#Socialmediaresponsibly — Body image, brain changes, fake ids: What under-16 social media use is doing to children

As countries across the world move towards tougher rules around children’s social media access Australia rolling out an under-16 ban, France exploring platform liability, and Malaysia finalising its own framework India is entering a pivotal moment in its digital parenting debate.

The question is no longer whether children should be online. It is how young is too young and who should be responsible for keeping them safe.

To understand this growing anxiety, Storyboard18 spoke to Indian parents, psychologists, and digital wellness experts about what it means to raise children in a world where social media is as normal as schoolwork, and algorithms know more about teenagers than their families do.

The Post-COVID Digital Childhood

For corporate communications professional Aashish Washikar, the turning point was the pandemic. His daughters, aged 6 and 12, suddenly needed screens for everything school, entertainment, connection.

“Post-COVID, digital usage has gone up for all children, but we’ve tried to keep social media itself off-limits for as long as possible,” he says. His older daughter, now 12, still does not have her own social media account. “She only uses YouTube and WhatsApp under supervision on a shared device. My younger daughter has no access to personal devices at all.”

Washikar’s concerns mirror what many parents across India describe: safety, mental health, addiction. “Safety and inappropriate content are immediate concerns, but the longer-term risks around mental health and algorithm-driven addiction worry me just as much,” he adds. Even age-appropriate content like animated movies quickly leads to memes and trends that derail attention.

His solution has been a “graded safety model” at home and a similar approach at the policy level. “A strict under-16 ban may not be practical in India because children rely on digital platforms for learning. What we need is restricted features, no direct messaging, no personalised ads, and tighter content controls.”

Peer Pressure Is the Real Regulator

For Anisha Singh Motwani, owner of a digital agency, the issue is not simply safety. It is social belonging. Her daughter got a mobile phone at 11 and is now 13. “Honestly, if it was up to me I wouldn’t allow social media even now, but it became about peer pressure,” she says. “If they are not on social media and their friends are, they miss out on the conversations.”

Her biggest fears revolve around mental health. “Negative self-image, lack of attention span, and the damage it is doing to a developing brain rate highest.”

Unlike families that enforce blanket restrictions, Anisha uses Apple’s downtime and app limits to moderate screen usage. But she believes conversations matter more. “Rather than being a monitor which I really cannot do as a working mother, I find speaking to my daughter about effective time management and the proper utilisation of time to grow in one’s talents works better.”

Her regulatory view is sharper. “Educational institutions need to be at the forefront. Beyond that the government must ban the apps for children below a certain age.”

For Teens, Responsibility and Risks Grow Together

Parents of older teenagers face a different challenge one that blends trust with cautious optimism.

Shruthi Cauvery, Founder and Managing Partner at Vaia, has a 17-year-old daughter who has been on Instagram for two years. “I was not happy about it, but since I had given her a phone to be accessible, I could not prevent her from downloading Instagram,” she says. “I would like to think she’s a responsible social media user and I don’t have the same worries as other parents.”

Her younger child is 6 and limited to Ms Rachel and NumberBox videos on YouTube, so she is navigating two extremes at once.

Her primary concern is not whether teens should be online but how much. “The biggest issue I see among my daughter’s friends is the amount of screen time these kids are getting. I also worry about body dysmorphia among young girls who look at influencers and start holding themselves to almost unattainable beauty standards.”

She warns against assuming teens always follow the rules. “Most kids find a work-around and submit false age proof similar to having a fake ID to get into bars.”

Her regulatory preference: “The Indian regulatory landscape could model some of the EU’s policies. But ultimately, the onus lies on parents to make sure their children are safe.”

What Early Social Media Exposure Does to the Brain

The debate cannot be complete without understanding the psychological implications. Prof. Sairaj Patki, Faculty of Psychology at FLAME University, describes the neurological and emotional effects with clinical clarity.

“Research shows that early and frequent use of social media negatively impacts attention span and sleep quality,” he says, citing a study on 10-year-olds that found higher media use linked with thinner cortical grey matter in areas responsible for attention, visual processing, and literacy (Paulus et al., 2019).

Beyond brain structure, identity formation is deeply affected. “The constant exposure to ideal personalities online and reinforcement patterns of likes and comments make adolescents question their identities at an age already marked by identity confusion.”

On whether 16 is a meaningful cut-off, he explains that while maturity varies, adolescence is a vulnerable stage. “A systematic review by Keles et al. (2020) linked time on social media with anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. Unless closely monitored, mindful use cannot be expected.”

Pre-teens are especially at risk. “The mind is more mouldable at the pre-teen phase. Open the floodgates of influencers and unlimited content, and one is bound to be flooded with opinions a little too early.”

The biggest risks he highlights are not just cyberbullying or body image issues. Privacy vulnerabilities, data misuse, harassment, and academic impact are equally significant. “Exposure to comments or trolling can sow the seeds of body image issues among children.”

What Digital Wellness Coaches Want India to Do

Digital wellness coach Upasna Punj works with families dealing with addiction, attention issues, and overstimulation. She says most parents underestimate how early exposure begins. “Most parents have allowed YouTube at a very young age almost when they are toddlers. Many aren’t even aware of the platforms their kids access.”

For her, the issue is not just restricting children, but empowering them.

“Under-16 restrictions are a good protective layer. But real protection comes when we teach children balance, behaviour, and safety. Restrictions seldom work. Children always find work-arounds.”

Her regulatory blueprint for India is expansive: mandatory digital literacy in schools, no-phone policies, sharper age-gating, zero targeted advertising for minors, time-bound takedowns of harmful content, parent workshops, counsellors in every school, and integrating screen addiction screening into pediatric checkups. She also calls for a National Online Safety Authority for Children.

The India Question: Ban or Balance?

Unlike Australia or Malaysia, India’s digital ecosystem is deeply entangled with education. Outright bans may be difficult to enforce and may even push children to create hidden accounts.

Across all the parents and experts interviewed, one pattern emerged. The debate is not about whether children should be online but how to make their online spaces safer.

Whether through parental controls, school-led digital literacy, or a national framework that limits addictive design and targeted advertising, India’s regulatory conversation seems headed towards a hybrid model: restrict early, supervise consistently, educate deeply.

And as Washikar puts it, “A balanced framework is more realistic than an outright ban.”