Lucas and I received this email from our friend, Paul.
Dear brothers,
What did y’all decide on with your kiddos and phones?
Pls Ty kindly!
Lucas and I were not in agreement. I think the conversation could benefit others, and also could benefit from others of you adding your wisdom, so here is how the conversation stands so far…
We use Gabb phones and watches. It’s not amazing stuff, but I notice regular improvements, and it gets the job done.
Brie has a mobile phone, and we allow texting (and even image texting) with anyone. That can be turned off completely or we could just turn off the ability to send images. I don’t think it’s a problem with her, though. I ask for her phone and check it occasionally. It’s helpful to both her and to us for her to be able to send images, so we keep it on there.
Asher has a Gabb watch, and he can only call or text people that I specifically add to his contact database. The watch does voice to text, which is much better than getting a voice memo in your messaging app.
Neither device allows for social media, which should never be given to any teenagers ever.
Love,
Good question, Paul.
We bought this phone for Tate and purchased a $5/month plan from Tello (100 minutes, free texting, no data). It’s a regular flip phone, without a browser, without wifi. It can send SMS with difficulty, receive texts including images, and has a very lo-res camera. It provides what we want Tate to have and doesn’t allow anything else, it not having a browser or apps.
The only possible further lock-down that it does not allow is no sending/receiving pictures. We aren’t scared about Tate adding contacts we don’t approve, since he’s not on social media anyway. The only people he could get contact info for are people we already know or people at work.
The only feature I considered “missing” is GPS and turn-by-turn instructions. But I don’t consider it a real drawback. We can get a GPS unit if it becomes a problem. So far, printed directions are the plan for the rare case he needs to get someplace he doesn’t know how to get to. I’m not interested in promoting even psuedo-smart phone use to Tate in order to have GPS nav, nor am I interested in paying $25/month for it.
So far Tate never uses the phone. He doesn’t carry it with him. He takes it with him once every couple of weeks when we need to be able to get in touch with him or vice versa. I’m not sure he has ever legitimately used it though.
Which is perfect, as far as I’m concerned.
One last note about picture SMS. I can easily imagine that being a problem with some children, even with this phone. But part of the benefit of this phone is that Tate has no desire to use it, thus he doesn’t message with his friends on it. That means I’m entirely unconcerned about him sending and receiving pictures. He would have to be communicating with it for that to happen. And everybody else is using chat apps anyway, so he’s not likely to be able to participate in the majority of communication, anyway.
All of this is driving at why should we get phones for our kids? The answer is not any of the reasons our kids want phones. It’s just so we can communicate with them in emergencies. All the kid goals are anti-features as far as I’m concerned. And this accomplishes my goals and not the anti-goals.
Hope that helps.
Love,
I disagree. It’s not just so that we can contact them in emergencies. If that were the case, then maybe I’d do something cheaper like what Joseph is doing. And at that price, I’d be fine if that were the only goal (and fine with them never actually using it).
Instead, I view this as preparation for when my children will have complete freedom with digital devices. That’s inevitable, and so I want to prepare them for it. It’s a half-way house, or like learning to ride a bike with the training wheels on.
Brie texts often with her girl friends. Some of them I’ve never met. Is she doing a good job with self-control? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. But I recognize that my method requires that I monitor and talk with her about it regularly.
If Brie were rebellious and demonstrated a pattern of lying or hiding things, then I would take the phone away. Or if I felt like the people she was talking with were harming her somehow.
I don’t think she is texting boys, but, come to think of it, it’s been a while since I’ve checked her phone and talked with her about it. I should do that again soon.
Love,
Great! A good old fashioned philosophical debate.
Does teaching them to be texting at 15 actually lead to them being on their phone less at 18? I think it likely accomplishes the opposite.
Give them the ability to live for another 3 years without texting at all, and they will have a different pattern of living and be much more set in it.
In the meantime, I have yet to see any good come from teen texting, and much harm.
I don’t know why you call it a “philosophical” debate, since it has very practical, day-to-day implications IRL. Seems like a dig.
My whole premise is that it’s better for a teenager to begin the experience of handling the pressure of texting - with all the sins that come with it - while they are in your home rather than when they move out of it. I think a charitable understanding of your position is that teens are just too immature, as human beings, to handle that pressure whatsoever. Better to keep them from it entirely until they are 18.
You could be right.
But I assume you don’t think Tate will - or even should - stick with a flip phone when he turns 18 and moves out of the house. How is what you’re doing now helping him prepare for when he gets his first iPhone?
Not a dig at all! My point was that the random decisions people have made are meaningless without an understanding of the philosophy behind them. So let’s talk about our differing philosophies. 
I’m not assuming Tate should get an iPhone when he turns 18. Or 21. He might. Nathan ___ didn’t until he got married. I think that was wise. If he wants to when he turns 18, that’s his decision, yes, but I don’t think he’ll be worse off for having lived without a phone prior to that. I think not having one does teach him how to live with one.
I could maybe be convinced of your position. You’re certainly making me rethink mine. But here’s the question I have for you. How are you teaching your daughter to responsibly handle social media? Shouldn’t she be on IG while she is under your roof so she learns to use it wisely before moving out? Won’t she just join when she turns 18 anyway?
There are basically three things on smart phones that aren’t on a flip phone: 1. the web browser, 2. social media, and 3. other apps. Maybe I’d add ChatGPT as another category now. Tate can already learn to use a web browser responsibly on a computer. So far he has not done a stellar job. He cannot use social media, and I see no reason to let him. 3. Other apps would be really nice to have, but I don’t want him to think he must have a phone to get by in life. If he has to drive to the bank to deposit checks instead of scan them from his phone, that’s fine.
Nathan said something very interesting: a smartphone is a powerful tool. Either you should trust your child with it, or you shouldn’t give it to them. Don’t try to hamper or monitor it. Either they are ready for the tool or they aren’t.
I guess I assumed a very uncharitable use of the word “philosophical”, as in “stupid” or “worthless”. 
That was unkind on my part. I apologize, Joseph.
My responses are below… but my basic philosophy is “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” We should be teaching our children to use technology in the way that we use technology.
Learning that a phone is not necessary for life is very important. But I would argue that you and I should work to remember this lesson also. And how might we do that? Or… is an iPhone actually necessary for our lives? (See the first point, up above.)
I think you and I should consider what we should do to remember this truth and then teach our children to do it, too.
These devices are very dangerous! It is wise to wait and see some maturity before we give them to our children.
[quote="Joseph Bayly, post:7, topic:4199, username:jtbayly”]
I could maybe be convinced of your position. You’re certainly making me rethink mine. But here’s the question I have for you. How are you teaching your daughter to responsibly handle social media? Shouldn’t she be on IG while she is under your roof so she learns to use it wisely before moving out? Won’t she just join when she turns 18 anyway?
[/quote]
This is a very important distinction that is baked into my decision to go with Gabb: I’m teaching her that she never needs an IG account. Ever. But she will have a much greater need to be able to make calls and send texts.
Of course, she will have the opportunity to sign up for IG and FB when she turns 18, just like she’ll have the opportunity to do anything else she wants. But my message is that those things are actually unnecessary. They are probably a bad idea for anyone, but they are particularly dangerous for her right now.
All good.
I think he’s right. I think all the permutations of monitoring and blocking that parents go through is just so much rope to hang ourselves with. But, again, I would push us to consider how we use the tools. Because how we use them is how, theoretically, we are teaching our children to use them.
And when it comes to that, I do believe in filtering. I want my devices to be filtered.
The problem with my position, however, can be illustrated with your list from above:
There are good tools available for filtering. None is perfect, but there are some pretty good ones.
I don’t see much value in it and think most people would be better off without it. So no filtering needed. Just don’t sign up.
This is the tough one where my position breaks down. I see value in Libby and Hoopla and Apple TV, but I have no ability to filter. And there is plenty of garbage there.
So I would say that #3 is where I would simply apply Nathan’s rule with most strictness.
As to sauce for the goose and gander, I do think I should be using my phone more intentionally, which is to say, less. Intentionally. What we do with our phones is certainly a huge part of our training. Good reminder for all of us. It doesn’t really matter how often you tell your kid to drive the speed limit if they see you driving fast all the time. Point well made. But I don’t see it as applicable to the question at hand of what devices we do and don’t give our children.
If a kid’s phone…
A) doesn’t have a web browser on it
B) doesn’t have social media on it
C) doesn’t have (many) other utility apps
then you haven’t taught the child how to use a smartphone at all. Just a phone. Tate can text and call on his phone… if he wants to. True, I’m not paying extra to make it a pleasant experience for him, but so what? If he doesn’t text much at all right now, is he going to be worse prepared for texting if he gets a smartphone in 2 years? I don’t think so. The smartphone difference isn’t texting. It’s the ability to install social media, the constant web access, and the other utility apps. So I’m still left wondering what exactly a Gabb phone prepares a kid for? Perhaps something, but not for having a smartphone.
Thanks so much brothers for all this helpful discussion! I reckon next time I’ll ask in Sanityville so others can also be helped
I don’t think it’s fair to say, “so what”. It’s the whole ball game. A device that is used only for literal emergencies is as close as possible to not getting a device at all while still buying something .
[quote="Joseph Bayly, post:9, topic:4199, username:jtbayly”]
If he doesn’t text much at all right now, is he going to be worse prepared for texting if he gets a smartphone in 2 years?
[/quote]
This is a separate question.
Your position is that there is no middle ground with smartphones worth talking about. You’re either a man, or a woman, but you’re not something in between. Anything in between is: 1. not especially helpful, 2. potentially very unhelpful, and 3. the surgery to become something in between costs too much money!
I think that’s a fair position. It’s reasonable.
However, I believe there is such a thing as a transphone. Something in between the device Tate currently has and a full-on smartphone. You’re right: it is not the full smartphone experience. But it is definitely something very much like the smartphone experience, but with much less risk. You could argue that Brie is not learning anything useful by learning when to text, or not text, her girl friends right now. That perhaps she’s even being harmed.
But I think the conversations we’ve been able to have and the practices she is beginning to get a feel for are helpful now, and will be helpful in the future.
I’m late to the party but I do think the conversation has to take different needs into account when you’re talking about a teenage girl as opposed to a teenage boy.
As someone previously mentioned, cell phones are powerful tools. Like any other powerful tool, whether it be a jackhammer, a battery drill, or especially even a firearm, my aim is to teach my child the safe use of said tools. Like firearms, cell phones are shrouded in mystery, are almost magical in many folks minds, and children who pick up these tools with no training, wind up hurting themselves. I want to remove the mystery.
So, they get the cell phone with safeties in place, lots of instruction and warning, lots of dry firing and watching the safe use of it, slowly being introduced to them, with the idea of growing into full, proper use of them.
The discussion has been helpful. Thanks, brothers. We’ve been talking about this quite a bit at our house over the past few years with no end in sight. Our oldest has a Troomi phone which is very similar to a Gabb phone. I can see all of his messages, have control over his contact list and when he’s able to use the phone. No browsing, social media or apps without me installing them. So I tend toward Lucas’ line of reasoning above but I’m sympathetic to Joseph’s position.
What we’ve found most difficult is getting our children to trust us about the lurking dangers. They just don’t “get it”. They’re surrounded by friends that, in their opinion, aren’t falling prey to the dangers we’re so concerned about. I’m convinced that they’re incapable of seeing clearly. So, we talk about the dangers (quite a bit) but we also appeal to them to trust us because the wisdom that’s required to grasp the dangers is beyond their maturity. I don’t expect them to fully understand and agree that something is dangerous. Instead, we’re trying to teach them to defer to the wisdom of older, wiser men and women as they grow and mature. It doesn’t go as smoothly as I would like.
The truth is that I’m scared for them and many of the restrictions that appeal to me are my workarounds for trusting God, praying for my children and having uncomfortable conversations with them. No amount of restrictions or time will govern our children’s hearts. As they become adults, they have to own their childhood professions of faith and become men and women of God who are ruled by the Holy Spirit. Just like their parents. One of the ways we’ve grown through this situation is that we pray a lot more for our children and are trying to be more intentional and unified in our approach to these issues.
Lord help us all and be merciful to our children.
My wife and I have five children currently living with us ranging from 10 years old to 20 years old. Here are some comments.
For our kids who are high school age and younger, they carry a flip phone for emergency calls when they go out. Our high school aged daughter wants a smart phone – or at least a phone that enables easy texting and other communication – to stay in better contact with her friends in our home school co-op, but we are holding the line on not letting her get a smart phone, and think it is best to do so.
When our two older daughters finished high school, we let them buy smart phones, if for no other reason that it was very difficult for them to navigate adult life – part time job, community college attendance, public transit – without a smart phone. So much of adult life expects that you have a smart phone with the relevant app. My own job requires me to use a particular app for TFA in order to log onto any of the computer systems I use for my work. Maybe a smart phone isn’t absolutely essential for adult life, but not having one makes life much more inconvenient and cuts you off from many opportunities.
We allow our children to use tablets, a desktop computer, and a Roku in common areas of our house with permission and for limited times, and the devices are equipped with monitoring/blocking software. Our two youngest are boys, and they mainly watch YouTube videos and play Roblox games. We permit only certain YouTube channels and games. We do less policing of our high school age daughter, who spends a lot of time on Discord connecting with her friends (mostly Christians from families we know). No one is on Facebook or Instagram.
We let our two older daughters purchase their own laptops when they finished high school, which they use in private rooms and without monitoring/blocking software. Since our daughters are off on their own at college/work for most of the day, it didn’t make sense to keep up the same level of supervision at home, and I figured I would deal with any problems as they came up. One of daughters recently confessed to us that she looked at a bad website out of curiosity several months prior, and we used it as a teaching moment.
The tech landscape changed over the past couple of decades, so our two youngest get a lot more access to tech and video watching than did our two oldest. Perhaps we are becoming more permissive parents with later children, but it also seems to have become more difficult to keep tech out of the house in the sense that so much of life today is mediated online and through devices. For example, Discord is the price that must be paid so our daughter in high school can have Christian friends. There are still a lot of in-person meetings, but it is not the same world that me and my wife grew up in. Even so, we are on the tech-conservative side in our home school community.
I use a flip phone and that’s what we give our working age sons when they get a job.
A lot of what you said resonated with me Joel—our kids are similar ages—but this paragraph pretty well could have come out of our home.
I use a “transphone.” It’s a Light Phone. Calls, texts, GPS directions (not great, but sufficient when needed), podcasts, music, and works as a hotspot. There’s no social media and no web browser. Their new Version 3 has a camera and can display photos, but V2 does not.
I can function 99% of my life without a smart phone. The only time I need a smart phone is traveling, primarily for Uber. For that I have an old iPhone in a drawer that gets charged and connected to my LightPhone hotspot for traveling.
My oldest is 15 and is driving on his own and working two jobs. I don’t think he needs a phone, even for emergencies. I am 44 and I survived driving on my own without a cell phone. I’m not sure the world is that much more dangerous now. Maybe I’m naive.
He’s the only one at his high school without a cell phone. He does miss out on some things. I pray he doesn’t resent me too badly as he grows.
I have bought my kids a few different devices. Their current communication device is a wiPhone. It can call and text message (T9) over WiFi. I have it setup with a voip.ms phone number. So they can communicate with their friends through the phone, but I have access to messaging and calls logs through a website. They’ve done pretty well. It doesn’t have a camera or the ability to display texted photos. It costs <$5/month, but only works on Wifi.
My 14 year old daughter has learned to type pretty fast on both her wiPhone and the laptop because she doesn’t get a long time to sit and write emails. We also encourage her to write paper, handwritten letters to her friends – which slows her down and slows down the communication. She’s probably missing out on connections.
So far, it seems to be working and worth it.