EE warns parents against giving children under 11 a smartphone

Please don’t give kids smartphones period. A smart watch is far less addictive and just as valuable to parents and kids (parents can track location, kids can still make phone calls and txt.) other suggestions are a dumb phone (think t9 txting), or just let them go phoneless.
- I don't think going phoneless would be a great idea because emergencies happen and people need to communicate but society would probably be better if kids weren't glued to smartphone apps and social media from a young age. The smart watch or dumb phone idea makes sense to me though.
  
  The emergency argument can be managed by not giving kids a smart phone with internet aceess. Easy
- Don't they require smart phones to work though? All the ones I have had are all just BT devices which require a phone to do anything beyond tell the time
  
  There are several cellular capable watches.
- Those watches with tracking built in are certainly popular in my area, but I absolutely refuse to use it. Kidnapping just isn't a thing (the majority of kidnappings is by a trusted family member/friend), and I don't think kids should get accustomed to someone constantly looking over their shoulder. I've gotten my kids "smart" watches (fun Minecraft watches with built-in games and whatnot), and there's no tracking or internet access whatsoever.
  If kids need to call, they can ask a trusted adult to borrow a phone. If I trust my kid, they can borrow my spare. Kids don't need a phone of their own until they can at least get around on their own (e.g. driver's license or parental permission to leave the neighborhood on their own), and for me, that's like 14yo. I have a 10yo, and there's no way I'm giving them a phone now or in the next year. They're really responsible, but they don't need it at all.
  
  Curious, what smart(-ish) watches did you get? Product recommendations appropriate in this discussion imho
- Or just give them a dumb phone.
- Anyone have a recommendation for a decent kids smartwatch with cell service? I got my son a Garmin Bounce and the text and the service sucked so we returned it.
  
  You can find older Apple Watches for fairly cheap, I paid 10 bucks a month on T-Mobile for just the watch plan.
  You would need to have an iPhone in order to manage it but you can manage a watch for a kid that way. They have school mode for them so it just acts as a watch with emergency contact action at school.

Scrolling to find out what “EE” is… I can’t find anything. Can someone fill me in?
- EE (formerly Everything Everywhere) is a British mobile network operator, internet service provider and a brand of BT Consumer, a division of BT Group. Supposedly the #1 network in the UK similar to Verizon in the US.
- A telecom company with the hubris and arrogance to call themselves "Everything Everywhere".
- Equine Enchephalitis
  
  Erectile Encumbrance
- Electronics Enonymous.
- Electrical Engineers.

I will argue smartphones or any electronic is not the problem. The problem is lazy parents.
My kids all have had phones since before 10 and they're all well adjusted but to be clear I monitor their usage and I check in with my kids regularly.
I cannot hold back society or technology at the fear of my kids being left behind. What I can do is help them navigate both as they grow.
I love how quick we are to lay the blame anywhere but parents.
- I strongly believe that a large part of the reason China is so strict with underage phone and game restrictions is because the parents are at work for too long to do any real parenting. Ideally parents should be the ones making those choices and actually monitoring their kids, but since I don't have kids I can't really say for myself.
  
  the parents are at work for too long to do any real parenting
  This 100%.
  
  I'm always sus of anything the Chinese government does. I feel that governments restricting Internet usage is just a way to indoctrinate people with the media you (the state) shows them instead.
- This is an extremely reactionary take. I hear what you are saying but I draw the line as delusional and irresponsible unless you apply that to pretty much all parents that don't completely smother their children.
  We make mistakes as we grow. We lie. We get hurt. Technology is always Pandora's box. I'd argue we have better knowledge of our kids now than we ever used to and stats show the world is safer now than it has ever been.
  If you live in fear you will form your decisions from a place of fear.
  
  This is actually a good take. Kids aren't miniature adults, they're kids. They're not helpless or useless, but neither are they fully morally and emotionally developed. They need guidance. Plenty of adults can't responsibly handle internet access. I survived early onilne porn and gore and social media, but it's not like any of it benefited me in a meaningful way.
  Some folks have an attitude that's like "I touched hot stoves and I learned better", but that's far from ideal.

Get the kids a dumb phone instead. Calls and texts are more than enough in an emergency
- When I went to price it out at the store, the line for a dumb phone was going to cost $30/mo more than a smart phone. It was dumb.
  
  I'm in the US and can get a simple plan for $6/month for no data, 300 minutes, and unlimited texting. Unlimited minutes is $8. There's no contract, so this isn't some kind of family deal, this is just the regular price at Tello for a single line.
  I personally have 1GB and 300 min for $7/month.
- If the new dumb phones also came with Google Family Link for tracking then it would be a win. But they don't. As a parent, having the ability to track my kids when I know they're heading to or from somewhere is a big deal. And no, it's not an issue of trust.
  
  I'd argue that is still an issue of trust, but maybe more concerning society / the local neighborhood.
  
  Give them a phone with no play store or browser. If they get apks over mms or adb I think they've earned them

My kids are around that age and it's a real struggle when all of their friends have one.
- There is a growing tide of data suggesting the fight is worth it, but understand it is a serious struggle.
  Much like trying to get kids to eat healthy when they are surrounded by so much awful food in the US.
  
  I wish I didn't need an Android phone for work, WhatsApp, Telegram, maps.
  But I sadly do.
- Yup. All my friends had cell phones and I was pretty much the only one who didn't. That kind of sucked, but my friends were cool and worked around it.
  If their friends won't accommodate them, well, they've shown their true colors and perhaps they should find some better friends. Having a phone isn't going to fix crappy friends.

Is it the phone, or the social media? The article only really mentions social media as the real issue.
Subsequently, does that mean social media on a computer is 100% A-OK? (this is a mobile phone carrier so it makes sense that they'd only focus on phones)
- All smartphones can access social media. But they also have some really good (mostly intuitive) parental controls. So if you don’t want you kid on Facebook just block it.
  What does it matter if the child is on a phone all day va on a computer all day? Sure you can’t really do that in class, but what about the other 16 hours of the day?
- Both.

You definitely see a difference in children who are regularly given phones to keep them occupied. They're just so much more hyper active. I know a lot of teachers have been complaining about phone use in the classrooms. In Canada they just started rolling back against rules saying teachers can't confiscate phones.

In my opinion, social media is a bigger problem than smartphones in general. For me a smartphone is a just a tool that can be both incredibly useful but also very harmful.
With a bit of knowhow, you can neuter a smartphone so kids can't access social media, games, and other distracting mediums. No social media apps, no browser access, no YouTube, no games. But they can still access useful functions like calculators, the torch, phone calls and messages, etc. Android and iOS both have features allowing parents to do this.

What age is a good age to give them one?
- When they need one. And no, that's not when they say they need one, but when you decide they need one.
  I'm planning on having a loaner phone when my kids are teenagers that they can share. It'll stay home unless they leave the house, and they'll be limited to how much time they can spend on it. If they earn my trust, maybe they'll get their own (again, subject to limitations). I don't see a reason why they'd need one before they can drive, but I'll play it by ear.
  That said, I refuse to do any sort of tracking on their devices. If I trust them with a phone, I'll respect their privacy with it. If they violate my trust, they lose the phone. If they don't like it, they're free to get their own once they're 18, and not a day before.
  
  At least give them dumbphones for connectivity.
  
  Yikes.
- As a 17 year old who has 3 phones (somewhat strange story behind it), giving a child a phone should be either when they need it, such as when they go out more often or other events where they need a specific use, but if not, I believe 18 to 20 is not a bad age to receive one, since young adults are more likely to need to travel to schooling such as UNI more often and generally need more info about travel routes and to be able to message parents/siblings/etc.
  As for my 3 phones, one is a galaxy S4 my dad gave me as a hand-me-down, pretty much used to text my parents exclusively, then I received an oppo Reno z from a friend who didn't need it, which I currently use as a games and social media phone, then the third is one is a galaxy a20 my dad brought home and said I could take if I wanted, since there were a few of those unused at his workplace, so I now just use that as a flashlight.
  
  You can't exist in this world without a phone anymore.
  Any meaningful school relationship builds on things like messaging groups.
  Just because we could do it in the early 2000s doesnt mean it's applicable today.
  This would today socially cripple a student.
- IMO 16, if you can trust them to be responsible enough to drive you can trust them to have a smartphone. If you can't trust them to drive then yeah they probably shouldn't have a smartphone lol
  
  I'd say 13-14 under tighter supervision but 15 is the range where they will be made fun of for heli parents.
  And they will quickly find a way around it like resetting the whole phone if nothing else.
- Depends on when you think they wouldn't get smarter anyway
- I feel like I had a problem socially starting jr high without a phone at all in late 00s. All your friends communicate/plan/etc over phones so not having one you're missing out on all of that.
  Smartphone is debatable, but I feel like 6/7th grade kinda needs a phone of some sort in current society

Just don't do it people. Me and so many parents have horror stories. Even without social media these phone numbers get out one way or another. For us it was much more trouble than it was worth.
- I haven't had a problem.
  iPhone with Screen time and communication limits means I can control how much time they spend in the device and in which apps and I control who they can contact.
  Don't approve any apps that allow social features.
  Talk to them about the realities of the internet and the wider world.
  All of this has to happen at some point. If you just hand off a phone to an 11 year old or even a 14 year old workout doing any of the above, you're still going to have issues.
  Much of what is being said about tech is the same as was said about tv and video games. The only studies you're going to hear about this are the ones that confirm the societal biases.
  If you don't seek counter opinions of this topic you're playing into the same fear mongering every generation of parents has had about the new thing.
  Dancing, rock and roll, tv, video games, and now phones. Every time, everyone thinks this time is different and every time it hasn't been.

Don't give them a phone until they are prepared to see everything the Internet has. Kids can be smart and will find ways around the blocks you put in place.
- They are probably smart enough to find a phone if they want one...
  
  Smartphones cost enough that a parent can control the finances and I don't believe kids can aquire a large enough fund by themselve without at least some assistance by the parents.
  And if, usually as a gift and that is probably taken in by a parent anyway
  
  Phone maybe, but not a SIM card with data. Although you can do a lot without a SIM card if your school has public WiFi I guess
- The thing I tell people is that as a parent, you are going to put maybe a few hours into blocking them from getting to stuff. They are then going to spend as much time as they want trying to get through it. You can dig through concrete with a spoon if you're patient enough.
  Educate them, and give them access when they're responsible enough
  
  That's the real problem, kids being able to spend unlimited time unsupervised because they have horrible absent parents. Parents shouldnt let their kids have unrestricted time like that. That is one reason why kids suffer in school not because of phones; because their parents aren't involved to guide them in making good choices and forcing good habits.
  So we take away the phones as the luddites demand. What fills the gap? Definitely not independent learning. Most definitely not suddenly mindful and present parents.
  There is a lot of fear mongering and blaming, but no actual effort to fix it. Banning or removing doesn't fix it. There is a reason that, when absent parents for latchkey kids were huge problems, they didn't simply decree gangs illegal and pat themselves on the back. Communities offered alternatives. But no alternative is being offered here. All the woes are shifted onto the unholy smartphone and internet.
  Ya know why predators can find success online? Because shit parents don't parent. A better use of resources would be forcing the parents to sacrifice their phones contingent on spending time with their kids, right?

Yes, don't do it. It's a bad idea. Phones are addicting and one day when we all realize this, we will have laws to prevent it.
- Because all of our current laws work so well at preventing access to addictive things. /s

I think we all could benefit from less screen time 💻

Lucky them. I wish I didn’t need one. It’s a window to other people’s problems.
- You know you don't have to doomscroll social media right? You can just, you know, not do social media.
  
  Why did you assume I was talking about social media? Besides lemmy I really don’t do social media.

Let's go one step further...
VRChat on the Quest is not a babysitter!
- Is that a step further though? I feel like not giving kids access to VR Chat comes way before not giving them a smartphone in terms of restrictiveness or severity. It's a far more reasonable suggestion.
  
  Both... but a Quest is mainly designed for gaming, where a smartphone is designed to do everything. The smartphone restriction is an easy one to recommend.
- Yeah, public worlds are cancer. It's best to get in with friends or groups.

EE is advising parents that children under 11 should be given old-fashioned brick or “dumb” phones that only allow them to call or text instead.
That sounds ridiculous. An 11-year-old is, what, a fifth-grader in the US?
If they have access to a computer or something in addition to their phone, okay, maybe. But for a lot of young people in 2024, their smartphone is their sophisticated electronic device. Maybe they tack on a keyboard or whatnot. But take that away, and they don't have a computer to use. A computer is just too essential of a tool to not let someone learn.
Kids used to veg out in front of the TV, where material is generally not all that fantastic and the device is noninteractive. I think that it's great that smartphones are replacing that.
I was programming when I was in first grade. I was doing computer graphics and word processing somewhere around there. Those are important skillsets to have. I made use of those. You want kids to pick those up. You do not want to push those back. I'd get a computer of whatever form into their hands at the earliest point that they can avoid destroying it.
If your concern is that you want to restrict access to pornography or something, okay, fine, whatever, set up content filtering. I think that they're probably going to get at it anyway. But that does not entail not permitting access to the computing device. That's a restriction on access to the Internet.
In May this year, MPs on the education committee urged the government to consider a total ban on smartphones for the under-16s and a statutory ban on mobile-phone use in schools as part of a crackdown on screen time for children.
That'd be, what, up to high school before you have one? And that's not "I have parents who want that", but outright "the government doesn't let anyone do that".
Wikipedia. Google Maps. The store of knowledge available from search engines. I use those all the time. You want to cut them off from that?
I read and certainly write way more text than I did in the pre-Internet era. Do you want kids reading and writing less?
I mean, I'm just boggled.
- I was programming when I was in first grade. I was doing computer graphics and word processing somewhere around there. Those are important skillsets to have. I made use of those. You want kids to pick those up. You do not want to push those back. I’d get a computer of whatever form into their hands at the earliest point that they can avoid destroying it.
  Most kids aren't improving their skillsets. They definitely aren't programming on cell phones. I am a programmer. I have code editors that I paid for on my phone at all times. I've used them like 5 times at most.
  Social media and misinformation is damaging for everyone but more so for children. Social media is what kids are mostly doing.
  I agree that there can positives for using a cell phone. Their are educational software but most kids aren't doing that.
  
  Even if they are only figuring out how to ignore clickbait, they are improving their skill sets.
  Social media is "damaging", in the same way that all social activities are "damaging". The solution is not isolation, but early exposure. The last kid to get a phone is the one at greatest social disadvantage.
- Smartphones won't help you learn how computers work. They are dumbed down devices, designed to keep you on social media while maximizing exposure to ads. These things are way worse than TVs.
  
  Tasker says you're wrong.
  The kid who has done nothing more than install games from the play store is miles ahead of his phone-less peers.
- set up content filtering
  Then kids will just work around it.
  I personally refuse to set up content filtering. My state passed a law requiring ID to view porn and use SM, and I'm willing to set up a VPN on my WiFi to work around that because I detest content filtering. I'd much rather have zero filtering and track what websites are visited so I can react appropriately (i.e. if the kid is watching porn, they probably need some proper sex ed and something to occupy their time).
  That's a restriction on access to the Internet.
  Sure, and I'm 100% willing to take that away from them.
  My policy is, if I trust you, I trust you to not be supervised. If I don't trust you, I don't trust you at all. So either you get complete access, or you get no access.
  That's how I'm planning to handle phones as well. They'll get a loaner phone when they need it, and if they earn my trust with that, they'll get their own. If they violate my trust, they lose the phone, including the loaner. Simple as that.
  the government doesn’t let anyone do that
  Yeah, that's not cool at all, the government shouldn't tell me how I can raise my kids.
  That said, kids can still access the internet at school and at libraries, just like I did as a kid. Or they can ask to borrow the family computer. If I choose to restrict my child's access to the internet, that should 100% be my prerogative, as should me deciding to give my child a smart phone.
  
  Hey kid, you finished your vegetables and cleaned your room, here's the car keys. Right pedal is gas and... ah, you'll figure it out. Be home by 10.
  Also lol @ family computer.
- Wikipedia. Google Maps. The store of knowledge available from search engines. I use those all the time. You want to cut them off from that?
  That's a bit overdramatic. Most kids have a laptop for schoolwork these days. I personally didn't get a smartphone until I started university, got a Samsung S7 then. I had no issues accessing any of those sources. These days I have a comp sci masters degree, so it definitely didn't "stunt" me in any way.
  I read and certainly write way more text than I did in the pre-Internet era. Do you want kids reading and writing less?
  Kids reading and writing skills appear to have been declining ever since the rise of the smartphone, so I doubt they're reading anything of sufficient quality to hone those skills a bit.
  Schools here have recently mostly banned smartphones, and the kids seem happier for it and their grades and concentration in school is improving. Sound like positives to me.
- Agree with your points on having a pocked PC to hack with, the issue here is then with mobile and their OS makers which mindbogglingly have omitted to design a working and hardly hackable "children account mode", since what is damaging here is not what they can fiddle within their devices, nor certainly what they can read from wikipedia, but rather the unfiltered and unaccountable exposure to a profiling oriented social media storm which even adults fatigue to cope with.
  I'm sure it isn't unheard of OSes having a hardware locked managed kiosk mode, because that is what smartphones basically need.

- "Age restriction should be 25. lmao"
  
  Social media has rekd us all regardless of age.
  Also, did me deleting my comment not federate for you? Is it still up for you?
  it should have been deleted before you had time to comment in response.

Make parents less entitled. Problem solved.

ME and CE warn against children under 16 handling firearms.