Beyond the Feed: Protecting Children’s Mental Health in Family Proceedings

This week is Children’s Mental Health Week (9 to 15 February 2026), and with it comes a pressing question for family lawyers and parents alike: what are the courts doing to protect children dealing with family breakdown from the harms of social media? In family proceedings, where the welfare of the child is the court’s paramount concern, the potentially significant and lasting impact of social media on children’s wellbeing can no longer be ignored.

Research consistently demonstrates the significant impact that parental separation and the court process can have on children’s mental health: 36% of children from separated families report poor mental health and those embroiled in court proceedings face 60% higher rates of depression and 30% higher rates of anxiety compared to their peers. For children involved in family law proceedings, the pressures of social media can often exacerbate what is evidently an already unstable and emotionally distressing time in their lives: constant comparison to ‘friends’, cyber bullying and the potential exposure to parental conflicts playing out online can all have a damaging psychological impact on children. Against this backdrop, it’s no wonder that family court users are amongst those calling for the UK to explore a potential ban on social media for under 16s. 

Children’s exposure to social media is starting increasingly early in their lives – Ofcom statistics for 2025 suggest 37% of those aged three to five use social media, with 60% having their own social media profile. Poor habits - often picked up from parents - of prolonged screen time and “doom scrolling” feed children’s anxiety, erode sleep and, particularly in the context of family proceedings, drive conflict. Recognising these risks, on 10 December 2025, Australia enacted the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024, which enforced a nationwide prohibition preventing children under the age of 16 from holding accounts on major social media platforms. The burden now falls on the platforms themselves to take reasonable steps to prevent underage access, with substantial fines for non-compliance. Other countries are now considering whether to follow suit. In late December 2025, the French Government submitted a draft bill proposing both a ban on social media for under 15’s and a prohibition on mobile phone use in secondary schools. Somewhat late to the party, the UK government have announced a consultation to be undertaken in 2026 to gather views on how to improve children’s relationships with phones and social media, including the specific proposal of a ban on social media for under 16s. 

Judges are increasingly being asked to regulate both parent’s and children’s social media use as part of their wider welfare considerations, ensuring that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect children from online harm. This can take many forms, including placing restrictions on what a parent may post about a child/the other parent or limiting when a parent may have indirect contact with children via social media messaging apps. Whilst there is currently no formal legislation governing social media in family proceedings, judges have made it clear that online behaviour may be considered when assessing a party’s conduct. In Re J (A Child) (Contra Mundum Injunction) [2013] EWHC 2694 (Fam) the court granted an injunction lasting until the child’s 18th birthday to prevent a parent from publishing identifying information on social media of the child, highlighting that such exposure breaches the child’s right to privacy and can cause lasting harm. 

Parents attempting to agree child arrangements themselves outside of a court process are also increasingly looking to instil social media safeguards. Parenting Plans (non-binding written agreements to support proactive co-parenting) can incorporate age-appropriate platform specific rules, as well as practical measures - such as device-free nights, agreed privacy settings, curated app lists, and limited windows for indirect contact – to help create a more stable digital environment for children. When used thoughtfully, and monitored carefully, social media can facilitate positive indirect contact with a non-resident parent and help maintain meaningful connections with the child’s wider family – but there is a growing sense that it is unsafe for children to have unfiltered and unregulated access to social media. 

As Children’s Mental Health Week reminds us, it is all too easy for parents embroiled in proceedings to lose sight of what their children might see and feel, including online (where a growing number of children are spending upwards of 3 hours’ every day). A seemingly innocent post or screenshot by a parent can have a long-term impact on a child’s mental health – and many feel that the family courts must now step in to ensure there are appropriate safeguards in place to protect children.