Why teenagers and children should be banned from using smartphones like the BlackBerry or iPhone
John Paul Dickie asks 'do children really need smartphones', and goes as far as saying 'should smartphones be banned for children under the age of 14?'
More and more people are using smartphones such as iPhones, BlackBerrys and Android devices but unlike a few years ago when smartphones were only being used by the business elite they are now being used by all ages but I want to specifically take about children around the ages of 9 and 14 using smartphones.
As I walk around my local town, I see children aged roughly between 9 and 14 using BlackBerrys and iPhones but why are they using them? They don’t need to use the email function, the web browsing function or the apps that can be downloaded from the various application stores for smartphones.
My mobile phone history
It sometimes frustrates me to see children using smartphones as when I was their age; I was using a Siemens A55 which did the basic phone functions; calls and text messaging, on the orange background with the black text, basically, not a colour screen.
I got my first smartphone two years ago when Android was just starting to be accepted by the general consumer, it was the T-Mobile Pulse. It worked most of the time during its two year life. Email started to be quite important for me as I received various emails throughout the day from various projects I was involved in. It was only back on October 14th this year when I got the iPhone 4S, unlike others younger my age, who have had an iPhone for 4 years.
What do I think?
My opinion is that children between the ages of 9 and 14 should not have a smartphone. They have absolutely no need for it at all. For some, it’s more of a fashion item than an actual device that they depend and rely upon for phone, text, email and other associated activities that come with smartphones these days. (This comes with news that teenage girls exchange 4000 texts a month).
John thinks children between ages 9 and 14 shouldn't be allowed smart-phones - but what about those under 9?
Costs for parents from children using smartphones
Another aspect of having a smartphone, particularly the new smartphones and the ones that have lots of features, is that they are quite expensive to run either on pay as you go or on contact. Most smartphones will require always-on internet which costs £5 per a month, for example. BlackBerrys require BlackBerry Services (BlackBerry Messenger and Push Email) which is another £5 on most mobile phone companies then you can add on your contract (minutes and texts) which can range from £10 a month to £61 a month on T-Mobile and O2 costs roughly the same as well.
Parents will be paying this and in the current economic climate, some can’t afford it but somehow they do. Parents should think before they buy their children a smartphone as they are wasting their money on something which child won’t use to its full extent. Most children won’t bother paying half or the full amount of their monthly bill as the may see it as something which they right not a privilege.
'Parents should think before they buy their children a smartphone as they are wasting their money on something which child won’t use to its full extent'
The pros of children using a smartphone
It’s hard to justify the use of a smartphone by a child but there are some good uses. I think that most parents will say that by using a smartphone, they can track their child to make sure they are safe while they are out playing with friends or going to school.
Smartphones and their apps, which can be downloaded from the application stores on devices, do provide children access to more learning resources which can help develop their learning and skills further. You can guarantee that there is an app for every type of subject (on the Apple App Store) which are taught in schools these days; Science apps, Maths apps, Art apps, spelling apps, apps for learning foreign languages and many more.
A recent survey, which polled 1,876 parents across the UK, showed that one in five children under the age of 16 own a smartphone of which 43% owned Android devices, 29% used an iPhone and 11% owned a BlackBerry. Another thing which the survey pointed out is that 9% of parents buy their child a smartphone is so that they wouldn’t get bullied at school for not having one. This links in with my point that smartphones are a fashion item for children.
The dark side of children using a smartphone
Smartphones can be used to bully other children through advanced messaging features which are available on smartphones and also apps which can be downloaded. Social networking apps can be added to smartphones functionality and can be used for cyber bullying through social networks such as Facebook and Twitter but also through BlackBerry Messenger (commonly known as ‘BBM’) which comes pre-installed on all BlackBerry devices where a user can send a “broadcast” out to all his/her friends. This feature of BlackBerry Messenger can be used to send mass-messages about a person to other people and then other can forward it.
Questions to be asked
I think the questions to be asked are;
- Do children really need smartphones?
- Can smartphones be beneficial to their learning alongside school?
- Are smartphones a fashion statement?
- Should smartphones be banned for children under the age of 14?
My overall opinion is that children under the age of 14 should be using a smartphone as they don’t need to use all of the features that come with iPhones, BlackBerrys and Android devices. The cons of a child using a smartphone outweigh the pros of children using a smartphone.
John-Paul Dickie is a student and a technology, media and news addict aspiring to be a journalist. He blogs occasionally at http://johnpauldickie.co.uk/
Do you think under-19s should be allowed smartphones? When did you first own a smartphone? Can a teenagers and children use smartphones to their full extent? Are smartphones a fashion statement? Share your views below…
10:28 pm 29th December, 2011
Following on from our twitter conversation I have no issue giving my (imaginary child) a smartphone because:
It will be prepay
it will have parental controls regardless of platform
And the simple fact that it is now fairly hard to get a non smartphone, by the time I and do have kids (and they are capable of using a phone concepts that you discuss are going to be either ancient history or mitigated.
I would also hope to instill a level of responsibility in my future offspring so that they would use any and all devices appropriately.
11:22 pm 29th December, 2011
When I was between smartphones my nokia dumbphone could update and receive messages from facebook, twitter and a whole host of SMS services.
Thats before you get to the problem of sexting, to a logical extreme any device capable of display ASCII can be used to view pornography.
The real issue is parental guidance, if the parent does not instruct, protect and guide their child in using technology things may go wrong.
The child may also be fine, the question do you lock your child in a room to protect them from the world, or give them the best tools to protect themselves?
3:28 am 29th December, 2011
Your argument could be used to ask “should teenagers be allowed to have iPod touch devices” – as they are essentially the same, minus the cellular calls, they can even do iMessage now.
Would/do you take issue with that?
12:32 pm 29th December, 2011
I am disgusted when I see this happening. I had a basic cellphone at 16 and it was for emergencies. Smart phones are expensive, as well as iPad and other ‘fashion’ technology pieces. They make that child a target, any one could hurt that child and obtain this £500 computer they are carrying around. The fact schools condone buying iPad as part of their equipment list is ridiculous and quite frankly when they are whining about wireless masts being put up by their schools they have no argument when they allow smart phones and iPad.
I may sound like a grouchy adult and it may be unfair but these are not essential items, life goes on with out them and at least I’d know my child wouldn’t be getting cyber hate messages as they wouldn’t have a smart phone.
3:45 pm 29th December, 2011
Wait – the question posed at the bottom is “under-19s”?! You can join the army at 16 for heavens sake, why the heck should you stop people from owning a smartphone at that age?
Kids have been bullied without technology for years, kids have been sexually active under 16 without technology for years. The cyber variants obviously spread much faster, but it’s only worsening a problem which would more than likely have developed organically.
It should be based on individual kids and their maturity. I’ve had a games console which can be used to play adult titles for the vast majority of my life – and my parents allowed me to play titles which wouldn’t ordinarily be played by a person of my then-age.
If you have an internet connection (which kids should have access to at that age in my opinion) you can look at a bit of blue anytime.
If money is an issue, and if teenage girls do send 4000 texts a month, surely a £5 BBM bolt-on would be better financially? Only parents know whether they can afford something or not, and again, children should be taught about finances long before this becomes an issue.
Why don’t kids need to use email, or a web browser? I’ve had an email account since I was 10, it would have been nice to be able to check those without using the “family PC”.
Other than the risk of theft (which, let’s be honest, isn’t precluded by being an adult), there isn’t really an argument here based on *age*, but that of *maturity*, and the two are very different concepts.
4:44 pm 29th December, 2011
Technology is becoming more a brand rather than a functional tool. My 14 year old brother wants an iPhone. Why? Because his mate have one. He doesn’t know the difference between an iPhone, a Blackberry or an android run device, except for the name and look. All he’s bothered about is the image of having an iPhone. But is this really a bad thing?
You also touch on the cost to the parents who have the pay for the smartphones. It’s simple in my mind. If they buy one and can’t afford it, then its more fool them.
6:02 pm 29th December, 2011
The irony with the final question “Do you think under-19s should be allowed smartphones?” is that the author of this post, John-Paul Dickie is a 16 year old and consequently, by definition of his own post, shouldn’t have a smart phone.
What on earth is this backwards thinking from someone who claims to be progressive with technology?
Most children of primary school age now have mobile phones. My younger brother, 6 years my junior, received his first mobile telephone at the age of 8; in stark contrast I was 13 when I had my first mobile telephone. Questions asked then were “Does a 13 year old need a mobile phone?”. Society now thinks it’s strange if a child doesn’t have a mobile phone by the age of 13.
John’s arguments throughout this article are flawed. Idiotic statements such as “They don’t need to use the email function, the web browsing function or the apps that can be downloaded from the various application stores for smartphones.” just further prove his ignorance and that he doesn’t understand his own stance. – If under 19s don’t need email function on smart phones, let’s just stop them from using email altogether. Web browsing? Yeah who needs that in the modern age, I mean it’s not like the UN have defined it as a fundamental human right, after all. Applications? You’re right, that 13 year old in the corner shouldn’t be playing Angry Birds, he should be twiddling his thumbs on a £199 Nintendo 3DS and shelling out £30 for new games.
“Smartphones can be used to bully other children through advanced messaging feature” – Like a bully couldn’t log onto Facebook on a computer and post horrible messages there, or send them an SMS. Yeah, stopping 13 year olds from using smartphones is going to stop bullying. Please.
John seems to have forgotten that a smartphone is essentially a mobile computer. A device that encourages communication and social interaction on many levels that have now become standard. The term ‘smartphone’ is now a dinosaur because even the most basic of feature phones have all of the functionality that Dickie has described here. His argument is less “Children shouldn’t have smartphones” and more “Children should not be allowed computers, or on the internet!”
I’d suggest that most of this post is perhaps written under jealousy. John wasn’t allowed these devices when he was younger, they didn’t exist, so therefor younger generations shouldn’t be allowed to either; it’s not fair on his ego.
On that note I have to go and handwrite an essay that I have to submit to my teacher via Royal Mail, put credit on my BT Charge Card so that I can phone my parents from a phone box to tell them that I’m going to be late; and pass the time stabbing myself in the leg with scissors because I’ve got nothing else to do.
9:07 pm 29th December, 2011
Young people don’t need technology. In a similar vein, neither does anyone. Humanity got along just fine without the wheel. The point is that it’s a nice to have that improves our lives and what we are capable of.
9:53 pm 29th December, 2011
You are looking at it from the point of view of someone who is witnessing children grow up with smartphones that just 2-3 years ago were not accessible to you.
What about 20 years ago when it was unheard of for a teenager to have a mobile phone at all, and they were limited to well off businesspeople? Nobody suggested entirely banning mobile phones from children just because they didn’t have one when they were children.
Technology develops fast, and drops in price fast as it becomes mainstream. You can pick up an Android smartphone, or even a cheap BlackBerry for £10/month. It’s actually cheaper than a conventional handset as you can use messaging solutions other than SMS (i.e. BBM – cutting out the need for an expensive tariff with a large SMS allowance). Smartphones are the future and it will be 2-3 years until absolutely all phones are considered ‘Smartphones’. A few years ago, before the iPhone, only PDAs, and of course the BlackBerry were considered smartphones. Aside from all of the points you make, there is simply no justification for ‘banning’ them from any section of society.
It’s just the same with personal computers – laptops 10 years ago set you back well over £1000 and were hard to come by – now most children have one, or have easy access to one as you can pick them up for under £200. Again – nobody seriously suggested banning laptops from children just because they didn’t get one when they were children.
Cost has been the only barrier to entry, and there are simply no other real reasons to restrict technology from a younger generation.
Some more food for thought: And what about the iPad being used to teach children just a few months old? Where is the line between an iPod Touch and a Smartphone drawn? How long before Apple discontinue the entire iPod range in favour of mobile devices?
We need to look at the bigger picture. Yes it’s unnerving, slightly disturbing that children have smartphones that most of us couldn’t even dream of affording just 10 years ago – but we live in times when Moore’s law applies to almost everything. Technology is becoming more advanced and far cheaper at an alarming rate – but that doesn’t mean we should arbitrarily restrict it from anyone. As a previous commenter said – the UN now considers access to the internet a fundamental human right http://techland.time.com/2011/06/07/united-nations-report-declares-internet-access-a-human-right/ so in a sense – it would be a breach of civil liberties to impose such a ban with some pseudo-’moral’ justification.
Also – you might want to raise the issue with the UK’s most popular consumer advice publication, Which. They recommend the iPhone 4 and the HTC Wildfire (both smartphones) amongst the top five mobile phones for Children. http://blogs.which.co.uk/mobile/mobile-phones/top-five-mobile-phones-for-children/
10:21 pm 29th December, 2011
Great points from both Michael and Sam.
Surprised Which are recommending smartphones in their “Top five mobile phones for children” post but that’s just my opinion.
10:34 pm 29th December, 2011
Google? Wikipedia? Find my Friends? Google Latitude? Google Goggles? Navigation? iMessage? BBM? GTalk? Google+? Facebook? Twitter? Reminders? Weather? Calendar?
I can see just a few reasons there for a young person to have a smartphone. They are necessary tools for many people, and useful tools for everyone else; and this is the case for young, old, and everyone in-between.
Yes there is this fear that if we give young people these sorts of devices they all spend their whole time playing Angry Birds, avoiding to talking to people, trying to peak at boobs, and playing GTA; but with the right supervision/parenting, children will learn to use the device to help them.
With data packages starting at free (O2 give you 500MB of data free when you topup £10, on their Text and Web tariff), and smart phones available for under £100 (The Alcatel OT-990 is a great example), it is cheaper than ever own a smartphone. Compare what you get on the OT-990, a £79.99 phone, to what you get on a normal phone; and you see why people are buying them.
That £79.99 gets you: 5 megapixel camera with LED flash, WiFi, GPS, Bluetooth v3.0, 3.5inch Capacative touchscreen, and much, much more. You can’t anywhere close to that with a normal phone, so why compromise?
Bring into play the above mentioned advantages:
* Being able to keep tabs on your kid using Google Latitude
* They can easily find numbers/info they need online
* Google Navigation means they never get lost
* Calendar means they can easily remember important events/homework
* Twitter and Facebook mean they can be social all the time, for free
* Apps like WhatsApp mean you don’t need as many free texts
* Skype can be used to call, even if you have no credit
* The list goes on…
Should children under the age of 14 be given a smartphone? Yes.
Should they be taught how to use it properly? Yes
Should it be on a contract? Hell no!!!
I believe that people should not have a contract until they are old enough to have one themselves, unless there is a ridiculously important reason. I grew up with some quite privileged friends, and a lot of them had contract phones bought for them. The horror stories of £200 bills, stolen phones, etc; left me more accepting as to why my parents would not buy me one.
It also meant that I had no dent on my parents Credit rating. When I was old enough to get a contract, I understood that it was a privilege, not a right, and was careful I didn’t go over my allowances, and kept good care of my phones. ( I have never had a phone break, stolen, or lost one). Those who had those bought for them, are often still having their’s paid for by their parents, and take no care or pride in their devices.
In conclusion…
Smart phones are the best thing to happen to the world of mobile phones, especially after a certain one was announced in January 2007; why should young people be made to suffer with inadequate feature/bland phones, when the rest of the world is out galavanting, whilst we download everything on 3G, and multitask to our hearts content.
Getting them using them early, means we will have a better prepared generation, one prepared to use technology more adeptly when it comes to the inevitable point where they will have to use them at work.
12:22 pm 29th December, 2011
I’m a 27-year-old Canadian and only just purchased my first laptop less than a year ago, and my first cellphone (“dumbphone”) 3 months ago. I went through six years of university mechanical engineering studies without any of these devices, and got by just beautifully. I personally have no need for a smartphone — I can of course see the benefits and convenience of having one, but my occupation and lifestyle simply don’t require me to always be “connected”, nor would a smartphone really make my life any easier or more enjoyable. Sure, everyone young and old should have access to e-mail or a web browser these days, but I personally have never been in any situation where I needed the internet so urgently that it couldn’t wait until I got home to my desktop.
As an engineer, I’m certainly no Luddite — I believe that technology has the ability to enrich and transform lives in the most positive ways. But, at this point in time and in my current life situation, I still can’t see a smartphone as anything more than a novelty item. Are smartphones truly a necessity for some people? Sure, if you’re someone who travels a lot for work or you’re in any kind of occupation where constant access to up-to-the-minute information is crucial (such as a stock trader). Are smartphones a necessity for children? If they have a home computer with internet access, I can’t see how. When I’m ready to have my own children, I would definitely not have any qualms with buying them cellphones so I could stay in contact with them whenever they’re not at home, but smartphones? I think I would still treat carrying a smartphone as a privilege to be earned rather than a right.
Another point worth mentioning is that many parents who buy their youngsters smartphones these days are far less “technologically literate” than their children, and therefore wouldn’t even know where to begin with setting up the proper parental controls and teaching their children responsible use. I’d personally be highly averse to purchasing a device for my child if I myself wasn’t fully aware of its capabilities, let alone operation. Sure, one could argue that it would be the responsibility of the parent to educate themselves rather than restrict their children, but somehow I doubt that every parent would be willing to take that initiative.
Comments and crticism welcome.
Cheers,
Maria
6:26 am 29th December, 2011
“As I walk around my local town, I see children aged roughly between 9 and 14 using BlackBerrys and iPhones but why are they using them? They don’t need to use the email function, the web browsing function or the apps that can be downloaded from the various application stores for smartphones.”
Well… did you ask them? It’s pretty presumptuous of you to declare unilaterally that kids below 14 don’t need or use email. Or any functionality.
Also, your last round of ‘overall opinion’ should read ‘shouldn’t', not ‘should’.
I think nearly any attempt to police the behavior of all children is arrogant in the extreme, offensive first to their parents (as it implies they’re not parenting well enough, and should be legislated to do better) and second for the implication that all children in all situations share the commonalities you observe of – and project upon – spoiled white kids and exceptional cases.
Smartphones are the latest in a long line of many handheld electronic devices, up to and including portable gaming consoles, that have real daily functionality for multilingual kids, kids with hearing impairments, and kids with learning disorders, to name just a few subgroups whom you may have unknowingly observed with your disapproving eye, as you declared airily that they have “no need for [their smartphone] at all.”
Check your privilege before you make sweeping statements, please.
9:28 pm 29th December, 2011
When you were their age the phone you had will have been up to date with the times, so I don’t see the issue when really, they’ve got the exact same: a current phone. Bit hypocritical isn’t it?
5:15 pm 29th December, 2011
If children are old enough to go outside by themselves, they are old enough to have smartphones.
6:57 pm 29th December, 2011
To me this article didn’t hold very much water at all.
While John didn’t outright say it, I think I detect a bit of the old ”I didn’t have a <insert technology here> when I was their age, why should they have one?”. The fact is, the world changes, people change, society changes, so lets all just collectively deal with it and focus on things that actually matter.
If parents want to bankrupt themselves by shelling out for an expensive iPhone contract for their kids, that’s up to their own discretion. If they have sense, then the kids can get a cheap smartphone (like the tmobile pulse!) and a rolling-contract sim like Giffgaff or O2 simplicity. Parents don’t break the bank; kid can use public transport app to figure out how to get home safely, for example.