Pediatricians, psychologists, mental health professionals, and media scholars have criticized Australia’s new ban on social media use for children younger than 16 years. An open letter from more than 140 academics and organizations argued that the ban was “too blunt an instrument” that affected young people’s rights to access and participation, did not improve safety standards on platforms, and would be difficult to implement and enforce.

Other organizations, including the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses and the Australian Psychological Society, raised concerns that the ban could exclude young people from communities and peers, mental health resources, and support, as well as increase their social isolation.

The ban, which is the first in the world, prevents younger teenagers from accessing a range of leading platforms, including Snapchat, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. As of December 10, 2025, social media platforms have the responsibility to implement age-verification processes to prevent people younger than 16 years from creating or keeping accounts on the platforms.

In a speech to the Australian parliament introducing the proposed law on November 21, 2024, federal minister for communications Michelle Rowland said the move was “about protecting young people — not punishing or isolating them — and letting parents know we’re in their corner when it comes to supporting their children’s health and well-being.” She stated that the ban was just one step that the government should take to protect young people.

Social Media’s Benefits

“What hasn’t been taken into full consideration is the benefits that have been derived from social media for this particular age group, and so now the withdrawal of those connections is going to be very challenging,” said Rhonda Wilson, PhD, professor of mental health nursing at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, and president of the Australian College of Mental Health Nurses, Woden, both in Australia.

Wilson also criticized the lack of consultation with young people in the development of the ban. “We’ve simply made a decision for them, about them, and without them, and so that is hugely problematic,” she told Medscape News Australia.

The rationale given for the ban was that it aimed to protect young people from content that could harm their health and well-being, and from design features that encourage them to stay on their screens.

Observational evidence suggests that social media use by young people is related to harms ranging from reduced physical activity to eating disorders and body image problems, said Marie Yap, PhD, professor of psychology at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. “The existing evidence does suggest that there is a correlation, and enough of a correlation for us to not dismiss it as just chance.”

Those harms were also more likely to affect already vulnerable individuals, for example, those with chronic health or mental health issues, and young people from minority or marginalized groups. “They’re already feeling isolated, hence they are drawn to social media connection, because that’s where they might feel safe,” said Yap. “So they are perhaps more vulnerable to harms that can arise from those platforms.”

One of the greatest concerns regarding the ban, however, was that it could cutoff young people from what may have been a lifeline for some, she said. “They don’t have the resources, they don’t have the capacity, sometimes, to find workable alternatives. It is genuinely risky for them.”

Big Tech’s Responsibility

Catherine Page Jeffery, PhD, lecturer in media and communications at the University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia, said that while the move toward greater regulation of big tech was a good thing, the social media ban risked reducing young people’s agency and freedom. “What fuels that concern is that parents can’t see what their children are doing online and don’t appreciate the value that it has,” Page Jeffery told Medscape News Australia.

The open letter criticizing the ban, which Page Jeffery signed, suggested that it affected young people’s rights to access and participation, citing the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child’s statement that children should have the opportunity to access and engage with the digital environment safely. “By excluding them entirely, then no, that is actually impinging on their rights,” she said. “Instead, the onus needs to be placed on the platforms themselves to make these spaces safer.”

Pediatrician Susan Sawyer, MD, chair of adolescent health at The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia, said she applauded the government’s commitment to prevention of mental health issues in young people, but much more needed to be done, particularly for vulnerable and marginalized youth. “We need to be working much, much harder to be creating inclusive spaces for young people in schools and in communities,” she said.

Wilson, Yap, Page Jeffery, and Sawyer reported having no relevant financial relationships.