By Katelyn Catanzariti

Social media is being used as something of a “scapegoat” for mental health issues in young people and isn’t what is making them feel depressed, anxious and driven to self-harm, says one of Australia’s leading medical research organisations.

As the nation moves towards bans to protect under 16s from the harmful effects of online interaction, a new study by the Black Dog Institute indicates the link between platforms and headspace is relatively weak.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced on Thursday a minimum age limit for social media access, telling parents “we have your back”.

However the institute’s research indicates that although social media is a “fertile ground for disseminating harmful content”, evidence shows the parallel rise in its use and that of youth mental health problems does not imply a causal relationship.

The study found the impact of social media on youth was less than universal, lacking in the results of longitudinal research and meta-analyses and unable to explain a disproportionate rise in self-harm in young women.

Furthermore, restricting access to socials may also restrict access to support and information for young people experiencing problems.

“If you ask young people why they are anxious or depressed, they don’t say ‘because of social media’, they say ‘it’s because my interpersonal relationship is not very good with my friends, I’ve lost my boyfriend, I’m really concerned about the way the world is’,” lead researcher Helen Christensen told AAP.

“Social media is really a little bit of a scapegoat – the bigger problems youth are experiencing are broader things like access to good jobs, gendered violence, poor economic outcomes, fears of social change.

“It’s these sorts of things that are preoccupying them and it’s not because of social media.”

Removing access to that one element will not be a panacea for the broader societal influences causing the rising rates of self harm, Prof Christensen explains, though it is understandable that worried parents are looking for an link.

“From a scientific point of view, we can see this does seem compelling but … this would mean in scientific terms people with higher social media (usage) would need to be showing higher anxiety and depression 12 months later in order to show that relationship,” she explains.

“That’s when (the argument) starts to fall apart a bit… Really, we can’t blame social media.”

It is natural for parents to want to protect kids from harm, be it drugs, alcohol or online bullying and exposure to undesirable content.

Yet Prof Christensen says it’s important to remember 80 per cent of young people have no issues with social media and for many, its a source of useful information and community.

“If you’re with a group of LGBTQI people, they will say to you that they use social media in order to make connections with people like them and it’s actually a comforting way of reaching out and finding people who feel the same way as they do,” she notes, adding that if the ban goes through, more research should be conducted as to whether it actually makes a difference.

“There’s a two-sided coin here.”

Limiting access may be ineffectual anyway, as children can “easily get around” bans and restrictions.

The government is in the process of trialling a number of sophisticated methods of age verification to prevent that happening.

Yet communications department officials overseeing the trials told Senate estimates in Canberra last week it ran the risk of pushing young people towards “darker websites”.

Prof Christensen believes it would be far more effective to compel social media companies to better filter what appears on their platforms to ensure a safer environment: “Just like we want to create healthy schools.”

Children’s organisation Act For Kids agrees, saying while the ban is a significant step forward, more must be done to hold social media companies accountable.

“While we welcome this, there needs to be greater emphasis on social media giants and their own provisions to protect all children from online harm, regardless of their age,” according to CEO Dr Katrina Lines.

“We also acknowledge there is not yet effective technology in place for age assurance or to verify parental consent.”