3 ms·
> That said, a better approach would be to limit kids under certain age from owning smartphones with full internet access. Instead, they could have a phone with
by jolmg 1y ago
> That said, a better approach would be to limit kids under certain age from owning smartphones with full internet access. Instead, they could have a phone without internet access—dumb phones—or ones with curated/limited access.
Why should this be the government's responsibility rather than the parents'?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- reaperducer 1y agoWhy should this be the government's responsibility rather than the parents'? For the same reason that the government limits smoking and alcohol. Because the parents can't/won't.
- jolmg 1y agoA teen can go to the store on their own and consume the cigarettes and alcohol right out the door without the parents knowing. There I can see why the parent would need the collaboration of greater society. But for a phone? A child/early-teen shouldn't be able to afford a phone nor contract with a cellphone-service-provider being underage. That should be collaboration enough. If they got a phone beforehand, it's because the parents themselves got it for them. Even considering a mid teen starting work, buying a phone and using it with WiFi, they can only really own things with the parents' approval. They can't really use it enough to form an addiction without the parents noticing and having the opportunity to confiscate it.
- sieabahlpark 1y ago[dead]