Ban or restriction? School without smartphones and digital drugs

Daniel and I are talking about the fact that dependence on technology ruins children, digital hygiene and how parents, school and society are trying to deal with the increasing problem of digital drugs.

(Interview is simply a edited and completed version of the podcast Are you aware? p. School without smartphone libations).

Rafał Górski: What are smartphone libations?

Daniel Ninewit: First of all, it is an unwillingness to disconnect from the screen, halt playing, scrolling, surfing or another activities that powerfully attracted the user. erstwhile a parent or guardian tries to encourage a young man to go to sleep, it ends in quarrels, brawls, and in utmost cases even a police call. That's why we call it smartphone libations, like alcohol libations.

Sometimes the player acts like he's at the stadium, and in the mediate of the night reacts like a fan, which means if he succeeds in his game, he screams, waking the full house.

I'll give you a beautiful pictorial example: a player can wake his parent up in the mediate of the night just to tell her he's moved on to the next phase of the game.

We're not just talking about night fights. Sometimes a parent wakes a student to school, and he's half conscious due to the fact that he played all night. Then there is verbal aggression, and sometimes even physical violence, due to the fact that a young man waves his feet or hands to drive distant whoever wants to halt his sweet sleep.

The fact is that technologies have a very advanced addictive force and that is why these situations arise.

You're the co-founder of the Reset Youth Therapy Center. You deal with digital drugs all day. Which stories are most memorable to you?

The strongest communicative is related to a 12-year-old girl who logged into 1 of the portals where you can sale your bare photos. She earned about PLN 300 a day, and was paid there in different ways, including a blink. erstwhile parents discovered this, they were shocked and began seeking help. The first decision they made was to take the smartphone distant from their daughter. Then she offered to commission a friend and threw these bare pictures of herself from her smartphone. The strength of a parent in specified a situation is enormous. The purpose, or cessation of specified publications, was not attained, and these parents remained hand in the potty.

A father showed me pictures taken after his boy bit a household member. I saw the teeth on the body... The household was looking for a way for a young man to halt playing, and erstwhile they were just trying to take his computer, he was the 1 in the heat of anger, the anger started to bite. These are situations highly difficult, dramatic for parents.

That's quite a few stories. It happens again, this kind or way of life. There is only a difference in circumstances, age or weight. My parents, whose kid barely ate, did not usage the toilet due to the fact that it was so sunk in the game. This indistinguishment of what is technology and what is reality entails difficulties in school, low self-esteem, aversion to life, apathy, has a destructive effect on human relationships. People who are close to you worry, pay attention, ask, beg, scare, promise. They are looking for different ways to change the situation due to the fact that they are aware of the danger.

I fishy there is simply a tiny percent of parents who apply with their children to therapy centers. The others face the problem alone. Is that truly so?

I frequently hear that my parents deficiency money, that they can't afford specified a detox at the resort. They then effort to usage the aid of psychologists or therapists available in their city. This process can take up to 2 or 3 years, but frequently the situation does not improve, but worsens.

Another point is that the parent has long delayed the minute to apply to the therapeutic centre: private or public, due to the fact that he is simply ashamed.

He takes all the blame for failing somewhere, for not noticing that he's a worse parent than his neighbor... This is simply a very hard decision to make. That's what it looks like.

Does today’s school respond to the challenges of digital drugs?

Yes, I confirm that school pedagogues and educators are actually involved. If the parent signals that there are difficulties, then it is easier for the another side to say: yes, we see this problem, we want to help.

Schools approach – I am talking about their experiences – in an knowing way, encourage change, therapy. They declare that this is simply a good solution erstwhile a young man disappears for a while and performs therapy. The planet won't collapse, the school will aid catch up. frequently the problem affects students who have learned fantastically, they may have had satisfaction and same - respect. Unfortunately, technologies work so that they consume more and more time. It seems to me that schools are becoming more and more oriented about digital addiction, due to the fact that teachers see the behaviour of their students.

We operate without censorship. We don't advertise, we don't charge for texts. We request your support. Throw yourself in the media.

Institute of civilian Affairs sent call for education and digitalisation ministers on digital hygiene. In this appeal, we ask you to make regulations about having a telephone in schools.

In response, MEN wrote: “(...) it is so possible to consider a ban on children’s usage of smartphones in kindergarten. In the case of schools, if any, it could only concern the youngest students. There is, as it seems, no basis in investigation for a full ban on all schools and institutions."

Please comment.

The appeal itself is undoubtedly needed and I have no uncertainty about it. Concerning the answer, I think the direction is right, but it does not contact the mark group, due to the fact that the children of children do not carry telephones yet.

In my opinion, the mark group is primarily children and young people up to the age of 15, which is the full primary school period.

The American Psychiatric Society recommends, encourages, and advises that a man until he is 15 should not have contact with technologies so that he does not have this smartphone.

To me, psychiatrist doctors are an authority, and since they issued specified a recommendation, they're right.

Research on the harmfulness of excessive usage of smartphones or another technological tools is simply a lot. Scientists pay attention to the neuroplasticity of the brain and how excessive pre-screen time affects neurons, to the construction of the brain, which is only at the phase of formation. Returning to the appeal: I believe this is the first step, due to the fact that this subject will not vanish – it will grow due to the fact that the time spent online is constantly increasing. At any point, you can no longer deny facts. I believe that there will besides be investigation institutions in Poland, which will confirm the opinions of the American Psychiatric Society and many another scientists who deal with psychology, brain building, and the influence of stimuli on people. I think it's a substance of time and it's going to change in the close future.

I wanted to mention to 1 more phrase. We know what the reaction is erstwhile a young man or even an adult hears: ban! We don't like bans by nature, but it's not about bans and closets. We're talking about a restriction, not a ban. These are 2 different worlds, 2 different concepts. The velocity limit on the road is designed to increase our safety. Limiting the usage of digital technologies in schools is not intended to prohibit them always and everywhere. It's about classes in school: concentration, focus, learning. UNESCO or a fewer gentlemen in suits didn't come up with an appeal to make individual angry. Basically, the point is to have people around us mentally healthy.

Excessive technology in life ruins the psyche, causes depression, aversion to life, causes full confusion.

He surely does not build relationships between people, but he exposes many things that children should not see. There's quite a few pornographic content on the Internet, violent content, destructive content that affects the brains of these young people. The point is to defend them, not to ban them at all, due to the fact that otherwise, a guy who is 30 years old, or a girl who is ten.

So let the appeal come from my side: let us not usage the word “pronounce” but “limitation”. There is simply a chance that this will talk to young people more effectively, and that is the point.

I hope you're right.

I remember another appeal made by the Institute. I then read a comment on 1 of the media dedicated portals that specified an appeal is any populism. I'm sorry, but concern is not populism. It's an reflection of any phenomena that are becoming burdensome, dangerous. Was there any objection erstwhile the regulation came in that you were not allowed to look at the smartphone screen at the pedestrian crossing? No, and that's the concern for the safety of the driver and the pedestrian. Was there any protest erstwhile you were banned from talking on the telephone while driving? It has been noted that this is dangerous and that appropriate government has been introduced.

The problem is that government will never catch up with technology.

Technology precedes law, rules, principles and even our imagination.

It's only erstwhile something bad happens that we start to have any reflection. Only erstwhile an electrical scooter runs into the hood of a car and a man rushes that scooter dies at the scene, abruptly comes sobering up and asking: "Okay, what to do about it?" How do we regulate this to make it safer? It's not about keeping everything out, but it's about making things right.

This is so makiavelic, due to the fact that on the 1 hand we are moving forward, we want to be modern, we want a digital society. On the another hand, we see the intellectual crises that are there, but someway we do not want to link them to digital progress.

Professor Jean Twenge [Prof. psychology at San Diego State University, author of the book entitled ‘iGen. Why children increasing up online are little rebellious, more tolerant, little happy – and completely unprepared for adulthood – and what this means for all of us” She has conducted major focus studies on the impact of digitalisation on young people. It wasn't a survey conducted on behalf of any large tech, it was a professor's work that looked very closely at the phenomenon.

I'll quote from your entry. Magdalena Bigaj, president of the Institute of Digital Citizenship, author of the book „Beaching at the Screen. How to prepare a kid for life online?”:

“The password: the ban on phones is simply a patch for the anxiety of adults who would very much like a magic spell that will solve the problem erstwhile and for all. No telephone in schools is the same as no vodka bottles for prevention. A password without context will turn into a meaningless action."

This entry is simply a answer at the call of the civilian Affairs Institute to ministers of education and digitisation, which has spread throughout Poland, thanks to its publication, among others, by the Polish Press Agency.

In Magdalena's opinion, the most crucial thing is the urgent equipping teachers with competences to aid them make digital hygiene in children at all phase of education. Legal regulations that would lead to effective age verification, at least on social media, should then be addressed.

Ms Magdalena Bigaj proposes that the restrictions on the usage of telephones in schools should be introduced from the bottom up, to make solutions in individual schools with the advice of parents or with students, not that specified a directive should come from above, from the Ministry of Warsaw.

Except without a directive from Warsaw, it can be hard to control parents. As the Institute for civilian Affairs We were at the “Warning! Smartphone” conference in Kraków And the teachers asked us if we had any ideas on how to get out of the situation erstwhile the parent comes to school and demands that the school's phones be unlocked, threatening to sue the school. Directorates and teachers are helpless, they don't truly know what to do.

It seems to me that in a situation where the home is burning – and so I would measure the situation related to the excessive usage of smartphones by students – we do not do talks or educational workshops, we just put out the fire. What do you say? How do you comment?

There are schools that have worked out regulations with the advice of their parents. In any children they can bring smartphones, they have them in their backpacks, but they don't pull them out during breaks, phones are off. Parents, along with the school’s pedagogy, agreed to this principle. There are besides schools where phones hide in peculiar lockers.

There's always individual who gets in the way.

There's always a individual who's going to be intimidating 1 way or another, but if there's something worked out by both the board of parents and teachers, then the school has the right to make specified rules. And teachers have the right to enforce these restrictions – for children's safety, relation building, concentration, focus, attention.

As for Mrs Magdalene, I do not know the full text, and I would like not to mention only to this passage. Personally, I am in favour of limiting the usage of telephones on school grounds. If children have access to phones during breaks, it is apparent that they do not want to go for a run or talk to someone, to have a real relationship.

We can't let large tech into schools.

It is besides not the best thought to make social groups within the classroom, due to the fact that what happens in these groups is very controversial. Young people have told me themselves about events that are very painful to them. Girls who are on these groups said that there are pornographic content published there, offensive, is hate. My incentive is to halt trying to get kids to communicate with each another through social networks, due to the fact that it has the other effect.

The most crucial thing present is digital hygiene, due to the fact that we should be realistic and adapt to the environment. Let's talk, educate, due to the fact that the law slows down, slows down. For example, 20 years ago, there was no specified word as stalking, and present it is being punished. Of course, large tech can surprise us and the legislators.

Welcome to internships, internships and volunteering!

Join us!

Should corporations pay from profits on digital cork fund?

And here we go back to the point that there are people who don't have money for costly therapy. After all, in almost all municipality there is simply a municipal committee to solve alcohol problems. This committee is getting money from the alleged cork.

One associate of specified a commission could be chosen and trained on what is the mechanics of dependence on technology, how to deal with it, what are the centres or clinics in Poland that are active in helping with this topic.

In addition to this bag, which includes money from buying alcohol, you could besides add a small bit of a penny for those who have digital addictions.

It would not be essential to make additional actors, but to join the municipal alcohol problem-solving committees. That would be doable. It seems to me that large big techs, which have immense money, would be happy to even pay to calm their conscience a small bit or make them feel better. I think they would allocate any amount of support, counseling for those who request it.

And if people were ashamed – due to the fact that that is frequently the case – to come to these municipal committees to solve alcohol problems, then you could usage that money to, for example, as part of nationwide No telephone Day organize picnics without telephones. They could be preventive, informative, educational: to evidence less, take less pictures, throw little on different portals, and live more. That would be great. I wonder if that would work?

What do you advise parents of children already addicted to digital drugs?

To be honest, there are situations where all I'm asking is simply a intellectual hospital. If a young man has a completely disturbed sleeping and eating cycle, he must sleep first and then eat. It needs to be restored to the average regular cycle.

I don't urge drastic solutions like, "We're shutting down the power." This is frequently utilized by parents, but it does not improve the situation due to the fact that it generates anger, conflict, misunderstanding. This is simply a very powerful solution. I don't buy it as a therapist. After all, this young man got a tablet or smartphone he could usage and abruptly individual takes it from him. You gotta explain, explain, change your way of being. Many adults are besides addicted to digital technologies, so they effort to underestimate the problem of their own children.

Sometimes an adult says that he is addicted to technology, while the head of an adult is already formed, and the head of a kid is just forming.

I effort not to give gold recipes due to the fact that I just don't have one. Different practices are used, but there must always be a minimum desire to change a addict. The desire to perceive to the voice of a parent or teachers who, in good faith, want a restriction, not a ban on this man from losing himself and being able to function normally.

W Japan has documentary films showing how dead people are found after respective decades of intense playing, surrounded by cans of energyists. This is not the only case in Japan. It's noticeable, more and more.

The Chinese already recognise the phenomenon of net abuse as their social problem number one.

They know that if they neglect to get these young people out of bed and implement restrictions, the full economy is threatened due to the fact that the sick individual has no strength or desire to work.

What crucial question has no 1 always asked you about the subject we are talking about, and what is the answer to it?

I don't think people have any opposition to asking questions anymore. Sometimes they are ashamed to ask directly: how to break a twelve-year-old or fourteen-year-old boy from addiction to pornography, but specified questions besides arise.

Sometimes I'm amazed by specified a intellectual novelty erstwhile individual talks about "repairing a child" due to the fact that it reminds me of fixing a bike. Or individual says, "Well, you have tools here." Then I say, “I have tools to spin the wheels on my bike, and people are unique, unique.”

A man cannot be treated as a function in Word: copy, paste. It's not possible.

We request to catch the minute erstwhile the frontier is crossed, erstwhile a young man cannot abandon the technology himself, he cannot make that decision. His addiction frequently does not consequence from his deficiency of respect for people, his deficiency of value or insensitiveness. He just doesn't have the strength to get distant from it. Technologies are designed to be addictive, it's about monetizing people, drawing their emotions, attention to leaving digital footprints so large techs can make money out of it. That's another serious conversation, too.

Young people are very helpful erstwhile parents participate in this process of change and besides follow the principles of digital hygiene. Then it's easier to get a kid out of the digital planet to a real one, which is beautiful, has quite a few value, not just hurt and hurt. frequently young people say they run distant into a virtual planet due to the fact that the real 1 is mean. They're right due to the fact that erstwhile you perceive to the news, you can break down sometimes. But it's not that nature doesn't make us happy, that walking together doesn't make us feel closer.

And moving into this virtual planet frequently leaves a void at the end.

Thank you for talking to me.