Mother of Jools Sweeney calls on UK government to ban social media for under-16s

The death of 14-year-old Jools Sweeney in 2022, tied to a TikTok challenge, has pushed parents to demand more control over social media. Ellen Roome, his mom, says platforms like TikTok are built to hook kids, turning risky behavior into routine. Her push shows how worried parents are: if platforms can shape behavior so much, how can they be trusted to keep kids safe from self-harm, bullying, and addiction?

UK’s 12-week review on banning social media for under-16s shows the world is stuck trying to balance tech growth with protecting young users. While the plan is supposed to gather data, Jools’ case makes the issue feel urgent. Critics say delays could let harmful habits spread, as families and experts push for action.

“platforms like TikTok are built to hook kids, turning risky behavior into routine”

Australia’s 2021 ban on social media for under-16s offers a key example. A 2026 The Lancet study found the policy cut exposure to bad content at first, but tech companies found ways around it—proxy servers, unregulated apps. This mirrors concerns from former Health Secretary Wes Streeting, who used Australia data to argue for tighter UK rules. But critics say the long-term impact is unclear because kids can easily bypass age limits.

Australia’s experience shows a problem: even with legal limits, platforms are designed to hook users. Reports say infinite scroll and notifications are built to trigger dopamine hits, creating addictive cycles. This suggests a ban alone might not fix the core issue—platforms are engineered to keep people hooked.

The UK’s review faces pushback for being too slow. Labour’s Anna Turley admits laws need to keep up with tech, but some parents say delays risk letting harmful behavior become normal. Tech lobbyists warn overregulation could hurt innovation and push users to unmonitored sites. This tension reflects a global split: the US focuses on content rules, the EU on data privacy, while the UK’s approach is unique in targeting age limits.

Enforcing strict age checks remains tough. TechUK warned that methods like VPNs, proxies, or adult accounts can bypass rules, making bans hard to police. Civil groups also worry about a ‘cliff-edge’ effect for older teens, fearing they’ll avoid seeking help if they hit harmful content. These risks show how complex it is to balance safety with practicality in regulating platforms.

“used Australia data to argue for tighter UK rules”

The UK’s focus on pilot programs for 13–15-year-olds—testing curfews and screen time limits—shows a practical approach. But these tests might not solve the bigger issues. Reports say even partial steps like age checks and filters can help, but only if paired with broader changes. This suggests a mix of design reforms, education, and enforcement might be needed to tackle the root causes.

As the UK weighs its options, experts say a total ban might not be the answer. The review’s emphasis on pilots reflects a realistic approach, acknowledging the challenge of enforcing a ban while testing its limits. The UK’s decision could shape global rules, balancing innovation with the need to protect kids. The Jools case and the push for rules highlight a bigger challenge: how to keep youth safe in a world where digital platforms are both tools and risks.

The final decision will need to address both immediate dangers and long-term impacts on education, mental health, and digital skills. By focusing on evidence-based policies and working with stakeholders, the UK aims to handle this complex issue without stifling tech growth or risking child safety. Jools’ case and the broader push for regulation serve as a clear warning: the digital world’s risks are real—and protecting kids is a shared responsibility.