This is something we hear from youth and teen all the time here at the White Hatter.

In reading the book, we found at times that Dr. Also of interest, David Wallace-Wells, bestselling science writer and a columnist for The New York Times interview: " ...as part of the rollout of the Affordable Care Act, it was recommended for the first time home alone Babysitting a younger child for short windows of time Riding public transit independently articles/d41586-024-00902-2 8/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/a-book-review-unlocked-the-real-science-of-screen-time-and-how-to-spend-it-better-by-dr-pete-etchells

stated: "The data is clear, the earlier we give a child a smartphone and social media, and the more time The Reality of Teen Suicide Rates Contrary to the claim that increased screen time and social media leads time among youth and teens directly caused higher suicide rates, we would expect a steady rise over time rather than a decline in youth and teen suicide given the increase use of cellphones over the years If the assertion that the more time youth and teens spend on screens, the more likely they are to experience

Caveat - It is increasingly common for parents, caregivers, and educators who follow us to reach out with questions about statements they've heard from others regarding technology and social media use. This article was inspired by one such parent who recently shared that a presenter claimed, with no research citation to support their statement, "youth phone addiction can lead to substance addiction.” Parents and caregivers are constantly bombarded with warnings about the dangers of excessive cellphone use among youth - some are legit, but many others are nothing more than a moral panic. Some claim that what is often described as "addictive cellphone use" is a gateway to more serious addictions, including drug and alcohol addiction. But what does the research actually say? To be very clear, there is no direct causal link between problematic cellphone use causing drug addiction - NONE! Current scientific literature does not establish a direct cause-and-effect relationship between excessive cellphone use and subsequent drug addiction. While some studies have found “some” correlations between problematic technology use and substance use disorders, correlation does not equal causation. (1) However, what the research does emphasize - shared vulnerabilities, such as impulsivity and poor emotional regulation, may contribute to both excessive technology use and substance abuse, rather than one causing the other. (2) What the research does suggest, individuals with addictive tendencies may engage in multiple compulsive behaviours, including excessive cellphone use and substance abuse. However, rather than viewing one as the cause of the other, experts encourage looking at underlying risk factors such as childhood trauma, poor impulse control, or co-occurring mental health disorders. While it is important to monitor excessive technology use and encourage balance, current research does not support the claim that problematic cellphone use directly leads to drug addiction. Rather than relying on fear-based narratives, parents should focus on evidence-based approaches to foster digital wellness and overall well-being in their children. To recap, the claim that excessive cellphone use leads to drug addiction is not supported by the good evidence-based research. While some studies indicate correlations between problematic technology use and substance abuse, correlation does not imply causation. Instead of viewing cellphone use as a direct gateway to drug addiction, experts emphasize the importance of addressing shared vulnerabilities such as impulsivity, poor emotional regulation, childhood trauma, and co-occurring mental health disorders. For parents and caregivers, distinguishing between correlation and causation is crucial. When others overstate the dangers of cellphone use, it can lead to unnecessary fear, diverting attention from more significant risk factors associated with substance abuse. Rather than adopting fear-based narratives, a more effective approach is to promote digital wellness, healthy coping mechanisms, and open communication about responsible technology use. Encouraging balance and supporting children's emotional and mental well-being will be far more beneficial than falsely equating problematic cellphone use as a gateway to substance addiction. Related Article: Digital Food For Thought The White Hatter Facts Not Fear, Facts Not Emotions, Enlighten Not Frighten, Know Tech Not No Tech References: 1/ https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/5/919 2/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28182139/

It’s Not About Screen Time, It’s About The Type Of Screen Activity! time?” Just as important, it reserves time for offline activities, too. time starts) Outdoor activities, hobbies, or family outings Creative play, music, sports, or just relaxing Most importantly, starting having this conversation before the summer break begins, the time is now to

Maybe you've seen a viral image, a sea of glowing screens held high at a concert, a stadium full of fans with some version of, "People aren’t living in the moment anymore; they’re watching life through a screen But the notion that they’re glued to their screens for the entire experience simply doesn’t hold up -

Each time, well-meaning adults claimed these innovations would ruin young minds. And each time, those fears were eventually debunked. work on the harms of technology for youth while completely ignoring, “Unlocked – The Real Science of Screen Time (and How to Spend It Better)” by Dr. book-review-the-anxious-generation-how-the-great-rewiring-of-childhood-is-causing-an-epidemic-of-mental-health/ 2/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/a-book-review-unlocked-the-real-science-of-screen-time-and-how-to-spend-it-better-by-dr-pete-etchells

CAVEAT - At times, it feels like we're constantly pushing uphill or swimming against the current when finger, “whether or not it holds as a real medical problem…” However, what wasn’t disclosed was at the time stress injuries, especially for the neck, the wrists and thumb when used over an extended period of time can help youth and teens develop self-regulation strategies and encourage them to take breaks from screens articles/s41598-024-71153-4 7/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/a-book-review-unlocked-the-real-science-of-screen-time-and-how-to-spend-it-better-by-dr-pete-etchells

This past week, there was a strong push from the phone-free school movement to expand their agenda beyond banning phones in schools, to now restricting computers as well. (1)(2) Many of these organizations provide “phone-free school toolkits” designed to help parents pressure school principals and districts into enforcing complete “bell-to-bell” bans. To be clear, we absolutely support placing appropriate restrictions on phone and computer use based on age and grade level. (3) However, as you will read, research does not support a complete ban for all students. For example, a 2025 released study from Great Britain titled “School phone policies and their association with mental wellbeing, phone use, and social media use (SMART Schools): a cross-sectional observational study” (4) found: “There is no evidence that restrictive school policies are associated with overall phone and social media use or better mental wellbeing in adolescents. The findings do not provide evidence to support the use of school policies that prohibit phone use during the school day in their current form, and indicate that these policies require further development.” When reviewing the phone-free movement’s toolkit, we noticed that this important research, and several other studies that present different perspectives, was completely omitted. Here’s the problem: If parents, educators, and school leaders are only being presented with cherry-picked, often dated research, how can they make truly informed decisions about technology in the classroom? Case in point - many in the phone-free school movement are heralding that Sweden has adopted a phone and tech-free school policy for all their schools. However, this statement is not completely true, and does not share the whole story of what they are actually doing (5) That’s why we’ve developed evidence-based resources to support a balanced, intentional approach to cellphones and computers in schools, one based on research, not reactionary bans. Our toolkit for parents, caregivers, teachers, and school districts provides the full picture, including the research that the computer-free movement does not speak to. Knowledge is power, but only when all relevant information is considered, not just what supports a specific agenda. Again, we do not advocate for unrestricted use of phones and computers in all grade levels. However, we do believe in a structured, intentional approach backed by high-quality, peer-reviewed research. A well-informed approach to technology in schools must be based on a full and balanced understanding of the research, not selective evidence that supports a predetermined agenda. The push to extend phone bans to computers ignores the complexities of how technology can support learning when used appropriately. While age-appropriate restrictions can be necessary, outright bans are not supported by robust research, such as the recent 2025 SMART Schools study from Great Britain.  When decision-makers, whether parents, educators, or school leaders, are presented with only one side of the argument, they are not truly equipped to make the best choices for students. This is why we advocate for an evidence-based approach that considers the full spectrum of research rather than reactionary, all-or-nothing policies. By providing comprehensive resources that include the studies omitted by phone-free advocates, we empower schools to develop technology policies that are thoughtful, intentional, and grounded in evidence-based facts. Knowledge is most powerful when it is complete, and that’s what our approach ensures: a framework that prioritizes student well-being, learning, and digital literacy over simplistic bans. Digital Food For Thought The White Hatter Facts Not Fear, Facts Not Emotions, Enlighten Not Frighten, Know Tech Not No Tech References: 1/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/lets-ban-all-student-digital-device-use-in-schools-what-the-heck/ 2/  https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/first-it-was-the-phones-now-some-want-to-ban-all-tech-in-the-classroom/ 3/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/our-thoughts-on-cellphones-in-elementary-school-dr-k-6-middle-school-gr-6-8-and-high-school-gr-8-12/ 4/ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(25)00003-1/fulltext 5/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/swedens-shift-in-education-tech-use-in-classrooms-its-not-a-complete-ban-as-some-are-reporting/

Caveat - This article was sparked by a recent online video interview in which a digital literacy and internet safety advocate held up a cellphone with both hands, looked directly at it, and declared, “It’s a drug”. There’s a growing call from some presenters, parent advocacy groups, and influencers to ban cellphones for kids until the age of 16, based on the argument that phones are like “addictive drugs.” While the sentiment may come from a place of concern, the narrative is wildly disconnected from real science where there is a significant difference between “addiction” and problematic behaviour. Worse, it contributes to what is known as a juvenoic moral panic, the tendency of adults to fear and demonize the tools, behaviours, or culture of youth, especially when they don’t understand them. We hear the comparison a lot: "Phones are the new cigarettes,” (1) or "Social media is digital heroin or crack cocaine” given its effects on dopamine and the brain. (2) While these analogies sound punchy in headlines or social media posts, they are scientifically misleading. Yes, phones can trigger a dopamine responses, just like exercise, food, or a good conversation can ,  but equating that with the pharmacological impact of heroin or nicotine is not only inaccurate, it's irresponsible. Many supporters of the “delay is the way” movement exaggerate the role of dopamine and often misrepresent how it actually affects the brain when it comes to the use of technology by youth. (3)  A 2022 report from the American Psychological Association stresses that calling technology “addictive” in the same way as substances (drugs and alcohol) conflates different types of brain responses and risks oversimplifying the issue. (4) Not every dopamine behaviour is an addiction. If that were the case, we’d also need to ban hugs, sports, and pizza. By labeling phones as drugs, we create fear rather than understanding, and fear has never been a solid foundation for good parenting decisions. However, it’s effective when you want to push a political agenda. (5) "Juvenoia" is a term coined by media scholar Dr. David Finkelhor to describe the exaggerated fear that new trends or technologies are harming young people. (6)(7) We’ve seen it before, with comic books, rock music, video games, and now smartphones.  History tells us that every generation of parents and caregiver tends to panic about the habits of the next. Today’s smartphone bans are yesterday’s Walkman bans. The difference? Smartphones can be tools for communication, learning, creativity, and even safety. To deny youth and teen access to age and developmentally appropriate technology and the internet, is to deny them the opportunity to learn how to use these tools responsibly when combined with parental guidance. (8) Banning phones doesn’t teach digital literacy, it avoids it! The “delay is the way” crowd loves to say that banning phones until 16 helps “protect childhood.” But in reality, it just delays digital literacy, making kids more vulnerable once they do get online, because they’ve had no experience navigating it under the guidance of trusted adults. (9) It’s how we incrementally “pave the way” that is most important when it comes to youth and teens and their use of technology. (10) The onlife world is not going away. Our kids will need these tools to thrive academically, socially, and professionally, something that China has fully adopted.  (11) Teaching healthy phone use early with boundaries, conversations, and guidance is far more effective than blanket bans. The push to ban phones often stems from a place of adult discomfort. Phones challenge traditional parenting models. They require ongoing dialogue, monitoring, and adaptation. That’s hard, and some parents are looking for the easy way out: just take the tech away. However, good parenting isn’t about control, it’s about connection. Banning age and developmentally appropriate phones removes the opportunity to have ongoing conversations about onlife boundaries, values, safety, and self-regulation. By completely removing phones, we avoid teaching the very skills our children need: critical thinking, emotional regulation, and digital resilience Rather than fall for fear-based messaging and moral panic, let’s embrace reality: Start young, start small. Give kids age-appropriate devices with limited functions to begin. (12) Scaffold digital responsibility just like we do with chores, money, or schoolwork. Model healthy phone use yourself. If you're scrolling at dinner, don’t be surprised if your child wants to do the same. Calling phones an “addictive drug” may sound like a bold, protective move, but it’s rooted in fear, and outdated thinking. What our kids need is not isolation from technology, but mentorship through it. Fear doesn’t teach. Dialogue does. Let’s stop moralizing the phone and start humanizing the experience. Instead of reacting with panic, let’s parent with purpose. Lets ditch the ban, and embrace the plan when it comes our kids and the use of technology (13). Rather than “delay is the way” let’s “pave the way” to digital literacy. (14) Digital Food For Thought The White Hatter Facts Not Fear, Facts Not Emotions, Enlighten Not Frighten, Know Tech Not No Tech References: 1/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/smartphones-are-the-new-cigarettes-really/ 2/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/when-quotes-in-the-media-feed-parental-moral-panic-the-dangers-of-false-comparisons-in-youth-technology-use/ 3/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/dopamine-facts-vs-fear/ 4/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10504808/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 5/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/why-human-emotion-can-override-evidence-understanding-parental-fears-and-social-contagion-when-it-comes-to-youth-and-their-use-of-technology/ 6/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/the-echoes-of-moral-panic-what-is-old-is-new-again/ 7/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/ding-juvenoia-moral-panic-its-impact-on-onlife-parenting/ 8/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/embarking-on-the-onlife-journey-together-7-key-parenting-ingredients-to-strength-enhance-online-safety/ 9/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/the-onlife-shift-how-social-media-has-transformed-connection-and-why-digital-literacy-rather-than-banning-is-more-crucial-than-ever-for-our-kids/ 10 / https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/why-restricting-technology-until-16-will-not-keep-youth-and-teens-safer-from-delay-is-the-way-to-pave-the-way/ 11/ https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202412/1324230.shtml 12/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/the-analogy-of-riding-a-bike-when-it-comes-to-tech-integration-benchmarks-and-our-kiddos/ 13/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/ditch-the-ban-embrace-the-plan-intentional-tech-use-for-schools/ 14/ https://thewhitehatter.ca/blog/why-restricting-technology-until-16-will-not-keep-youth-and-teens-safer-from-delay-is-the-way-to-pave-the-way/

today’s conversation about youth mental health and technology, it’s tempting to point the finger at screens to that narrative, especially when it comes to a youth or teen’s home environment (1)  It shows that screen time itself isn’t the root cause of the mental health crisis among teens. distraction can quickly turn into dependency, feeding a cycle that worsens their mental health over time This isn’t a call for more screen-time rules or blanket bans on devices.

Brandon from The White Hatter team recently took time to review a new PSA that advocates for raising Kids can encounter the same hostility and harmful rhetoric in almost any space they spend time... whether Such guidance promotes safety, health, time management, and overall well-being. fact, the PSA would make a far stronger case by arguing for limiting device access at inappropriate times