FOLLOW US

New government guidance recommends that children under five should spend no more than one hour a day on screens, while under-twos should avoid using them alone.

Parents are encouraged to steer clear of fast-paced videos and, where possible, engage with their children during screen use. The advice also suggests “screen swaps,” replacing screen time with shared activities such as reading stories or playing simple games at mealtimes.

Officials describe the guidance as the first practical, evidence-backed recommendations of its kind, but ministers said it will be regularly updated as new research emerges.

“This is still quite an unknown area in lots of respects and we've taken a precautionary approach,” Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said.

The recommendations were reviewed by Children's Commissioner for England Dame Rachel de Souza and Professor Russell Viner, a paediatrician and adolescent health expert at University College London. They found that prolonged periods of solo screen time can negatively impact sleep and physical activity, both crucial for early development.

The guidance applies to all screens, including TVs, tablets, mobile phones, and computers. It notes that while nearly all children—about 98%—use screens daily by age two, the context matters. Shared screen time with an adult supports cognitive growth more than solitary use.

Parents are also urged to model good habits. Children’s brains “are like sponges—they'll copy your screen use habits,” the guidance says, emphasizing the importance of adult presence during screen interactions.

The guidance arrives alongside a government consultation on whether the UK should follow Australia in restricting social media access for under-16s.

Ahead of Friday’s publication, BBC News followed the Montastier family in Manchester as they attempted to reduce screen time.

Mum Alexis described screen use as “a topic of conversation every day—because we do it every day.” She wants to limit screens for her children, Romi, four, and Marlo, one, who are growing up surrounded by technology.

The yoga instructor admits she often relies on screens to manage practical tasks, like packing school bags or cooking, or when Romi wakes early. Sometimes, screens are used “to avoid conflicts and meltdowns.”

“It does make me feel guilty for doing it, but you're not always going to be getting out of bed bouncing with them at six o'clock and setting up art and crafts,” she said.

Alexis said following the new rules has been challenging.

“At the start of the week I was like, 'Yeah come on, we're going to do this,' and by the end of the week I thought we would have no screens and everything would just swap perfectly—but it didn't really happen like that. We've tried our best.”

She added that some swaps, particularly in the mornings and after school, were time-consuming. “I need that time, so I'm not going to swap it to sit down and read a book because it's not realistic,” she said.

Her husband Marciel acknowledged the difficulty of setting limits while using screens himself. “It's hard to tell them not to when you're doing it yourself,” he said, noting that work demands mean he frequently checks his phone during the day and evening.

Despite the challenges, the family is committed to continuing their efforts. “This has definitely made me more aware and almost made me start doing things that I've always said, 'Oh, we need to do that,'” Alexis said.

Fast-Paced Content

Researchers at the Institute for the Science of Early Years at the University of East London are examining how different types of screen content affect children.

Observing three-year-old Alex with a sensory cap, Professor Sam Wass said he is particularly interested in “moments where his brain can't keep up anymore, where the content is happening at a speed which is too fast for his brain to track.”

“If stuff is coming at us too fast, something called the fight-or-flight stress system kicks in, where your heart starts beating faster and you start to get a lot of energy released to your muscles,” he explained. “Of course, this isn't actually useful anymore, because this is happening when children are sat still on a chair watching screen content.”

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Prof Wass noted that screens are not as effective as face-to-face learning. He added that researchers still need to understand why children are so drawn to screens.

Over the past 20 to 30 years, he said, children’s programming has shifted from slower-paced content to fast-moving shows with constant action and talking. “There is good evidence” linking exposure to fast-paced, unpredictable content with emotional dysregulation, or difficulty managing emotions, he said.

The guidance clarifies that limits should not apply to screen-based assistive technologies used to support children with special educational needs and disabilities.

“I know there are lots of pressures on families and the intention behind the guidance is not to be judgmental, but to be supportive and to provide that clear practical help that parents have been telling us they really want to see,” Phillipson said.

It also advises avoiding artificial intelligence (AI) toys or tools.

Online safety campaigner Ian Russell described the guidance as a “hopeful sign.” His 14-year-old daughter Molly took her life after exposure to harmful content online. “This is advice that's based on evidence and I think that's the key point here,” he said, adding that early intervention is critical.

Vicki Shotbolt, founder of Parent Zone, emphasized that young children cannot entirely avoid technology. “A small child under the age of five who's got an AI smart speaker in the house will be interacting with it,” she said. “So the idea that we can completely keep them away from it is probably flawed, but it's good general guidance.”

Shadow Education Secretary Laura Trott welcomed the guidance but urged further measures, such as banning smartphones in schools and restricting social media for under-16s. Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey also supported the guidance but criticized the government for acting “way too slow” on social media and missing “the big picture.”