Since he was born, Auguste, 3 and a half years old, has been almost completely deprived from screens by his parents. “Deprived”? Seriously?

That’s the word used in a recent testimony in French media: “deprived of screens.”
And that single word already says a lot. It reveals how our society views screens: not just as a tool, but as an obvious, almost indispensable norm. To the point where, if a child is not exposed to them from early childhood, we talk about deprivation, as if something vital were being taken away.

Let’s pause for a moment. We are talking about a child who is three and a half years old. An age where development happens primarily through human interaction, hands‑on exploration, sensory experiences, and unstructured play. Since when did not putting a screen in front of a toddler become a deprivation? And why does this simple parental decision provoke so much incomprehension, even family conflict?

Because behind screens lie much deeper issues.

When vocabulary betrays our relationship with screens

Saying that a child is “deprived” of screens implies that there is a right, a natural access, almost a vital need. We do not say that a child is “deprived of cigarettes” or “deprived of energy drinks.” But for screens, the shift is there. Because screens are now woven into our adult lives, we project that they must be equally present in our children’s lives.

Yet scientific data clearly show that before the age of 3, regular exposure can affect sleep, attention, language development and emotional regulation. Keeping screens away at that age is not deprivation, it is protection.

A clash of values within families

In the article, the story goes further: grandparents turned on the television even though the parents had made their wishes clear about limiting screens. It ended in a heated argument. This isn’t just about a screen, it’s about educational territory and recognition.

On one side, parents who rely on studies and choose strict rules because they want to give their child what they believe is best. On the other side, grandparents who see those rules as excessive, unnecessary rigidity. In their own upbringing, the TV was always on and never seen as dangerous.

Here we touch on a deeper mechanism: questioning screens in a household also questions cultural habits and family memories. It can feel like passing judgment on how the previous generation raised their children.

The real question: protecting or overprotecting?

Some will argue that the opposite extreme exists too: a disproportionate fear of screens that becomes anxiety‑provoking for both child and family. Yes, it is possible to slip into control so strict that it denies a child certain experiences. But we cannot put on the same level the restriction of a non‑vital tool and the deprivation of fundamental needs such as human connection, play, and creativity.

Using the word “deprivation” in this context completely blurs the debate. The real question lies elsewhere: how can we help children develop a balanced relationship with screens, appropriate to their age and maturity? How can we explain our choices to relatives to avoid conflict? How can we accept that different educational rules are not a personal attack but simply another way?

A call to change our frame of reference

Instead of judging these parents or labeling them extremists, we would do well to reflect on how easily we have normalized screens in our lives. If a simple refusal is labeled deprivation, it’s because we’ve already forgotten that a child can thrive perfectly well without screens, especially in those first years.

Rather than fighting over the family TV, we could refocus the conversation on what a child actually needs: talking, playing, exploring, sometimes even being bored to develop creativity. And if that means less time in front of a screen, it’s not a deprivation. It’s a deliberate educational choice.

Source : https://www.franceinfo.fr/societe/education/temoignages-il-a-force-notre-fils-a-regarder-la-tele-quand-l-interdiction-des-ecrans-pour-les-jeunes-enfants-tourne-au-conflit-familial_7336590.html