When I began my doctoral journey in children’s rights in the digital environment in 2020, a legal, state or legal perspective was rarely given to the issues surrounding the impact of digital technologies on children. I regularly found myself the only lawyer present in Quebec conferences or forums on these themes. We sounded the alarm on certain potential consequences, and conversely, we defended several possibilities that digital technology can offer to minors (which are even better documented today than at the time). But the proposed solutions, in Quebec at least, generally revolved around media education and parental responsibility.
Since then, things have evolved greatly. The question of legislating around screen time has practically become an electoral issue. I am delighted, as a researcher, that these questions are more present in the media. I am also delighted that they are recognized as part of current “public health” issues.
However, I deplore the fact that in media and political discourse, we still treat “digital and children” as a large monolithic block, mixing all kinds of distinct, complex themes requiring unique solutions.
We thus see “screens and children” as one and the same big problem “to be resolved”, whereas these questions deserve, in my opinion, to be divided in order to think about them effectively, taking into account a key principle in childhood law, that is to say that of the child’s evolving capacities: excessive use of digital technology in early childhood; the place of digital technologies in the classroom and at school as an educational tool; the use of personal phones at school as a distraction tool; access to social media before adolescence; the inclusion of children with disabilities through digital technologies; age verification on pornographic sites; protection of children’s personal information; protecting children from online sexual exploitation; video game addiction; addiction to social networks; cyberbullying; hyperconnectivity and adults’ right to disconnect as influencing family screen use, etc.
Of course, these concerns are often related and familiar, and there are “global solutions” for some of them (for example, digital education or ethical reflection on the design of technological tools that would be more respectful of rights of children).
However, to the question “should we adopt a law to regulate digital technology for children?” “, for me who is interested in the normative aspects of these questions (even if the analogies are always imperfect), it is a bit like asking ourselves “should we adopt a law to regulate the means of transport among 0 -18 years old? “.
Should we think about the role of “law” in relation to some, or even several, of these issues? Certainly. But I don’t believe laws are necessary for all the challenges faced by toddlers (around 0-5 years), children (6-12 years) and adolescents (13-17 years) in their vast environment digital (what we often call “screens,” which are not just social networks).
Otherwise, without these nuances in the face of the complexity of these questions, I side with those who fear legislative overinflation and legal paternalism in the intimate and private lives of Quebec families.
And above all: we must invite children into the debate. Listen to them, and be interested in what they have to say. They are the main people interested in these questions!