Hello summer, goodbye iPads: How parents manage kids’ screen time

With the majority of kids out of school for the summer, parents are tackling a generational dilemma that their parents may not have faced: How much screen time to allow the kids and what it should look like.

It’s not an all-American dilemma. When Deseret News searched online, there were lots of international suggestions under the title “screenless” or “screen-free” summer, including lists of activities that get kids out and about without the help of social media or the internet or video games or even television.

When Deseret News asked parents who were pondering the benefits of banning screens for the summer, we were introduced to lots of approaches. It’s clear screens are a parenting concern with which families grapple. But approaches differ.

What they have in common is parenting goals that Carissa Barlow of Eagle Mountain, Utah, describes this way: Raising children who are “well-rounded, delightful and functional humans.”

She’s talking about Bradley, 8; Lucas, 6; Daisy, 2; and 6-month-old Sophia. While her kids are not yet teens, she and her husband Logan are already figuring out what role they want screens to play in their development.

The couple decided early on that screens are something to be careful with when it comes to children. They see no real benefit to screen time unless it’s educational.

Sarah and George Smith of Highland, Utah, have adopted an even more restrictive approach, taking down their TV a few years ago and allowing screens only on an extremely limited basis for their four sons, who are now 14, 11, 10 and 8. Their musically-minded boy can learn chords on an onscreen app occasionally, while the boy who’s an artist can take art lessons.

Meanwhile, Melissa and Andrew McKay of Pleasant Grove, Utah, are taking an approach tailored to their individual children, pointing out children’s needs are met differently and that carefully curated time could be beneficial.

What the families share is wariness and recognition that screens can pose real problems if children are allowed to roam online unfettered.

Crowd the temptation out

Barlow said they found their children pushing boundaries and craving more screen time as they got older. So they introduced “screen fasts,” where the entire family went a couple of weeks screen free. “We noticed such a positive difference in our children, in the way they behaved, in the way they responded to the world when we did that,” she said.

“We realized this is an even bigger deal than we’d been considering,” so between screen fasts they restricted screen time. She admits there were some exceptions, like when a parent was sick for a week and limits relaxed. They did another screen fast to get back on track.

These days, instead of hammering that “screen time’s bad, restrict, restrict, restrict, I’ve tried to shift the mentality to crowd out screens with more positive experiences, like getting excited for going out and enjoying fresh air, playing a game, doing a puzzle.” It’s an approach Barlow learned as she was studying to be a holistic health practitioner. The examples then were food and making healthy choices, but the principle’s the same.

The Barlows don’t demonize screens; good uses exist. What isn’t allowed is high-stimulation, low-value content. “There’s research that shows that is rotting their brains in a quite literal sense,” she said, noting it’s particularly bad for the developing brain.

While Barlow sees no positive for allowing an iPad or smartphone in early childhood, she emphasized that parents should make decisions based on their circumstances. “I do not wish to shame parents. Not everyone has the same resources. Some parents have the luxury of close extended family who act as a village, some have the means to hire help and others are simply doing their best to get by. I do not wish to shame parents doing their best and using technology to help.”

She does believe reducing screen time even a little bit yields benefits. “Cutting out what isn’t absolutely needed can make a meaningful difference for a child’s brain.” And she notes that research differentiates TV’s role, as it’s typically consumed more communally and the variety of programs available are often less stimulating, with higher content value.

Crowding out has been an innovation that matches her children’s growth, she said. Giving kids wholesome, connecting activities has eliminated the need to restrict screens.

“We spend as much time outside as possible, riding bikes, running through sprinklers, swimming, camping, hiking, family and friend movie nights” and more, Barlow said.

The Barlows also embrace boredom, which she calls “incredibly important for brain development.” Kids must find things to do.

The Barlow home is not entirely screen free. The kids don’t have iPads or free access to the home computer, nor do they often play video games. But they watch movies together and cartoons “when appropriate.” They are occasionally allowed a movie together while their mom cooks. Then they all eat dinner together and connect.

“To me, this feels balanced. To other families, it may not … and that’s OK. I think it’s important that parents understand the potential dangers of screen time and the long-term effects it can have on developing minds, while also finding what works within their own family dynamic," she said.

What screens can’t do at their house is babysit.

Kids can’t set healthy boundaries when they’re little, especially given that tech companies have entire teams to design features to keep users, especially children, coming back, Barlow said. So parents have to build the guardrails. Setting healthy boundaries that match the children and a family’s rhythm help children later set boundaries themselves.

She added that “even small, imperfect steps toward more connection, more presence and less dependency on screens can make a meaningful difference over time. We’re all learning, adjusting and doing the best we can. That deserves support, not shame.”

When kids learn to entertain themselves

When TV went away, the three younger Smith kids began to find ways to entertain themselves, aided by the fact that they’ve never really had iPads or smart watches or access to computers outside of school, Sarah Smith said. Their older boy, her stepson, lives in Oregon during the school year and has had more access to screens.

But he’ll be screen-free this summer, too. And he likely won’t be an outlier as the popularity of no-screens summer grows. But the Smiths are particularly serious about it.

Sarah Smith said before she’d even started her own family she saw kids who were very young and were already addicted to video games. In her 20s, she told herself if she had kids, they wouldn’t have video games.

She studied psychology as an undergrad and natural medicine post-grad and even very early information about the impact of screens just reinforced her resolve. “I kind of knew 15 years ago that blue light was bad for sleep. It was bad for attention.”

The Smiths’ journey hasn’t been perfect. She said when the kids were younger, they had a big TV and movies were sometimes a bit of a babysitter. But she and George noticed that the less TV the kids had, the more they found things to do. They seemed happier and better behaved.

They substituted other activities and reduced TV time, before taking it off the wall.

Occasionally, now, the kids watch a movie on the laptop. Mostly, they play outside with each other and neighbor kids.

“Kind of how I’ve been raising my kids is just to push them to be outside, push them to be bored, to read a book, learn an instrument, learn to draw, learn a craft. That’s kind of been the family’s philosophy from the beginning. So screen-free summers are just our norm,” Smith said.

She thinks some schools and teachers “gamify education” by letting kids play on screens in the name of learning. The Smiths changed schools over the practice. She and George use computers and phones for work, but the children don’t need them at their age. The limited use they have is targeted to actually learning — to draw, to play music.

She’s not judging others, she said, because she works at home and knows how hard that can be in the summer when everyone’s home. It’s also tricky because she wants her kids to have friends and be able to visit them. But she also wants her family’s screenless choice honored.

“It’s uncomfortable for other parents to hear, ‘My kid is free to go to your house, but isn’t allowed to play video games or allowed access to phones and iPads and stuff like that. Can you please make sure they don’t have access to that?’”

Smith said it takes — and she makes — extra effort for her sons to have more social experiences “because I do feel sometimes like we’re kind of an oddity.”

What her kids may lack in technology, they more than make up with the abundance of freedom to play outside and bike and walk around the neighborhood. “They have to learn those skills and I feel there’s a lot of people that are super guarded about that and I don’t think that’s really doing our kids a service,” she said.

Utah’s free-range law has made it easier, she added. When they lived in California, kids were almost never outside playing.

Self limits and a child who finds friends

Melissa McKay of Pleasant Grove is mother of five children ages 13 to 23 and, as one of the nation’s most persistent voices for online child safety, she founded and leads the Digital Childhood Institute. In 2017, alarmed by growing dangers her own kids faced in digital spaces, McKay began researching, speaking out and organizing alongside other parents and advocates. Her efforts to force app stores to protect children have been cited in court decisions.

She’s vocal on the need to make the screens that children use safe for every child, but she also believes screens can be beneficial. Benefits are individual, rather than distributed equally, she said.

She speaks fondly of a teen she knows who is mildly autistic and has built strong connections online playing games with pals, “where he finds his people.”

Sometimes, she said, those people aren’t in your neighborhood, where other kids may not be accepting or kind. And every child needs friends among peers. The online connection has helped him.

She matches screen access to her children’s needs. One child does better with some screen access and another does better without it. What’s needed is accountability on every level, she said. “But there’s no one size that fits all for every family,” she said. “My vision is not that the no-screen world is ideal, but that limiting it as much as you can is healthiest.”

She said the mother of the teen who games online has curated the platform and established clear controls.

Her own 13-year-old, Michael, set his own summer screen-free limits. McKay said without screens he’s “less moody, less emotional, more social, happier.” He sees that clearly, too.

As he described it: “Instead of doing a lot of screens, I decided, hey, why not just do screens after 7 p.m. so I can have a creative, fun and enjoyable summer. What I’ve been realizing is, sometimes I am bored, but I look back and have enjoyed my day much more than if I was just on the computer.”

He added, “A lot of days I’ll get to 7 and already have something planned with friends, or I’ll start screens and 10 minutes later my friends will text, ‘Hey, can we all hang out?’ I feel like I can choose them instead of dopamine because I’m not stuck in the middle of a game or YouTube. I’m having a healthier life.”

That doesn’t work for everyone. For the teen with autism, screens and online games “help him fine-tune his social skills. It helps him feel accepted and not feel alone,” McKay said. It’s a far cry, she added, from when his parents tried to pair him up on playdates with kids his age nearby and it often ended in tears. “Almost every playdate, they would leave him out or, worse, make fun of him. I saw how hard it was for his parents, over and over again,” McKay said, noting the child stopped wanting to extend himself.

“I think the beautiful thing about online is opening up the number of relationships that are powerful for them. And it kind of provides a speed dating model. If a relationship’s not quite working, they can burn through that one and try again.”

McKay believes parents should limit screens as much as possible for kids. But it’s as important to know the individual child well and know that online is safe, rather than “catastrophically dangerous like it is right now.”

She admires those who manage to let a child benefit while ensuring safety.