The recent ban on mobile phones for children below 16 years of age due to negative health implications opens up many questions on our government's effort to provide a healthy lifestyle for children. With India recently over taking China as the worlds fastest growing mobile market, it might be too harsh to impose a ban on mobile phones in this country where the ease of communication is of major importance. There have been many studies conducted to understand the health risks of using cell phones. Most of them have not captured any concrete evidence suggesting negative health implications, but they have warned children from using them frequently.
One might argue that children under 16 don't need cell phones since they spend most of their time at school or at home. But it is when the child is not in these safe houses that convince parents to give their children mobile phones. It gives a huge sense of relief to the parents as they can talk to their children anytime. It also helps the children to be safe and brave since they could call up anyone when they sense trouble.
Long before this ban, many schools have already banned kids from bringing cell phones to schools. Some schools allow students to bring them, only if they agree to hand it over to the class teacher till the school day ends. This, to me, seems to be a better alternative.
Now, the government is also proposing to extend this ban to bus stops and railway stations, putting the children in dire security risk. In this age of increasing terror attacks, what the government needs to do is to come up with other ways of regulating cell phone usage among children without compromising on their security.
One way the government could achieve this is by asking the mobile phone networks to come up with specific talk time plans for children under 16. For instance, the plan could provide kids with unlimited talk time to their parents but limit the calls made to other people. This would help achieve the primary objective of parents providing their kids with cell phones at such an early age. The kids are not restricted to use the phone for emergency use but are limited from making calls for other purposes.
Mobiles phones emit radio waves only when a call is in progress. By implementing the above plan, the health risk( if any) to children are considerably minimized without interfering with the child's right of communication!
But why does the government overlook the other problems that school going children face? Many schools are not equipped with decent sized playgrounds. This reduces the child's much needed physical activity. The load children carry in their bags seems to increase by the year. The schools could offer locker rooms for children so that they wouldn't have to carry the books they don't need. Having two copies of text books would eliminate the need to carry them to school as one would be in the locker room and the other at home. I recently went on a trip to the nearby villages around Trichy, TN. During the journey, I saw many kids in uniform going to school by walk on the National Highway itself. Most of these children walk miles without even wearing slippers. I see two major problems here. Most of these students prefer walking to their schools risking their lives while doing so. Perhaps there aren't other alternate modes of transportation. The other problem is that the schools seem to overlook the absence of slippers on the child's feet as long as they have their uniforms on! These children are subject to the harshest conditions on their way to school. They risk their lives of being run over by speeding vehicles and of constant injury to their feet.
Our government will have to make our children's- both rural and urban- lives better by strongly analyzing the current situation and not following up on baseless and unproven tests.
