What does the Online Safety Act mean for children and families?

From age checks and teen accounts to the planned social media ban for under-16s, media lawyer Rebecca Young explains what has changed, what parents can expect and why conversations at home still matter.

Online safety rules have changed quickly, and it is not always easy to work out what those changes mean in everyday family life. The Online Safety Act has introduced new legal duties for social media companies, search services and other online platforms. Further restrictions are also planned, including a ban on social media services offering their platforms to children under 16.

We spoke to Rebecca Young, partner and Head of Media Law at JMW Solicitors, about where responsibility now sits, the protections already in place and what parents can do while the law continues to develop.

What is the Online Safety Act, and why does it matter for families?

The Online Safety Act introduces laws designed to protect everyone online, with a particular focus on children and women.

It is the first piece of UK legislation to bring together new legal duties for social media companies and search services in this way. It makes those services responsible for how they deal with content that people may encounter online.

The Act reflects the growing role of digital platforms in everyday life, as well as concerns about how the online world should be regulated and made safer. It places greater obligations on platforms to prevent children from accessing harmful or age-inappropriate content.

There are different views about whether it strikes the right balance. Some people believe the Act does not go far enough to protect children and vulnerable users. Others are concerned about its implications for freedom of speech, freedom of expression and privacy.

For families, it is useful to understand what you can expect from a platform and how to report content. It is also important to keep talking at home about social media, online behaviour and content that is not acceptable. Children need to know that they can raise a concern and that they are not dealing with it alone.

Which parts of the Act are already in force?

The Act became law in October 2023. Since then, Ofcom, the independent regulator, has developed guidance and codes explaining how online services can meet their duties.

Ofcom has broad powers to assess and enforce compliance, but it does not resolve individual complaints about posts or accounts. If you see content that may be unlawful or harmful, the first step is to report it to the platform. If the platform does not respond or engage, you can also share information with Ofcom. It may not investigate your individual complaint, but the information can help it assess whether a regulated service is doing enough.

In 2025, Ofcom completed its illegal harms and protection of children codes, along with guidance on effective age assurance. The Act also introduced criminal offences covering conduct including encouraging or assisting serious self-harm, cyberflashing, sending false information intended to cause non-trivial harm, threatening communications, intimate image abuse and sending flashing images intended to harm someone with epilepsy.

The strongest protections are designed to keep children safe online. Platforms now have duties relating to three categories of harmful content:

• Primary priority content: Pornography and content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for suicide, self-harm or eating disorders.
• Priority content: This includes bullying, abusive or hateful content, violent content, content involving harmful substances, and dangerous stunts or challenges.
• Non-designated content: Content outside those categories that presents a material risk of significant harm to an appreciable number of children in the UK.

Ofcom sets out these categories and the duties placed on services in its protection of children guidance.

In its July 2026 report on age assurance, Ofcom said the proportion of children who recalled encountering age checks, excluding simple self-declaration, had risen from 25 per cent in July 2025 to 43 per cent in January 2026. It also raised concerns about the reliability of some age-inference methods used by social media services and called for more action from app stores, operating systems and device providers.

Ofcom has since opened an investigation into TikTok to examine whether it is meeting its child-safety duties. The opening of an investigation does not mean that Ofcom has concluded that TikTok has broken the law.

How is the Act changing platforms such as Instagram and Facebook?

The Act covers search services and services that allow users to post content or interact with each other. This includes social media, online forums and video-sharing platforms.

A company can fall within the scope of the Act even if it is based outside the UK. Broadly, this applies if it has a significant number of UK users, targets the UK market, or can be accessed by UK users where there is a material risk of significant harm.

Platforms have already introduced different accounts and settings to recognise that children and adults should not have the same online experience. Instagram, for example, rolled out Teen Accounts for younger users. Safeguards include private-by-default accounts, limits on messages from strangers, stricter controls on sensitive content, reminders to take a break and restrictions on notifications at night.

Where does legal responsibility sit, with platforms or with parents?

The legal responsibility sits with the platform. Services risk substantial fines and, in some circumstances, criminal action if they fail to meet their obligations.

Ofcom has already used its enforcement powers. In 2026, it imposed fines totalling £520,000 on 4chan for failures that included not putting effective age checks in place to stop children encountering pornography, not assessing the risk of illegal content and not setting out adequate protections in its terms of service. It also imposed daily penalties for continued non-compliance.

That does not mean conversations at home are no longer needed. While regulation continues to develop, it remains important to talk about appropriate online behaviour, age-appropriate content, anything that feels worrying or excessive, and the amount of time spent on social media.

What safeguards and parental controls can families use now?

Before agreeing to your child joining a social media platform, it may help to discuss how they want to use it and why. You could also agree whether you will have shared access, so you can see what they are posting, viewing and receiving.

Families may want to agree how long a child can use a platform, or whether it is only available on a shared device and under supervision. Teenagers may want more independence, but it is still useful to review the filters available and check whether certain categories of content or websites can be blocked from their feeds.

Look at the privacy settings and who can view your child’s content. Talk about the risks of accepting friend requests from people they do not know, posting in real time and sharing personal information. Once an image or piece of content has been shared, control over it can be lost.

Parental controls offered by platforms or third-party apps can help, but they are not a complete solution. The NSPCC has practical information about keeping children safe online, and your child’s school may also have useful resources.

It can also help to speak to other parents. Similar boundaries across a friendship group may be easier for children to understand and accept. Most importantly, keep conversations open. Talk about what your child is seeing, what feels inappropriate and when they may be more vulnerable online.

How do alerts for self-harm-related searches work, and what are their limitations?

Meta has introduced alerts for parents who use Instagram’s supervision tools. If a teenager repeatedly tries to search for terms related to suicide or self-harm within a short period, Instagram may notify their parent by email, text, WhatsApp and through the app. The alert comes with resources intended to help parents approach the conversation.

These alerts do not remove Meta’s responsibilities under the Online Safety Act. Platforms must prevent children from encountering primary priority content and protect them from other harmful content. Encouraging or assisting serious self-harm is classed as a priority illegal harm, and technology companies are expected to use technology proactively to detect and block relevant illegal content, rather than relying only on removing it after publication.

There are limits. Meta says the system may sometimes notify a parent when there is no real cause for concern because it is designed to err on the side of caution. That could cause unnecessary alarm. An alert is a prompt to check in with a child, not proof of what they are thinking or experiencing.

What could change next?

The Government has announced plans to stop social media services from offering their platforms to children under 16. The UK model draws on the approach taken in Australia, and further restrictions are planned for 16 and 17-year-olds.

Earlier in 2026, the Government ran a national consultation called Growing up in the Online World. It looked at the risks of social media, how long children spend online, whether platform design encourages longer use, and children’s exposure to content that may harm their development or wellbeing.

The consultation found that two-thirds of young people thought children under 16 should not be allowed to use at least some platforms. Nine in ten parents supported a ban for under-16s.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer announced the planned ban on 15 June 2026. The proposal has divided parents, young people and professionals. Some see a ban as the clearest way to protect children. Others argue that greater attention should be paid to platform design and helping children use social media responsibly, while preserving benefits such as connection and education.

The ban is not yet in force. The Government intends to put the first regulations before Parliament by the end of 2026, with the restrictions expected to take effect in spring 2027. Platforms likely to fall within the ban include Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook and X. Messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal are not expected to be included, and the Government has said there will be exemptions for services such as educational platforms.

The plans also address high-risk features elsewhere online. Restrictions on livestreaming and communication with strangers are expected to apply across a wider range of services, including gaming platforms.

For 16 and 17-year-olds, the Government has announced default overnight restrictions from midnight to 6am. Push notifications will be muted overnight, while autoplay and personalised feeds will be switched off by default. The aim is to avoid a sudden jump into the most engaging features as soon as a young person turns 16.

The legal burden will be on technology companies and social media platforms to stop under-16s accessing services covered by the ban. Parents will not be expected to enforce it on the companies’ behalf. The Government has also asked Ofcom to examine how services can detect and reduce attempts to get around the restrictions, including through VPNs.

What does this mean for parents now?

The legal changes are significant, but they will not make every part of online life automatically safe. Platforms now carry clearer responsibilities, and further restrictions are on the way. Parental controls and age checks can help, but neither offers a complete answer.

A useful place to start is to understand the settings on the services your child uses and agree boundaries that fit their age and your family. Keep talking about what they see, who can contact them, what they share and what they can do if something worries them.

The legal responsibility belongs to platforms. At home, the aim is not for parents to monitor every click. It is to make sure children know what may be unsafe and feel able to ask for help.

Rebecca Young is a partner and Head of Media Law at JMW Solicitors.