future. Also, we know a lot more know about the harms of alcohol consumption. No parent should encourage it because they assume it's something "everyone" does.

My kids don't have social media and, like PP, we'll try to hold out at least until high school. I remember when the SG's report came out and parents I know refused to read it - "I don't want to know! It'll complicate the decision!" No, actually, it should clarify your decision about when and how to introduce social media.