The ethical dilemmas of child tracking apps: care or control?

Parents can easily monitor their children's movements in a world driven by data. Tracking apps like “SafeT” and “Life360” are examples of such tools. While these technologies offer parents a sense of security, they also raise critical ethical questions about children's privacy and autonomy. Indeed, according to researcher Katleen Gabriëls (Maastricht University), there is a confusion between care and control, which can lead to unhealthy overprotection and even invasion of privacy.

The trend of “intensive parenting” in Western societies encourages this behavior but also opens the door for a vital debate about children's digital rights. What balance should parents and society strike between control and independence, and how can technological advances affect this balancing act? The apps operate at the intersection of ethics, safety, and technology.

The impact of tracking apps

The popularity of Life360, with more than 50 million users, illustrates the massive adoption of tracking technology by parents, according to Gabriëls. These apps are designed with safety as the primary goal, but studies show that continuous monitoring can paradoxically lead to increased anxiety and worry among parents. Even though the Western world has become safer, the “culture of fear” creates a false sense of need for constant surveillance. David Rose of the MIT Media Lab argues that the sense of protection from harm is a basic human need. However, this technological solution to parental anxiety fundamentally transforms the natural dynamic between parent and child.

Tension between autonomy and protection

Research shows that “helicopter parenting,” enhanced by tracking technology, can lead to higher levels of depression and reduced life satisfaction in children. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child affirms minors' fundamental right to privacy, which is in direct conflict with the growing trend of digital surveillance. Experts warn that parents are under significant social pressure to engage in surveillance in order to be seen as “good” parents. This social pressure, combined with technological capabilities, creates a complex situation where the lines between protection and privacy violation are blurred.

Unforeseen consequences

Children under 14 are particularly vulnerable to privacy risks because of their limited understanding of digital tracking, other recent research found. While they show a sophisticated knowledge of specific privacy issues, they struggle to understand institutional privacy risks. Interestingly, according to Gabriëls, young people find ways to circumvent parental control, which shows they are actively trying to guard their autonomy. Studies show that healthy moral development requires children to understand rules internally and not just follow them out of fear of surveillance. In this regard, the concept of “proper distance” argues for an essential balance: not too close and not too far away.

Recognizing the need for more research on children's rights in the digital world, the government is working on a three-track policy: legislation, policy, and surveillance. For example, the new Digital Services Act (DSA) provides better protection for minors from personalized ads. For parents, striking a balance between technology use and personal interaction is crucial. Setting screen time limits and scheduling undisturbed family time are recommended as concrete steps toward a healthier parent-child relationship.

Digital parenting

The government is launching initiatives to better protect children in the digital world in 2025. A Children's Rights Image is being developed to educate parents and young people about the risks of online products. Experts stress that adequate protection of children in the digital world requires a combination of legislation, education, and awareness. The focus is shifting from pure control to developing digital resilience in children, where parents should be guiding rather than controlling. This development calls for a new definition of “good parenting” in the digital age, where trust and communication are central.