Recently, social media, namely Meta and Google/YouTube, took one of their first major hits in two decades of supremacy within our culture. The groundbreaking California case tried the tech giants for a young woman’s social media addiction and the resulting mental health effects she experienced, beginning when she was a teenager. She won.
This ruling opened the door for new cases currently making their way through the court system. In fact, within the last month, the UK has restricted social media access for youth under age 16, including TikTok and YouTube.
Likewise, TikTok has faced lawsuits from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), over a dozen state attorneys general, hundreds of school districts, and private families over intentional child and adolescent addiction features and corresponding mental health outcomes.
Is this merited? And what is our collective cultural responsibility as we respond?
I was in the experimental Zuckerberg generation that innocently typed in our university email addresses to sign up and post college shenanigans between friends. The truth is, though, as platforms have expanded and entrenched all tiers of society, we can’t claim naivety anymore.
Social media has been around long enough; we know what it does—especially how it impacts our youth. Studies consistently show that social media use impacts mental health in children, adolescents and young adults, including exponentially increasing anxiety and depression.
According to the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), over one in five adolescents in the U.S. currently have a diagnosed mental or behavioral health condition such as anxiety, depression, or a behavior/conduct problem—the question is no longer whether this is connected to social media; youth themselves report the negative impact.
Sure, social media has produced both fiscal benefits and social conveniences. It's made the world small in a way no other technology has before. But at what cost to the next generation?
Currently purported “safeguards” by big tech haven’t proven to be enough. Just as with the historical tobacco and alcohol industries, the research and developmental impacts on the next generation cannot be denied, no matter how it’s marketed.
A response is now required. The real question is not whether we should enact policy, or even what policy to establish, but if we are courageous enough to advocate for change to put our youth first. Or are we too addicted to admit the gravity of the consequences and enact changes, all because of how it would impact our own social media use?
In 2025, Australia became the first country to implement an age requirement of 16 and up for social media use. Along the same vein, America has seen an increase in school policy across the country limiting access to phones and social media during school hours. The emerging evidence from such limitations points to potential improvements in social well-being, classroom focus, and academic performance.
What, then, should we continue to implement?
The normalization of social media for adolescents, along with the corresponding social pressures from peers, remains an ever-growing challenge among today’s youth. This, along with the known addictive tendencies among children and youth, leaves us with the responsibility of regulation.
As adults, we are compelled to take leadership in this way, to model standards of health, and to set boundary policies to reduce their mental health challenges with social media. Limiting access to social media for the sake of our youth's developmental activities (school, interpersonal socialization, chores, and extracurriculars) is paramount.
This will require shifts in existing policy, as well as changes in how institutions implement social media use to engage culturally with our youth. I would also argue these are just base-level responses to a problem we know exists. Further policy intervention may require age limitations, family and youth psychoeducation on developmental risks, and legal culpability for the technological tools that target children and adolescents.
It means change and accountability from the ground up.
Indeed, American youth report the highest levels of mental health distress, and social media time usage is directly correlated. With the door now wide open for litigation, more lawsuits regarding social media and child and adolescent health are currently making their way through the system.
Are we willing to take a proactive stance like Australia and the U.S. families that have advocated in court?
It doesn’t just require adjustments for our youth. It starts with conviction and courage from us as the adults in the system to enact needed change. Are we up to the challenge?
Dr. Megan Cannedy is an Assistant Professor of Counseling at Colorado Christian University in the College of Adult and Graduate Studies’ School of Counseling. A licensed marriage and family therapist in California and Texas, she brings more than a decade of experience in counseling, faith-based organizations, and clinical counseling education.