Hmmmmm
Sorry for the long-winded rant ...
I'm no fan of social media. There are good and bad aspects to each service but on balance I could do without the lot of them and I avoid them if possible. Having said that, I am a firm advocate of informed free choice. My choice is not your choice. Also, not every adolescent matures at the same rate and parental wishes should be respected, IMO.
I would much prefer a solution along the lines of provisioning each child's device in 'kid mode'. You know the drill: locked admin/owner acount, child (user) blocked from installing new apps or changing DNS settings, no VPNs permitted, mandatory content filtering and site blocking (e.g. via 'safe' DNS), safe search, etc. That could be made even better if filtering, search and site blocking were linked to the age bracket of the child (user). For shared devices (home or school computer, if anyone is still using those), the humble user account ought to be able to achieve the same (since it has for many years now). Nothing is 100% perfect, but at least that puts the power in the parents' hands, leveraging existing technology that could be made almost 'one click' simple with a few tweaks - and that's where I think Governments should really be exerting pressure - to make that 'kid mode' as simple and foolproof as possible.
But no. Government is instead mandating IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING as they do with monotonous regularity. Why do they always choose that path? Hmmmmm.
To me it's simple. Platforms and OS makers cooperate to make 'kid mode' an almost 'one click' simple operation. PARENTS make the decision to activate the mode and select the maturity level or age bracket. PARENTS also provide the parental guidance around why (assisted by, one expects, a helpful brochure from the Government). Safe DNS/safe search should filter out adult-oriented non-platform sites. Site block lists or content filters could even be augmented or provided by Government. This approach allows the adults to be left alone to do what THEY choose free (short of actual criminal violations such as CSAM, drug trade, etc.) from privacy intrusions or, more specifically, free from the threat of being identified and tracked like animals against an ever-shifting idea of what is or isn't 'acceptable'.
As an Aussie, I've been following all this very closely for the last two or so years. Before a social media ban, the rage was against porn (not CSAM, just regular porn) using the argument that adult identification was required to stop underage access. Yes, they really were lobbying hard to IDENTIFY every adult porn watcher. Of course, they claim it would be anonymised age verification .... pull the other one! But the emphasis suddenly switched to social media.
Being the cynical old b*stard that I am - and having worked in Government for many years - my take is that this social media ban (through age verification, i.e. ID and tracking) is a dress rehearsal for a future porn ban (through age verification, i.e. ID and tracking). It started that way and I think it will finish that way. There really are people, in no small number, who believe even consensual adult porn is inherently evil and that its watchers must be identified and tracked as 'criminals in waiting'. Personally, I gave up that kind of thing years ago so it wouldn't affect me ... but ... my choice is not your choice.