Executive Summary
LifeLab is a science-for-health-literacy programme based at University Hospital Southampton and the University of Southampton. Operating across the educational lifecourse from primary school through college, LifeLab works with young people to build the knowledge, skills and critical awareness needed to make informed decisions about their health and wellbeing.
This response was produced in collaboration with young people through the NxtGen Academy, LifeLab's programme for young researchers aged 13 to 19. NxtGen researchers were involved not only as survey respondents but as active contributors to the analysis, and interpretation of the evidence presented here and are named authors of this submission.
Young people need to be involved in the discussions and currently don’t feel that is the case. The reason that framing matters is made plain by the data. When asked whether their views are listened to when decisions are made about the internet and social media, only 1 of the 44 young people who answered that question said that they definitely are. Thirty-one said their views are not really, or not at all, listened to. One of the young Australian participants, reflecting on her experience of a social media ban already in operation since December 2025, commented:
Policy Recommendations
LifeLab does not support a blanket social media ban for under-16s. The evidence from young people, including direct testimony from Australia where such a ban is already in force, points clearly to the conclusion that a blunt age restriction is 1 ineffective, inequitable, and may produce unintended harms that outweigh its intended benefits. This position is grounded in four evidenced concerns:
- Age-based bans can be easily circumvented, as shown in Australia. Young people described facial recognition workarounds, shared family accounts, parental ID provided on behalf of children, and accounts on TikTok and Instagram that were never removed.
- Bans may reduce platform accountability for child safety. where platforms assume under-16s are no longer present, they have reduced incentive to maintain child safety features or moderate content for younger users. Young people who continue to access social media after a ban, which the evidence suggests is the majority, may be more exposed, not less.
- The impact of the ban falls unevenly across young people. Whether a young person accesses social media safely after a ban depends heavily on parental engagement and digital literacy - resources not equally distributed.
- Removing access to mainstream platforms does not remove risk; it may redirect young people to less regulated alternatives.
Contributors:
Professor Kath Woods-Townsend, Professor of Science Engagement and Education at the University of Southampton.
Esther Lash (age 15), Young researcher at Lifelab's NxtGen Academy.
Holly Tamlyn (age 17), Young researcher at Lifelab's NxtGen Academy.
Dr Nikhil Mistry, Knowledge Exchange and Enterprise Fellow at the University of Southampton
