fbpx
Articles

Do you need a digital reset?

A better approach to screen time after the pandemic

/
July 6, 2021

As things start moving back to a post-pandemic “normal,” many parents are looking forward to their children returning to in-person learning. In addition to improving their concentration, reconnecting with in-person friends, and reestablishing rigorous standards, one of the key benefits will be less time on screens. None of this will be without effort and intentionality, but what may prove most difficult is dialing back kids’ dependence on screens.

The battle over devices

The battle over devices was already a problem before the pandemic. Books like Naomi Scaeffer Riley’s Be the Parent, Please: Stop Banning Seesaws and Start Banning Snapchat sounded the alarm in January 2019. Real harm comes to children of all ages from unsupervised, unfiltered access to all things online and virtual, confirms Riley. The pandemic only made that worse. Once schools went online, there was little hope for limitations. Not only were children expected to be on their iPads or computers for all of each school day, they were typically given looser restrictions during after-school hours by parents who, scrambling to get their own work done and anxious about all the bad news, were glad for their children, who had nowhere to go, to have something to do. 

Last spring, when most kids didn’t have a choice about being on a connected device for hours a day, experts tried to be reassuring. They said some screen time is okay, but still agreed that too much is detrimental. “Spending an hour or two a day with devices during leisure time doesn’t seem to be harmful for mental health,” wrote psychology professor Jean Twenge, at the Institute for Family Studies. “And doing homework or educational activities on devices for a few hours a day is a virtual necessity and is unlikely to be harmful, so we can cross that off our list of worries as well.” 

Even when screen time was considered essential, Twenge wasn’t giving unqualified support. “[This] doesn’t mean parents should give up on managing kids’ screen time during this extended period of staying at home. Watching videos and scrolling through Instagram all day might keep them quiet, but it’s not the best for their mental health or development.” As virtual school winds down, it’s time to revisit prior concerns about how much screen time is too much, and even more urgently, how much of what’s online is harmful, regardless of time limits.

In addition to the angst all parents generally feel about what kids are watching and doing on social media these days, Christian parents have a biblical imperative to disciple their children — to oversee not just their mental and physical health, but most importantly, their spiritual growth (Deut. 6:6–9; Eph. 6:4). That includes shepherding their media use. We need renewed vigor to reclaim — or introduce for the first time — God-honoring digital habits. 

The Wall Street Journal’s family and tech columnist, Julie Jargon, says, “After more than a year of being glued to their devices, a lot of kids will have trouble easing up on the tech that brought them comfort and connection during the pandemic.” It’s not just children who will have to work at this. Parents, too, likely spent more time online and on devices in 2020, and their modeling is a primary influence on their kids. 

Digital reset

Jargon’s article, “How to Wean Your Kids—and Yourself—Off Screens,” recommends a family “digital reset” including things like phone-free times and spaces (the dinner table, car rides), shared rather than solo screens, and even a one-day-a-week tech sabbath. She suggests going back to pre-COVID tech rules. “Use the start of summer as an opportunity to re-establish any tech rules you let slide during the pandemic, like allowing devices in bedrooms at night or allowing videogames before homework or chores are done.”

Assuming you had pre-COVID tech rules, that’s a good place to start. But many Christian parents need to honestly ask themselves what their kids ’— and their own — habits were before the pandemic. What’s needed may not be a return to pre-pandemic normal, but a better, more biblical, normal. That includes a better rhythm of shared family culture, analog learning, creative real-life (not virtual) endeavors, and using technology for the glory of God. Some examples include reading books aloud together, asking good questions to foster substantive conversations at meal time, going outside to explore nature together, re-engaging with or developing shared hobbies, playing instruments and singing, playing board games, cooking together, exercising as a family, and the list could go on. 

It is up to parents to set expectations for life together in the family. That life is shaped in large part by how much, or how little, time is given to screens. Children need us to help them answer questions like: What does it look like to faithfully steward our time? How does social media use affect our thoughts, our affections, our desires? What might we do together if we put down our phones? And in the absence of those phones, how might we advance the kingdom of God in our childrens’ hearts and minds?

Here’s what might that look like in everyday life:

Meet with God before you meet with people: My husband and I both wait until after we’ve met with the Lord, praying and reading our Bibles, to even pick up our phones. Giving our first thoughts to what’s essential, seeking God’s will for the day, meditating on his revealed truth — all of this grounds us in what’s most important and makes us less vulnerable to the voices of the world that flood our phones (Psa.1:1-2).

Study the Bible and pray together: After seeking God personally, we seek him together as a family. Last fall we started spending between 10–15 minutes together on weekday mornings before we all headed in different directions, reading Lord Teach Us to Pray, a family study on the Lord’s Prayer. With our kids’ help, we read the text selections together and answer the questions provided in the study about what we just read in the Bible. 

Use screens in community: Proverbs 18:1 says, “Whoever isolates himself seeks his own desire; he breaks out against all sound judgment.” That reality is a warning against giving kids connected devices to use by themselves. We limit screen use to shared family spaces where they can be easily seen by more than just the person using them. 

Model what you require: (Or plan to when your children are old enough). Let your children see you stewarding your phone, your iPad, and your other smart devices the way you want them to steward theirs. 

Put screens to bed early: Rather than scrolling ourselves to a fitful sleep, we spend the last hour of most days together reading a story aloud, or reading books to ourselves, unwinding the stress of the day with restful “slow” entertainment, and closing the day’s activity with a family prayer.

As we celebrate a return to normal, these, and other similar embodied, relational practices can keep us from losing our way in the fog of media that grows thicker by the day.

Candice Watters

Candice Watters is the Fighter Verses blog editor. She is a wife and mom, and author of Get Married: What Women Can Do to Help it Happen, and co-author with her husband Steve of Start Your Family: Inspiration for Having Babies. The Watterses have four children and are passionate about … Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24