Social Media Making Kids Depressed? Send Them Outside To Play
When society criminalizes outdoor independence, it makes smart phone addiction more likely.

Are smart phones making young people—particularly teenage girls—depressed, anxious, and even suicidal? And if they are, what can be done about it?
Policymakers are considering a variety of options. Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) would go so far as to prohibit kids and teens from using social media until they turn 16.
I wonder if we are overlooking a big part of the problem, and thus a potential solution. It's called enjoying the world.
If we stopped keeping kids in cars, classes, or on the couch all day, and if we gave them back some free time and free play, they would have an alluring alternative to the screen. When young people don't have opportunities to hang out with their friends in real life, unsupervised, the only place they can have fun and socialize freely is online.
That's concerning. My colleague and Let Grow co-founder Jonathan Haidt has assembled chilling data that shows childhood mental health problems increasing since 2012, the year the smart phone became ubiquitous. As Haidt testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in May: "When you compare rates in 2009—before most teens were daily users of social media—to 2019, the last full year before COVID-19 made things even worse, the increases are generally between 50 percent and 150 percent, depending on the disorder, gender, and subgroup."
For many kids, the choice is between being on social media vs. sitting it out while everyone else is on social media. These are bad options.
If parents and policymakers want get kids off social media, we need to make the alternative even more fun. Thankfully, playtime and exploration are super attractive, when kids actually get to do them.
It may feel like kids prefer the virtual world to the real one, but a 2010 survey asked them point blank which they prefer: playing with friends or playing online. Fully 89 percent chose playing with friends. Playing outside was their favorite activity of all.
All young mammals are programmed to play. While I, too, am currently addicted to my phone, I didn't have one as a kid, which meant that my free time was truly free—to ride my bike, play with friends, read, draw, and spend time in the woods. Lack of access to a movie theater/game device/popularity meter meant that I had to engage with whatever else there was: friends, fun, nature, and even boredom.
Over the course of the past several decades, as children's free time and "independent mobility" have declined, kids have clearly suffered. While this began long before the invention of the iPhone, social media does seem to have had a corrosive effect on at least some young people. Is there a way to fight back? And should it involve government controls? The answer I'd give is twofold.
First, we have to make it normal again for kids to be out and about on their own. That means the police and child services need to stop hassling parents who let their kids walk to school, to the park, and to friends' houses. When we make those activities impermissible, the only world left for kids to explore is online. In keeping kids safe from strangers, traffic, and bullies, we've actually make them unsafe from anxiety, depression, and suicide.
Second, we should also work to popularize programs like Wait Until 8th, where parents jointly agree to wait until their kids reach eighth grade before giving them a phone.
"The idea was: What if instead of you being the only one waiting, there were 10 other families from your grade waiting too?" says Brooke Shannon, Wait Until 8th's founder. She launched her campaign in 2017, "and within eight weeks we were in every state, because every family is wrestling with the same issue."
As for government controls, I am not opposed to a minimum age for kids to get on social media, just like I'm not opposed to a minimum age before they can drive a car or buy cigarettes.
In his lectures, Haidt says that after the folks at Facebook told him they don't allow anyone on their platform until age 13, he turned on his computer and created a fake profile within minutes, just as any kid could do. (Probably faster.) So a good start would be for the companies to actually enforce their ostensible rules.
I also think Let Grow's legal advocacy could make a dent in the problem. The "Reasonable Childhood Independence" bills we've helped pass in four states (with five more pending), clarify that it does not constitute neglect to let your kids play outside, walk around, or be unsupervised for a while, unless you've placed them in serious, obvious danger.
Let Grow's other answer to the problem of kids spending too much time on social media is to give them healthier alternatives: chances to be with friends, in real life, having plain old fun. To do this, we recommend schools stay open for two or three extra hours every day for mixed age, no-devices, free play before or after school. We call this a Let Grow Play Club, and our implementation guide is free. An adult is present, but like a lifeguard, they only intervene if an emergency arises. They don't organize the games or solve the arguments. It's a way of injecting a little 1974 into 2023.
When I asked Patrick, a fourth grader who participates in one of these play clubs, whether he preferred playing online or in real life, he said: "You get to be friends in virtual reality. The sad part is, when you take your headset off, you never get to see them." And his friend Karin added, "In real life you get to see them every day in school. You have actual friends."
Actual friends are key to fighting depression and loneliness. Now the articles are coming thick and fast about fancy schools and influential people limiting social media one way or another—and everyone being grateful for it (after an adjustment period). Fidias, the upbeat YouTube influencer with 1.6 million subscribers, told me he's had someone else posting his own videos for the past two months so he can stay offline and not read the (usually very complimentary) comments because they were "lowering the quality of my life," he said. Now "creative bored-ness fills my life, which is the one thing I was craving for."
Kids need some creative bored-ness. They come pre-programmed by Mother Nature to play. If the only place we allow them any to do that is online, that's where they will go. Give them back real friends in the real world—without adults constantly hovering and organizing things—and you just might have to clang a cowbell to get them to come inside for dinner.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Are smart phones making young people—particularly teenage girls—depressed, anxious, and even suicidal? And if they are, what can be done about it?
Bring in more immigrants!
^^^Dammit, that's what I was gonna say.
I’m paid $185 per hour to complete the task using an Apple laptop. I absolutely didn’t think it was conceivable, but my dependable buddy convinced me to give this straightforward an03 chance a go after she made $26,547 in just 4 weeks working on it. Visit the following page to find out additional
.
.
instructions—————————>>> http://Www.jobsrevenue.com
Fidias, the upbeat YouTube influencer with 1.6 million subscribers, told me he's had someone else posting his own videos for the past two months
*squints* Oh, one of THOSE youtubers.
They would still be allowed to visit Mastodon to get true libertarian ™ takes from journalists though, no?
But the government wants your kids scared and depressed. They’re easier to control that way. You can’t let them believe that they have the agency to act independently.
“Second, we should also work to popularize programs like Wait Until 8th, where parents jointly agree to wait until their kids reach eighth grade before giving them a phone.”
Because telling kids they can’t do, use or consume something until they’re older worked so well with liquor, cigarettes, vaping, etc.
Where I grew up, anyone with coin could buy cigarettes. They only became attractive at a school which strictly banned them.
It actually works with smart phones because they're very expensive and difficult for kids to get a hold of without parents paying for them.
Obviously the solution is to make it illegal for kids to possess a phone.
Thanks for all the helpful parenting suggestions, Reason! However, the only reasonable political position on this topic is: “Mind Your Own Business!” It should not be government’s job at any level to interfere in the parent-child relationship in any way except for a few clearly defined crimes. First off, government is clearly not any kind of reliable expert on parenting. Second, the parenting experts are almost as clueless about the subject as government officials are despite their academic credentials. And finally, as with almost all regulations attempting to achieve some ill-defined, nebulous social goal, the attempt almost always does far more harm in failing than any questionable good it might do. It should be totally up to the parent to decide how much and what kind of media exposure, outdoor play time, education, religion, diet, medical care and personal supervision their children should have. The only time the government should intervene is when there is probable cause to investigate assault and battery, negligence that causes actual harm to the child or mental cruelty so extreme and obvious that any reasonable human would cringe at it. We as a society are so far away from that principle now that I can’t imagine it being solved any time in the next few decades.
“… we recommend schools stay open for two or three extra hours every day for mixed age, no-devices, free play before or after school. We call this a Let Grow Play Club, and our implementation guide is free. An adult is present, but like a lifeguard, they only intervene if an emergency arises. They don’t organize the games or solve the arguments. ”
Nice thought, but can you imagine what a FUBAR the government schools would make of this idea? First, they’d claim they need huge tax increases to staff schools for the additional hours. Then they absolutely wouldn’t be able to resist organizing the kids’ time and activities. Then they’d insist on liability insurance, permission slips, additional bus routes, school dinners, etc., ad intinifum. Then the Trumpian reich would demand every room have cameras so they can watch their kids’ every move to make sure they don’t interact with a homosexual.
The best answer is to get those kids *off* of government property as soon as humanly possible.
Lenore brilliantly advocates legalized choosing. Since 1972 the LP offered voters exactly that, but we've failed to explain how the voters who exercised choice used that spoiler clout to repeal many bad laws. Availability of libertarians on the ballot causes totalitarians to tread carefully on faces. Her lifeguard analogy is splendidly wise, and simple enough for even Reagan voters to understand. Boredness is the gateway to reading--another habit book-burning bigots bemoan.