With the advancement of digital platforms, the experience of childhood and adolescence has transformed. Virtual environments are no longer just spaces for entertainment; they have become central arenas for socialization, identity formation, and self-expression.
However, alongside these changes, concerns about young people’s mental health and the ability of laws to keep up with this new reality are also growing.
The debate around the “Digital ECA” (Law 15.211/25), which came into force in March 2026, arises precisely in this context, not as the creation of a new statute, but as the need to reinterpret and update the protection mechanisms established in the Statute of the Child and Adolescent in light of an environment marked by invisible, scalable, and persistent risks.
An analog statute for a digital world
Created in 1990, the ECA is internationally recognized as an advanced piece of legislation for the comprehensive protection of children and adolescents. However, its application in the digital environment still faces significant challenges.
According to digital law specialist Dr. Coriolano Aurélio, the issue is not with the law itself, but with its adaptation:
“The ECA remains one of the most advanced legislations in the world in terms of comprehensive protection. The problem is not its essence, but its operational insufficiency in the face of digital reality.”
In practice, this means the statute was designed for a context in which harm was more localized and identifiable. Today, the scenario is different.
The digital environment allows harmful content to spread rapidly, remain available indefinitely, and reach an incalculable number of people. As the lawyer puts it: “Today, digital harm is diffuse, viral, and persistent.”
Mental health at risk: the impact of the digital environment
Various international studies have already pointed to a correlation between intensive social media use and increased symptoms of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem among adolescents.
Factors such as social comparison, constant exposure, the search for validation, and cyberbullying contribute to an emotionally unstable environment. From a legal standpoint, these impacts are already beginning to be recognized.
“The Brazilian legal system already allows practices such as cyberbullying and exposure to harmful content to be classified as forms of psychological violence,” says the lawyer.
Even so, a major challenge remains: proving and measuring this type of damage. Unlike physical aggression, psychological suffering leaves no visible marks, making it difficult to translate into legal terms. As highlighted:
“Digital psychological harm is often silent, progressive, and difficult to quantify.”
This reveals a central tension: while the effects are real and profound, legal instruments are still evolving to keep up with this complexity.
Digital platforms: from intermediaries to active agents
Another key point in the debate is the role of digital platforms. Traditionally seen as neutral intermediaries, they now exert direct influence over the content consumed by users.
Recommendation algorithms, for example, can amplify content with high engagement potential, which does not necessarily mean healthy content, especially for adolescents.
According to Dr. Coriolano: “Platforms are no longer mere intermediaries. Today, they organize, recommend, and amplify content.”
He also points out a shift in focus: “The key issue is not just what the platform hosts, but what it promotes.”
In Brazil, the Civil Rights Framework for the Internet establishes that platforms can only be held liable after failing to comply with a court order (with some exceptions). However, this model has been questioned given the speed and scale of digital harm.
A global movement toward regulation
The rise in online protection policies is not exclusive to Brazil. Countries around the world are advancing stricter regulations, particularly aimed at protecting minors.
The European Union, for example, has implemented the Digital Services Act (DSA), which imposes stricter obligations on platforms, including algorithmic transparency and the mitigation of systemic risks.
According to the lawyer:
“The world is beginning to realize that leaving the protection of adolescents exclusively in the hands of the digital market was a mistake.”
Still, he offers an important warning: “Poor regulation is as dangerous as no regulation.”. In other words, the challenge is not just to regulate, but to build effective, balanced, and technically sound policies.
Protection vs. freedom: the most sensitive issue
Expanding protection policies raises a delicate question: to what extent does regulation protect, and when does it begin to censor?
Balancing freedom of expression and the protection of adolescents is one of today’s key dilemmas: “We cannot confuse freedom of expression with freedom to cause harm,” the specialist states. At the same time, he acknowledges the risks: “The risk of censorship exists, especially if regulation is vague.”
Therefore, the solution lies in broader governance models: “It cannot be only the State, nor only the platforms. We need a multi stakeholder model.”. This approach aims to ensure that decisions about content and protection are more transparent and legitimate.
Who is responsible for protection?
Responsibility for protecting adolescents in the digital environment is shared, but not equally. Although parents are considered the first line of defense, experts point out that this task has become increasingly complex.
“It is unrealistic to think they can, on their own, confront digital structures designed to capture attention and influence behavior,” the lawyer notes.
In this context, the role of the State becomes more relevant, especially in digital education. Media literacy, teaching young people to understand, interpret, and protect themselves online, emerges as one of the main prevention strategies.
Between harm and justice: a system that can’t keep up with digital time
In practice, cases involving adolescents and the internet are already part of everyday legal life. Among the most common are:
- Cyberbullying
- Unauthorized image exposure
- Grooming
- Digital scams
- Emotional manipulation by algorithms
Despite the possibility of legal redress, the path remains difficult. “The main obstacles are identifying those responsible, gathering evidence, and the slowness of the system,” the specialist explains.
He summarizes the issue succinctly: “In the digital world, legal time still does not match the speed of harm.”
The future: more than laws, a shift in awareness
Given this scenario, the trend is toward strengthening online protection policies, but experts emphasize that the solution goes beyond legislation.
According to Dr. Coriolano Aurélio, the path involves three main pillars:
- Proportional accountability for platforms
- Preventive mechanisms
- Structured digital education
Even so, he highlights a deeper dimension of the problem: “It is not only the law that needs to evolve. It is our awareness of the world we are building.”
This statement captures the contemporary challenge: protecting adolescents in an environment that evolves faster than any legislation, and that requires not only new rules, but new ways of thinking about the relationship between technology, society, and human development.
_________________
The article above was edited by Julia Galoro.
Liked this type of content? Check Her Campus Cásper Líbero home page for more!