04/08/2026
Imagine this.
It's 2028. You're separated and involved in child arrangements proceedings.
Your 14-year-old spends most weekends with one parent. During those weekends, they're allowed unrestricted access to social media platforms that are subject to age-based restrictions. The other parent objects, arguing that the child is being exposed to content they believe is inappropriate and contrary to guidance intended to protect young people online.
The disagreement escalates.
Suddenly, what started as an argument about screen time becomes part of a wider discussion about parenting decisions, online safety, and what's in the child's best interests.
Now, to be clear, this is a theoretical example.
The proposed restrictions on social media access for under-16s are not expected to come into force until Spring 2027, and there is still very little information about how any ban would be enforced in practice.
But it does raise an interesting question for separated families.
Historically, disagreements about social media, smartphones and screen time have often been treated as differences in parenting style. Increasingly, however, concerns around online safety are moving into the mainstream.
As a result, family courts may become more willing to view certain disputes through the lens of child welfare rather than simply parental preference.
That doesn't mean a child will live with one parent rather than another because of social media use.
But if concerns are raised about exposure to harmful content, online behaviour, or compliance with restrictions designed to protect children, those decisions could face greater scrutiny than they do today.
The law in this area is still developing.
The conversation, however, has already started.
For separated parents, it may be worth thinking about whether expectations around phones, apps and social media are something that should be discussed now rather than later.
