KUCHING: Calls to limit or ban social media access for those under 16 should be weighed carefully against the developmental realities faced by today’s youth.
Forensic psychologist and master hypnotherapist of Benfadzil Academy, Dr. Benfadzil Mohd Salleh said discussion on the matter should be approached with nuance, balance and long-term developmental considerations.
“Childhood and adolescence are critical periods for emotional regulation, identity formation, and social learning. Social media can serve as both a facilitator and a disruptor in this developmental process.
“On the positive side, reduced exposure may protect younger adolescents from premature social comparison, cyberbullying, online sexual exploitation, and unfiltered content that their cognitive and emotional systems are not yet equipped to process.
“However, a blanket restriction also carries potential unintended consequences. Adolescents today develop social identity and peer belonging partially through digital interaction,” he said to Sarawak Tribune.
He also said that a sudden or absolute ban may create feelings of exclusion, secrecy, or rebellion, and could limit opportunities to develop healthy digital coping skills under guided conditions.
“From a developmental lens, the issue is not exposure alone, but unguided exposure without emotional scaffolding,” he said.
Meanwhile, Dr. Benfadzil said there is credible psychological evidence linking excessive and unregulated social media use to increased risks of anxiety, sleep disturbance, attention dysregulation, depressive symptoms, and addictive behavioural patterns among adolescents.
“A restriction could indeed reduce compulsive usage patterns, dopamine-driven validation cycles, continuous social comparison stress and sleep disruption linked to late-night screen exposure.
“That said, addiction and emotional distress are rarely caused by technology alone. They often reflect deeper vulnerabilities such as poor emotional regulation skills, unmet attachment needs, academic pressure, or family relational stress.
“Therefore, while a ban may reduce exposure-based risk, it does not fully address the psychological drivers behind anxiety, depression, or compulsive behaviour,” he explained.
From a psychological and preventive mental health perspective, he said a blanket ban is a protective but a short-term measure.
“A more sustainable long-term approach would involve age-appropriate digital literacy education, emotional regulation and critical thinking skills training and structured parental supervision rather than passive restriction.
“It also would involve clear boundaries supported by schools and caregivers as well as gradual, guided exposure instead of abrupt prohibition,” he said.
He said digital environments are inevitable parts of growing up, and the real concern is whether young people enter these spaces unprepared and unsupervised, or emotionally equipped and guided.
“In my professional view, the most effective model combines reasonable regulation, active parental and educational involvement, and psychological skill-building, rather than relying solely on prohibition.
“The intention to protect young minds is valid and necessary. However, protection should not come at the cost of developmental preparedness.
“Policies should aim not only to delay exposure, but to strengthen resilience, discernment, and emotional maturity — so that when exposure occurs, young people are psychologically ready to navigate it safely,” said Dr. Benfadzil.
