[asveikau]

I don't understand the legislative pushes for some of these things.

Schools can already say "no phones during instructional hours". Many of them do. I guess legislating it can mandate the policy across a school district, state, country etc., so perhaps that makes sense.

But others call for outright bans for kids, all the time. Parents can also restrict usage or set rules for appropriate use. Many do.

[vitro]

But if kids refuse to put their phones away during classes, teachers have no right to take them since they are the kids' personal property. And yes, it is in the school rules that you cannot use your phone during class.

My SO teaches English and struggles with it permanently. Kids are on their phones and not paying attention to the lecture. And no support from the headmaster. Other teachers claim they do not have the problem to save face, but then you talk to an expat teacher who was in their class for observation and hear something else.

[whateveracct]

> But if kids refuse to put their phones away during classes, teachers have no right to take them since they are the kids' personal property. And yes, it is in the school rules that you cannot use your phone during class.

Is this true? When I was in high school, teachers could take away your phones.

[vitro]

Well yes. A teacher can have a box for phones, but kids need to put the phone there themselves. Of course, depends on the relation teacher has with their kids, but that's how you should do it by law.

And even then, if the teacher trips the box, it is on them to reimburse owners for broken phones.

[zdragnar]

Kid gets two options: hand over the phone, or sent to the principle's office. Parent can pick them up and the kid can come back without the device the next day.

Same effect, a difference with only a nominal distinction.

[flatline]

I don't understand how people fail to understand how public policy works. You can tell people to do something and they may or may not ignore you depending on how you say it, and what incentives and penalties you provide.

Being a parent or a teacher puts you in a position of fighting multi-billion dollar corporate interests that are trying to capture your kids' attention. It's also fighting their very successful advertising campaigns that makes kids, just like adults, feel FOMO for not having the latest gadgets, or access to the same social media outlets as their peers.

Any public policy trying to counter this needs some weight behind it, and a strong consensus as to what we value as normative behavior in society.

[asveikau]

> It's also fighting their very successful advertising campaigns

If you want to talk about successful advertising campaigns, things like age verification laws are actually being lobbied by Meta. In other words, Meta wants to do this and is spending money to make it happen. That should make you suspicious.

> Being a parent

I am a parent. I really hate it when people pull out this "parents say this ..." crap as if it's a shortcut to winning an argument. They don't want to have a discussion on the merits. A lot of the people pulling out that line seem to be childless, if it matters.

[cyberax]

> Parents can also restrict usage or set rules for appropriate use. Many do.

If you talk with teachers, some of them complain that kids are on the phone with _parents_ during the class time. And that parents loudly complain to the headmaster if the teacher tries to prevent their child from speaking to them.

Yes, it sounds crazy, but it's true.

[throwa356262]

Have you talked to a teacher lately?

[asveikau]

I'm the primary caretaker to two kids. So yes.

[Rebelgecko]

Parents are responsible for a surprisingly large fraction of the notifications kids get at school