The American Academy of Pediatrics has released new guidance on how to protect children’s mental health in the digital age – emphasizing the need for systemic changes as well as parental engagement that goes beyond limiting screen time.

Jessica Schleider, an adolescent psychologist and professor at Northwestern University whose lab develops digital mental health interventions, said the new policy statement was “really refreshing to see”, because it contrasts with conventional wisdom that places too much of the safety burden on individual parents. Common advice like “limiting individual youth access to screens”, or asking parents to keep tabs on their children’s every digital movement is “not only impossible, but for adolescents in particular, potentially invasive”, Schleider said.

Instead, the AAP is “putting more emphasis on the structural responsibility of companies and society”, Schleider said. Their statement recommends regulations that limit “overt, sexualized, commercialised, or harmful content to youth”, including algorithms that send teens and children down rabbit holes with damaging themes.

This guidance is also more nuanced than recent moves towards outright social media bans for certain age groups. Last month, Australia imposed a ban on all social media accounts for youth under 16.

Schleider says the ban is “very unfortunate” because while social media platforms are indeed designed in a harmful way, bans do nothing to make those platforms safer.

“Social media is the first and often only place that young people seek out help and support, and cutting that off immediately with no warning has really adverse consequences,” she said.

In her own research, Schleider has found that youth who need mental health treatment are more likely to get access in states that do not require parental consent. This is one example of why, in Schleider’s view, it’s healthier for teens to have some level of autonomy in their digital lives.

The AAP policy statement does include advice for parents and other caregivers, including to track digital habits for the entire family and set parental controls.

Dr Tiffany Munzer, a developmental behavioral pediatrician at the University of Michigan, and lead author of the statement, said “it’s hard to monitor screens 24/7,” but recommends “checking in intermittently to see what kids are doing.”

Teri McKean, director of crisis support operation for the National Alliance on Mental Illness in Chicago, has four children between nine and 24. She uses a Google parental control system that monitors her thirteen year old’s phone so that she has to ask before she can download any apps, and that flags “any content that could be considered problematic in any of her communications”. The system also sets limits on screentime.

But McKean doesn’t just rely on apps to monitor her children’s behavior—she talks to them about it too.

“Every day it’s like, Mom, can I have Snapchat? Mom, can I have Instagram? And I say, you spend enough time on your phone anyway,” McKean said. Her thirteen year old acknowledges this.

Keeping the conversation open is essential, Munzer emphasized.

“Ask kids, what did you like about that [game]? Did you see any ads on the screen? And that just creates a little bit of an opening into the window of what a child’s experience is,” Munzer said, noting that it’s important to “build these lines of communication early on”, not only to help parents understand their children’s digital worlds, but to build stronger relationships with them. Looking at social media as a group activity can also make it less isolating and strengthen bonds.

McKean enjoys watching social media videos with her kids: “The KPop Demon Hunters dad videos are really funny. Dads are really into the music, we all enjoy laughing at that.”

While Ben Blair, a Chicago based educator with children aged 10 and 14, said he values communication, certain topics are tough to bring up. He hesitates to tell his teen son about sexploitation, in which adults manipulate minors, usually boys, into sharing explicit images for blackmail purposes.

He talks openly with his son about sexual consent, but a conversation about sexploitation would be “such a stark reminder that he is entering a place in time where he’ll no longer be insulated from evil. There’s a profound feeling that there are pieces of his childhood that will never come back,” Blair said.

Munzer and Schleider both agreed that it can feel impossible for parents to make the right decisions in today’s digital climate. That’s why they believe policymakers should put more energy into holding digital media companies accountable for the harm they cause to minors, and into making sure children have access to safe “third places” like after school activities and green spaces.

“The system is set up for parents to fail no matter what they choose to do. And by the system, I mean how these social media, apps and online spaces are architected to keep eyeballs there,’ and “Not to protect young people’s well being,” Schleider said.

For Blair, letting go feels irresponsible. He said if you compare smartphones to cars, it’s the parent’s job to “be the seatbelts, even when they’re terribly uncomfortable… I hope all parents can kind of own that, that it sucks to be the seat belt.”