Screen Time is an issue that affects every parent today. How much is too much? At what ages should kids have devices? How do our own screen habits impact those of our kids? It’s something no parenting generation has ever had to face before, which means concrete guidance is hard to find, leaving parents to come up with their own screen time rules for their kids.
Infuencer Tia Stokes has an interesting, but controversial set of screen time boundaries for her kids. Stokes built her TikTok following by letting the world watch her fight acute myeloid leukemia through chemotherapy.
Now the 40-year-old creator is drawing a different kind of attention: her decision to keep her children completely phone-free while still granting them access to social media, a stance she freely calls “controversial” but refuses to walk back.
The choice puts Stokes in a small but vocal minority. According to survey data from Lurie Children’s Hospital tracking screen habits in families across the United States, 81 percent of children under 13 already own a personal device.
That same research found that children averaged 21 hours of screen time per week, more than double the roughly 9 hours per week that parents say they would prefer. The gap between parental preferences and household reality is one of the defining tensions of raising children in the digital era.
What Makes Stokes’ Approach Different
Most conversations about children and technology focus on duration, how many hours per day, and how many minutes before bed. Stokes is drawing a different line entirely, separating device ownership from platform access.
Her children can engage with social media, but they do not have personal phones. It is a nuanced distinction that many parents have not considered, and it is precisely that nuance sparking debate online.
Her story, shared exclusively with People, arrives at a moment when parents everywhere are reporting guilt, confusion, and conflict over how to manage their children’s digital lives. Lurie Children’s research found that 60 percent of parents feel guilty about how much screen time their children get, and more than half believe screens actively interfere with quality family time.
What the Science Says About Kids And Screens
The body of research on excessive screen exposure in children paints a concerning picture. A peer-reviewed study published in PMC/NIH found that children’s heavy reliance on screen media is linked to measurable harm across cognitive, language, and social-emotional development, with documented consequences including worse executive functioning, language delays, obesity, sleep disorders, depression, anxiety, impaired emotion recognition, and increased aggressive behavior.
Notably, the age at which children begin engaging with media regularly has dropped dramatically, from 4 years old in 1970 to just 4 months old today.
The Canadian Psychological Association adds an important structural dimension to this conversation. As their fact sheet, prepared by Dr. Jo Ann Unger and Dr. Michelle Warren of the University of Manitoba, notes, “Technology and programs are designed to be rewarding and make it hard to stop.” That framing shifts some of the burden away from individual parenting choices and toward the platforms and devices themselves, which are engineered for maximum engagement regardless of a user’s age.
The Mayo Clinic reinforces that the quality of media content children consume matters more than the specific type of technology or the total time spent, and that unstructured play remains more developmentally valuable for young children than any form of electronic media. Experts there also emphasize co-viewing, meaning parents watching or engaging alongside their children, as a key protective factor.
How Much Screen Time Is Too Much
The Canadian Pediatric Society, as outlined by the SickKids Foundation, recommends zero screen time for children two and under, less than one hour per day for children aged two to four, and a maximum of two hours of recreational screen time daily for children and teens aged five to 17.
The American Academy of Pediatrics similarly recommends no more than 1 hour per day for children aged 2 to 5, and discourages media use entirely for children under 18 months, except for video chatting.
Those benchmarks feel distant from the reality most families are living. Lurie Children’s survey data revealed that 49 percent of parents incorporate screens into their daily parenting routines, while 28 percent admit to using screen time to head off a meltdown or tantrum multiple times a week. One in four parents reported turning to screens because they could not afford childcare.
Dr. Alyssa Cohen, a pediatrician and health services researcher at Lurie Children’s, told the hospital’s research team, “Quality time with family helps children thrive. We recommend that families designate screen-free times of day or areas of the home, such as mealtime, to promote uninterrupted connection.”
Dr. Cohen also noted to Lurie Children’s, “It is never too early to start modeling healthy behaviors around digital media for children. As they grow and develop, children’s engagement with digital devices and online content will also change. Parents can support children by setting and enforcing age-appropriate boundaries, using tools like the AAP’s Family Media Plan as a guide.”
Social Media Without a Phone: A Workable Middle Ground?
Stokes’ specific framework sidesteps some of the most well-documented risks associated with children owning phones, including unsupervised browsing, relentless notifications, and the social pressure to be perpetually reachable.
At the same time, research from the Canadian Psychological Association links parent screen use patterns to child socio-emotional problems, suggesting that the environment surrounding a child’s media habits carries as much weight as the rules governing them.
Lurie Children’s data found that 36 percent of parents say they will not allow their child to have social media accounts at all, while those who do plan to allow access set the average permitted age at 13. Stokes’ approach occupies a middle space that neither camp fully endorses, which may be exactly why it is generating conversation.
This Conversation Matters For Every Family
Something for parents to consider here is that Stokes is not a pediatrician or a policy expert. She is a parent who survived a serious illness and is now making deliberate choices about how her children grow up. The broader data make clear that virtually no family is navigating this perfectly.
Dr. Cohen added in her comments to Lurie Children’s, “Screen use can become problematic if it replaces other important activities in the lives of kids and families, such as quality sleep, physical activity, emotional regulation, and social connection.”
In our household, the kids (ages 8 and 11) have devices, but they are wiped of all unnecessary apps, have no cellular or data plans, and only work within our home’s Wi-Fi network.
We have also set time limits (both on the phone and verbally) and cut-offs, and any app additions or deletions must be approved. All that said, I don’t know if it has had any effect, negative or positive.
As families continue to wrestle with phones, apps, and the social pressures that come with both, different methods must be tried and evaluated.
Stokes’ willingness to name her approach as controversial and defend it anyway may be the most useful thing she contributes to the conversation, but it’s important to remember that there is no definitive way to handle screen time and kids. Keep talking with them, engaging with their online access, and a balance can be sought.
What Stokes is doing, whether or not every expert would endorse every detail, reflects something researchers consistently identify as meaningful: an intentional, considered choice rather than a default to whatever is easiest in the moment.
That deliberateness, more than any specific rule, is what the science points to as the real protective factor for children in a screen-saturated world.
