How parents can explain Europe’s new social media limits to children

As the European Commission moves to restrict social media access for younger children, a psychologist says parents should frame the rules as protection rather than punishment.

For many families in Europe, the debate over children’s screen time is about to become a legal obligation. The European Commission has set out plans to bar social media use for children under 13, allow 13- and 14-year-olds to use parent-supervised “mini accounts”, and impose stricter safety rules on platforms that keep young users engaged for longer. The aim is to make services safer by design and to shift more of the burden on to companies to prove their products are appropriate for minors.

For parents, the harder task may be explaining the change without turning it into a battle. Abel Domínguez, a child and adolescent psychologist and head of Domínguez Psicólogos, told elDiario.es that the conversation works best when families think in terms of a traffic light. In his view, some decisions belong in the green zone, where children can decide for themselves; others sit in amber, where discussion and compromise are possible; and the new limits on social media for younger children clearly fall into the red zone, where there is no negotiation.

Domínguez argues that parents should present the rules as a protective measure rather than a punishment. He said the limits come from European lawmakers and should be explained to children as something adults are required to enforce, not as a personal choice made by parents on a whim. The psychologist says that framing can help children understand that the rules are meant to support cyber safety, even when they feel disappointed by them.

The biggest objection many families will hear is also the most familiar: “I’m the only one of my friends who is not allowed.” Domínguez told elDiario.es that this kind of pressure is common and that parents should respond by being clear about their family values rather than giving in. If the restriction risks leaving a child socially isolated, he suggests supervised alternatives, such as allowing contact through a parent-monitored chat, so children can stay in touch without being left alone in the wider internet.

He also warns against presenting technology itself as the enemy. The problem, he says, is not the screen alone but the way many platforms are designed to hold attention, encourage endless scrolling and push instant replies. In practice, he recommends teaching children to spot what is being sold to them, whether it is a subscription, a brand or a product placement, and to start talking about digital safety as soon as children begin using a tablet or a phone. That approach matches the broader direction of the EU proposal, which seeks safer default settings, fewer addictive design features and stronger age checks for children and teenagers.