A few days ago, Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission proudly announced at a press conference on “child safety” that they are ready to protect our children on online platforms by imposing bans and using an EU-developed age verification software. Both have been widely contested by parents’ representatives and child rights activists, Parents International being one of them. Who asked the European Commission to protect our children online? Surely not us parent representatives or any ordinary parent. This initiative is another step in a broader campaign to restrict parental authority and parents’ rights that are protected by the wording, but unfortunately not the spirit, of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Banning smartphones at schools and banning social media use for children and teenagers have been high on the political agenda in many countries, with the Australian social media ban becoming the proverbial veterinarian’s horse. Nearly all experts were warning against the ban, and new research clearly shows the detrimental effects: having to lie even more than before, turning to much less safe platforms that are not included in the ban, normalising cheating, and much more.
Smartphone bans have also been researched, and the warning signs are there. In times of the crisis of democracy, young people trust political systems even less; they are more likely to fall for predators, and even sleep deprivation is increasing, as they have to catch up at night. In parallel, cyberbullying by teachers is on the rise. But these are not the main issues I want to discuss.
My concern is about how the current political system is treating parents and how it infantilises them. For hundreds of years, parents – even if they were far younger and far less educated than most today – were considered competent adults to raise children. We were introduced alcohol, tobacco, left home alone, or sent to the shop by our parents when they considered we were ready for it. And how proud we were when we were allowed to go out to buy cigarettes. And how proud I was of my own 5-year-old when he went shopping alone for the first time.
In 1989, a revolutionary thing happened: the United Nations created the Convention on the Rights of the Child that – in its wording – cemented the role of parents as the main decision-makers in the lives of their children and defined the role of the state as a supporter of carrying out parental duties. However, the reality is that these regulations of the Convention are overlooked more and more by national governments and also the European Union.
In the digital world, the situation is even more complicated. Most companies providing services from Google to Facebook to ChatGPT are registered in the USA, the only country in the world that still hasn’t ratified the Convention, and thus neither the rights of children nor those of parents are protected; arbitrary state intervention is legal, and subsequently, the COPPA law prohibits access up to age 13 – a regulation these companies carried over the Atlantic, and European policy makers never tried to contest regardless of numerous requests by parent organisations, including us.
In the past 37 years, many countries have gradually taken away the basic right of parents to make parenting decisions enshrined in the Convention. Some countries created legislation that threatens parents with criminal charges if they make a parenting decision and allow their children to stay home alone or go to the playground without an adult present. Border guards may not allow your child to cross the border if it is school time.
It has been normalised that European countries have imposed age restrictions on alcohol and tobacco sales and often also on consumption, taking away parental authority. It might be a criminal offence to allow your child to taste your beer at a family dinner. The next step is that some countries are trying to restrict access for life for those being born now. Nobody really rebelled, but at the same time, these bans do not work. As no ban has ever worked, just led to more criminal activities.
When it comes to the current pet topics, politicians often quote parental support for the bans. I feel really sorry for those parents who have so little respect and authority that they want the state to raise their children. There surely is support, a small group of middle-class people, who have fallen into the pit of mindful parenting or something similarly fashionable parenting method that basically prohibits you from being a parent with all its authority, responsibility, and having to deal with conflict with your child.
However, the majority of parents have made a real decision. They have bought their children a smartphone (and often a second, non-working one that can be handed in at school), and they pay for the data. No child can do it alone, the 95-98% of children over 10 who have a smartphone got it from their parents. Similarly, the overwhelming majority of the parents of the 80% of 10-12 year olds who are actively using social media registered on the platforms with a fake age with the help and support of their parents.
We had to do the same 18 years ago with my own son. These are difficult moments as you have to explain to your child why we have to lie.
And policy makers, not listening to this majority voice, are planning to try and take away more rights. We have known since the restrictions in 2020 that the majority will quietly rebel rather than fight for their rights. But is this infantilisation really the solution for the so-often-emphasised crisis of democracy? I think one large step would be to give parents back the rights that are being gradually taken away.
Eszter Salamon
More from Parents International
The Birds and the Bees: Who Decides?
