Source: The post Ban alone cannot protect children from gaming has been created, based on the article “ADDICTION, NOT PLAY” published in “Indian Express” on 28th August 2025. Ban alone cannot protect children from gaming.
UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2- mechanisms, laws, institutions and Bodies constituted for
the protection and betterment of these vulnerable sections.
Context: India’s ban on online real-money gaming has sparked debate. The article argues that mental health, especially of children and adolescents, is the missing lens. It urges a public-health approach that recognises compulsive use, family strain, and the need for prevention alongside regulation.
For detailed information on Online Gaming Act, 2025 – Provisions, Significance & Challenges
Harms of Online Real-Money Gaming
- Gambling-like design and compulsion: These products use variable rewards, rapid gratification, and tight engagement loops. They are built to sustain play, extract payments, and create dependency rather than provide neutral entertainment. This pattern aligns with WHO’s ICD-11 “gaming disorder” criteria of impaired control, priority over daily activities, and persistence despite harm.
Note: Gaming disorder is defined in the 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as a pattern of gaming behavior (“digital-gaming” or “video-gaming”) characterized by impaired control over gaming, increasing priority given to gaming over other activities to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other interests and daily activities, and continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences.
- Adolescent vulnerability and behaviours: For impressionable users, leisure can shift into addiction. Many lose track of time, conceal use, or steal to fund play, and some develop anxiety, depression, or suicidal thoughts after losses or forced stoppage.
- Household and emotional fallout: Parents often discover harm late, after spiking bills or academic collapse. Homes become tense and secretive, with arguments and distress replacing trust and routine.
- Documented severe outcomes: Across India, cases include drained accounts, debt, and spirals of behavioural and emotional distress. In some tragic instances, the consequences have included suicide.
Issues with India’s Ban-Centric Approach
- Policy lens and missing emphasis: Debate focuses on economics, legality, and regulation. The article stresses that mental-health costs remain sidelined, weakening the policy response.
- Protective relief from bans: A ban can remove an immediate source of harm. Families often experience quick relief through fewer conflicts and reduced financial losses.
- Value of partial bans and age-gating: Targeted restrictions can shield minors while permitting informed adults to play. Lower exposure for younger users may delay addiction and allow parents to guide healthier digital habits.
- Limits of prohibition alone: Therapy cannot be an afterthought. Enforcement without parallel support risks treating symptoms while core behavioural drivers persist.
What Is Needed to Protect Children
- Prevent displacement with guided care: When access is cut, compulsive energy can shift to pornography, social-media overuse, or substances. Provide supportive guidance so children do not migrate to less regulated spaces and household tension does not persist.
- Implement school-based screening and counselling: Integrate routine mental-health screening in schools and expand child-friendly counselling. Early identification and timely care reduce escalation and support recovery.
- Train parents and educators for early response: Equip adults to recognise warning signs and act early. Skilled parents and teachers can de-escalate crises and rebuild healthy boundaries.
- Run joint awareness campaigns within a public-health frame: Reach students and caregivers together. Pair thoughtful regulation with counselling and prevention to create a safer digital environment where families regain balance and children build healthier relationships with technology.
Question for practice:
Evaluate the effectiveness of a ban-only approach to online real-money gaming in protecting children.
