admin 
Sophie Wingate, The Independent
Social media “ranks alongside smoking” as a threat to young people’s health, a report by the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges says. The Government’s ‘Growing Up In The Online World’ consultation, which explored measures such as an Australia-style social media ban for minors, app curfews, and limits on addictive features, closes at the end of Tuesday. In a report submitted to the consultation, the academy warned that doctors are witnessing “a wave of radicalised children” exposed to “hateful, addictive and grossly distressing content”.
A survey of 454 doctors by the academy revealed that half treated at least one child per week whose mental distress or physical injury was directly linked to online content. The report included harrowing stories of deaths and injuries from interests in violence or radicalisation. In his first public statement on the issue since stepping down from Cabinet earlier this month, former health secretary Wes Streeting said that social media should be treated like tobacco. “It’s extremely addictive, bad for our health, and Big Tech is borrowing the Big Tobacco playbook to avoid regulation,” he said.
“We’ve got to give our children their childhood back. A ban for under-16s must be the start, not the end. We have given the pen to tech moguls to write our future for us. It’s time to take the pen back.” Families who have lost relatives to harm linked to online platforms are set to meet Sir Keir Starmer on Tuesday and urge him to honour the Government’s promise to impose social media restrictions on under-16s. There have been widespread calls for the UK to follow Australia’s lead on a prohibition, although there have been questions about how effective it has been.
Ministers announced in April they would introduce “age or functionality restrictions” on social media for under-16s regardless of the consultation outcome, with proposals to be unveiled by the summer and plans to legislate before the end of the year. The concession by the Government came after pressure from the House of Lords over the issue, led by Tory former education minister and academy chain founder Lord Nash. Peers voted four times to press the Commons into accepting an outright ban, ending their stand-off with MPs only after ministers agreed to restrictions.
Lord Nash said: “The Government gave a commitment to Parliament that they would introduce some form of age or functionality restriction on social media for children under 16.
“We now expect them to deliver on that commitment fully and in the shortest possible timeframe.
“Hundreds of thousands of people have made their voices heard, asking the Government to raise the age for access to harmful social media to 16….
“And today the prime minister will meet the bereaved parents who have campaigned tirelessly to prevent their experiences happening to anyone else.
“Please, just get on with it.”
Ellen Roome, whose son Jools Sweeney died aged 14 attempting what Ms Roome believes was an online challenge, said: “I, and other families who have lost children to social media, will tell the Prime Minister directly: Social media is a product, and like any other faulty product causing the deaths of children, it should be restricted until the companies responsible have fixed it and proven it is safe.
“We cannot go on with further speculation — we need clarity.” But another coalition of children’s organisations warned that focusing solely on age limits risked failing to address the structural drivers of online harms. The Children’s Coalition for Online Safety, led by 5Rights Foundation and including groups such as the NSPCC and Girlguiding, demanded a broader overhaul of technology companies’ business models and product design choices that keep young users hooked.
In a joint statement, 25 organisations called for a ban on targeted advertising and manipulative design features; a ban on personalised services for under 13s and default safety protections for under-16s with penalties for firms that fall short; stronger regulation of AI systems including child-focused risk assessments; and the creation of an independent online safety commissioner.
Leanda Barrington-Leach, executive director at 5Rights Foundation, said: “We will not fix this by tinkering around the edges — by tweaking features or relying on age limits alone.
“The issue is not a single product or setting; it is built into the system itself, into business models and design choices that prioritise engagement, data extraction and profit over children’s wellbeing. “If a product were unsafe for children offline, it would not be allowed onto the market. We must insist on this same logic online.
“The onus must be on these businesses to demonstrate that their services are safe for children and not on parents or children to navigate or manage that risk themselves.” The NSPCC charity said tech companies prioritising profit over keeping children safe “cannot be allowed to continue”. Rani Govender, associate head of policy for child, said politicians must set out a path “requiring platforms to build safety into every device, feature and AI tool from the outset, preventing children from encountering harmful or illegal content and ensuring they can only access age‑appropriate services through risk-based age ratings — something that children and adults are telling us they strongly support.
“It also means ending the addictive design tricks that keep young users scrolling, gaming and watching for hours on end.”
