Germany is exploring legislation to ban social media access for children, joining a growing global movement. Australia already passed a ban. The US is debating it. Tech companies claim they're self-regulating. The question isn't whether social media harms kids—the evidence is overwhelming—but whether government bans are the right solution.

Let's start with what we know. Study after study shows correlations between social media use and increased rates of depression, anxiety, and self-harm among teenagers. The mechanisms are well-documented: comparison culture, cyberbullying, sleep disruption, dopamine manipulation through variable rewards.

Tech companies have known about these harms for years. Internal Meta research showed Instagram was "toxic" for teenage girls. The companies did nothing meaningful to address it because engagement drives revenue, and teens are incredibly engaged.

So governments are stepping in. Australia banned social media for kids under 16. Germany is considering similar measures. The United States has various state-level proposals. The approach varies—age verification, parental controls, platform liability—but the intent is the same: protect kids from systems designed to manipulate them.

Here's where it gets complicated. How do you enforce an age ban online? Age verification technology exists but raises massive privacy concerns. Do we really want to upload government IDs to verify we're adults? What about VPNs? What about kids who lie about their age?

Then there's the question of effectiveness. Teens are resourceful. If they want to access social media, they'll find workarounds. A ban might reduce casual use but won't stop determined kids. And it might push them to less regulated platforms.

The alternative is forcing platforms to be safer by design. Disable algorithmic feeds for minors. Ban infinite scroll. Require parental controls. Make platforms liable for harms. This addresses root causes rather than playing whack-a-mole with access.

I've talked to child psychologists, tech policy experts, and parents. There's no consensus. Some say bans are necessary because tech companies won't self-regulate. Others say bans are authoritarian overreach that won't work anyway.

What everyone agrees on: the status quo is unacceptable. Social media companies have spent a decade optimizing for engagement at the expense of teen mental health. Something has to change. Whether that's government bans, platform redesigns, or cultural shifts is the open question.