Menu

Why Babies Under Two Should Have No Screen Time At All

Author: University of Leeds
Published: 29 Jun 2026
Publication Type: Reports & Proceedings

Contents: Synopsis - Definition - Introduction - Main - Insights, Updates - Related Publications

Synopsis: This research presents the most thorough systematic review to date of global peer-reviewed evidence on screen use among children under two, drawing together specialists in mental health, physical health and social science from four UK universities under the iADDICT team. Its authority rests on the breadth of peer-reviewed studies examined alongside the views of 174 parents gathered through surveys and focus groups, giving caregivers a clear, evidence-based picture of the risks. The findings are useful for parents, health professionals and early years practitioners, and the call for a baby screen time risk assessment could help families - including those caring for children with developmental vulnerabilities - to recognize warning signs and seek support sooner.*

At a Glance

Topic Definition: Infant Screen Time

Infant screen time refers to the exposure of children under the age of two to digital screens such as smartphones, tablets, televisions and games consoles, whether through deliberate, regular viewing or passive background presence. It covers the period that researchers describe as the first 1001 critical days, running from pregnancy through to a child's second birthday, when the developing brain is especially sensitive to its surroundings. The concept takes in both the direct effects of screens on a young child's bonding, play, language, sleep and physical health, and the wider household and cultural patterns - including the screen habits of caregivers themselves - that shape how early and how often babies come into contact with digital devices.

Introduction

Avoid Intentional Screen Time for Under-twos

Using screens during the first 1001 days of life can lead to developmental concerns for the next generation, researchers warn.

Digital screen time for under-twos is associated with long-term impacts on health and quality of life, and limited benefits, according to the most comprehensive systematic review yet of global peer-reviewed research into babies' screen time.

Based on the findings, the iADDICT group of researchers from four UK universities recommends that under-twos should not receive any intentional, regular screen time. The academics are calling for any guidance that points under-twos to shared screen time, or suggests that screen technology is suitable for "all ages", to be reconsidered.

Researchers stress the findings reflect the pressures of modern digital environments rather than individual parenting choices. They hope the review will provide caregivers with the most up-to-date evidence so they can understand risks and seek support sooner.

Commissioned by the 1001 Critical Days Foundation, the research was conducted by academics across disciplines of mental health, physical health and social science from the University of Leeds, Leeds Trinity University, Aston University and Loughborough University. The study also invited 174 parents across the UK to share their views on young children's screen use and their concerns around it through an online survey and focus group interviews.

Report co-lead Rafe Clayton, Senior Lecturer in Media and Communication at the University of Leeds, said the under-twos issue is a global concern that in 2026 is not being adequately addressed, with implications for a whole generation and their future quality of life. He noted that screen time guidelines for children are not being followed, in part because the adults setting the example are themselves without guidance. With problematic screen use among adults common and no government screen time guidelines for adults in the UK, he argued that unguided adults are inadvertently teaching children and babies to develop unhealthy relationships with screen devices, and this has to change.

The research found a lack of guidance from health professionals for parents about screen use. The researchers believe this is a reminder of the discrepancies between government and healthcare guidance and the real challenges parents face on a daily basis, and call for more targeted support.

Main Content

Assessing Risk for Babies

Existing guidance from the World Health Organization (2019) and the American Academy of Paediatrics (2024), which recommends that under-twos avoid screen time, is already being exceeded globally during the critical first 1001 days of life, from pregnancy to age two, according to the report.

The harms of this include reduced opportunities to bond with caregivers, reduced play with peers, limited language development, increased risk of overstimulation, difficulty sleeping, eye health implications, increased risk of childhood obesity and reliance on devices for emotional regulation. However, the review does not establish causal links between screen use and specific developmental conditions.

The researchers are calling for the creation of a baby screen time risk assessment in collaboration with policymakers, healthcare workers and early years practitioners. This could help services to provide targeted support, guide families toward interactive alternatives, and intervene where developmental vulnerabilities may be emerging.

Report co-lead Carmen Clayton, Professor of Family and Cultural Dynamics at Leeds Trinity University, said screen time is heavily interwoven into the lives of many families throughout the day. Caregivers are calling for more guidance, but professional support is limited. She said the Government must consider how to engage with families better about problematic screen use, while being sensitive to the fear of judgement that many parents face when opening up about such issues.

Tips for Parents

More research is needed into which strategies are most effective for parents and caregivers wanting to reduce and cut out babies' screen time. But the following strategies from the review have evidenced benefits:

A Wake-up Call for Society

The review also found that parent and caregiver screen time correlates with babies' screen time, but the researchers emphasise that parents should not be the focus of blame or criticism here. Digital screens are embedded in our lives - from working, to buying groceries, accessing healthcare and communicating with friends and family - so passive screen exposure is inevitable.

To have healthy human futures, the researchers say we need to sustainably change our relationships with digital screens - including smartphones, tablets, TVs and games consoles - as a society. The first steps to societal change are focusing on understanding adult screen time thresholds, and reconsidering any guidance on screen time for children.

Dame Andrea Leadsom, Founder of 1001 Critical Days Foundation, called the review a wake-up call, saying the evidence increasingly suggests that screens offer limited benefits for babies and may carry significant risks during the first 1001 days, the most important period of human development. She said parents must not be blamed for a problem they did not create, and that many families are navigating this challenge without the information and support they need.

She added that every family should have access to a Best Start Family Hub, where they could access trusted advice and practical help during their baby's earliest years. Technology companies must play their part too, she said, and parents should not be presented with content labelled or promoted as suitable for babies when the evidence points to the contrary. She concluded that every baby should experience the best start in life, and that helping parents navigate the digital world is an essential part of making that ambition a reality.

Also See:

Insights, Analysis, and Developments

Editorial Note: What sets this review apart is its refusal to point the finger at parents, instead framing babies' screen exposure as a societal problem rooted in a digital world that few adults have been given the tools to navigate; by asking governments, healthcare systems and technology companies to share the responsibility, it reframes a familiar worry as a collective duty rather than a private failing.*

* Editorial additions by Ian C. Langtree.

Why Babies Under Two Should Have No Screen Time At All

UK researchers warn that screen time for children under two carries long-term health risks and offers few real benefits during early development. Published: 29 Jun 2026.

Number of US Disabled Schoolchildren Reaches Record High

US disabled student enrollment hits record 7.5M with alarming 15% dropout rate. New federal study planned after 25-year gap in disability education data. Published: 29 Aug 2025.

Infant Deaths in US Rise 7% After Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade

U.S. babies died at a higher rate in the months following Dobbs decision, and infant mortality was highest among those born with chromosomal or genetic abnormalities. Published: 21 Oct 2024.

Bat Decline Leads to Pesticide Use, Raising Infant Deaths

Farmers' use of pesticides, due to the collapse of bat populations, caused 1,334 infant deaths, which is an 8% increase in the child mortality rate. Published: 5 Sep 2024.

Development of Moral Foundations in Children's Language

Quantifying the emergence of moral foundational lexicon in child language development. Published: 20 Aug 2024.

Bilingual Speech in Womb Shapes Newborn Brain Response

Newborns exposed to bilingual speech in utero show broader acoustic sensitivity than those hearing one language, peer-reviewed brain study reveals. Published: 22 May 2024.

View the Full List of Related Publications

What People Are Saying

Start, or join, thought-provoking conversations with other Disabled World readers on this topic.

Share and Comment

Permalink:

<a href="https://www.disabled-world.com/disability/children/baby-screen-time.php">Why Babies Under Two Should Have No Screen Time At All</a>: UK researchers warn that screen time for children under two carries long-term health risks and offers few real benefits during early development.

While we strive to provide accurate, up-to-date information, our content is for general informational purposes only. Please consult qualified professionals for advice specific to your situation.