From Connection to Disconnection for Teens

*Jocelyn Lachance*

#### **Abstract**

We propose here to reflect both on the role of parents in connecting adolescents and on the desire for disconnection for teens. It appears that while we are inclined to notice teens when they go online, we less often perceive their resistance and their attempt to disconnect. Returning to several examples, we will see that the hypothesis of the existence of these attempts is realistic, and that it is possible to support them in order to help the youngest to better manage their uses.

**Keywords:** connection, disconnection, smartphone, parents, ritual

### **1. Introduction**

In a few years, the exceptionality of the situation of an individual who could be reached at any time and at any time was replaced by the normality of instantly hearing the voice or immediately seeing the face of the person. This participates in the transformation of our representations of time and space, which gives rise to new expectations. Expectations that parent formulate more or less clearly to their children. The obligation to remain reachable seems to be asserting itself as a general norm which, having imposed itself on adults, now extends to the youngest. In the case of parents and their children, the rationale for this ongoing connection is not always based on actual and imminent dangers [1]. It is the potential for dangerous events that underpins the indisputable argument for the importance of remaining reachable. It is the contingent nature of the risks that imposes itself on these young people as an argument of authority. By entering this connected world, the younger generations also end up adhering in many cases to this reassuring standard of connection. Many teenagers in ours researches nonetheless firmly believe that their freedom of movement is subject to the obligation to carry their smartphone with them. In this way, a connection "pact" is generally established, concluded under pressure, which implies first and foremost that contact be possible at any time, hence the importance of keeping it within reach, and often of "be attentive to calls and texts sent by parents, at the risk of losing a recently acquired freedom. In this context, if adolescents are growing up in a connected world today, it is also because of the connection the parents are expecting from them. In this chapter, by evoking a few situations reported by teenagers and parents of teenagers during our surveys, we propose to think about the role of the parents in making their child connected, and about the desire of the disconnection of the teens…

## **2. The obligation to be connected…**

*"When I am with friends," says Yann, 16, my parents like me to send them a message to say "I arrived well" or "I'm going to sleep" I feel obligated to answer, but I don't always do it, because sometimes I get drunk. But in real life, I have to answer because afterwards they worry. Afterwards, they won't let me go out anymore".*

This self-imposed standard sometimes seems to cause situations with high anxiety-inducing potential. This is the case for Yann, 17. Knowing that he was geolocated, a dead phone meant for him that he would, once again and in spite of himself, escape his father's surveillance. A situation that he fears, that he does not want to relive, given the reproaches he has already been subjected to in the past:

*Last week, he reports, I ran out of battery. So no more smartphones. He died. My dad didn't know where I was anymore and it made a big deal when I got home when this time I was being honest. I really had more drums. I thought he could locate me with the GPS or some other means, but in fact, no, when I run out of battery it really cuts everything apparently (…) You see, I "screwed up" once and it went badly so I don't want to start over.*

The connection "pact" is sometimes respected under the sign of fear [2]. As with Yann, this obligation which binds Leo to his parents encourages him to remain reachable at all times. A silence on his part that can provoke conflicts that he prefers to avoid: "In fact," he sums up, "I do not think it has ever happened to be unreachable. It's happened before, but there were times when I really did not hear the cell phone. And when I realized it I called them back to right the wrong. I really do not want to create a hostile climate, so I'm making an effort, once again."

Of course, not all adolescents experience this need to stay connected with the same intensity. Some even seem to lend themselves to this little game of giving news to their parents with indifference, like Yoan, 18, for whom it is only a trivial formality:

*"In general I tell them everything. time what I do, so for me, it's not monitoring, it's more to reassure them than anything else. Afterwards, when I'm at home, they don't watch me".*

Others admit to doing it half-heartedly, and are sometimes tempted to deviate from the rule. But all agree on one point: not answering a call, ignoring a message, not giving a sign of life when it was apparently expected from their parents are always signs of transgression in a world where the norm is to stay connected. A form of mistrust towards parents which introduces a form of negotiation with them, and which transforms the apparent pact of connection, the terms of which have not always been decided by the adolescent, into a real negotiated pact.

This standard of connection also appears in the form of the urgency to respond: "Every time my mother sends me a message," Yann, 16, tells us, "I have to answer in ten minutes. Like many adolescents, Yann accepts the conditions of the connection pact so as not to frighten his mother or father. In a connected world, young people are revealed anxious to reassure their worried parents, no matter what space they occupy and what time they live. Parents sometimes no longer have to make a request, as teens who have internalized their fears anticipate these times when they must contact them.

#### *From Connection to Disconnection for Teens DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99140*

Sending a small message is perceived as a micro-signal that most see as a compromise that does not require real sacrifice. Discreet, quick and easy; texting reassures without necessarily disrupting the course of an activity with friends, which some parents will be content with over time:

*I said it wasn't necessarily to track them, says Laurent, 48 (father of 14-year-old). It's just that the connection with the phone is that today we have to hear more from them than we had from our parents. So it's a feeling of being closer. The times spent with us may be stronger than with our parents or different but I say yes, I feel like I relate more to my daughter. And it's not necessarily to track her down or ask her questions.*

In any case, adds Liliane, 50 (mother of an 18-year-old girl and a 16-year-old boy), my son, he is absolutely not asking for this kind of telephone relationship with his mother, on the contrary, if I do not call him every now and then, I think he would not call me at all, and he makes it clear to me. When I call him, he answers yes or no. His texts are minimalist, either yes or no.

The micro-signal then embodies a form of resistance. It is as if the advance of adolescence corresponded to a progressive claim for a right to temporary disconnection. It is precisely the intrusive permanence of the connection, the standard of being reachable, the imperative that is generally imposed on the origins of the acquisition of the smartphone that are then called into question. In other words, the connection pact that takes hold in the first few months or years usually goes through episodes of temporary disconnection. Having obediently responded to her parents' requests for years, Corinne, 17, admits having deliberately changed her attitude in recent months: "Now, from time to time, I do not answer," she said. For example, I refuse to answer texts or calls from my mother, things like that! Like last Saturday, my mom called me to find out when I was coming home and I wasn't answering!".

These episodes of disconnection, however, are not only signs of a willingness to resist parents. They also testify to a demand to be able to judge, for oneself, the interest of an exchange in real time, on the moment, according to the situation. When Alexi, 15, recounts this evening when he did not pick up despite repeated calls from his father, he insisted on the evidence that he was in good company, in safety, and that his father knew it very well at the deep down:

*"I find it a bit normal for them to call me, he explains, but I find that sometimes they do too much and I tell them. During a party a few weeks ago, I refused to let my father call me because he knows the friends I go to very well. Also, there were relatives present so I didn't see fit for him to try to reach me or watch me."*

Self-assertion is not only manifested through a form of opposition expressed by a punctual disconnection: it mainly depends on the adolescent's ability to justify this choice to parents, which is also reflected in the story of Dorian, 17 years old:

*I answer them often, he said, but I do answer them later. Because I don't necessarily want to talk to them all evening. The last time was at a party at a friend's house where my parents called me late at night and I wondered why they called me so late (…). At another party where it was still early in the evening that had only just started, I told myself that it was not important because they were friends that I had not seen for a long time.*

Knowing how to justify one's priorities, and how to make one's arguments heard by one's parents: episodes of disconnection are not only an opportunity to take action, but also to subsequently engage in a discussion on the subject [3]. In other words, disconnecting leads to discussions about those times they seek to preserve. Because if the voluntary and punctual disconnection is often followed by remonstrances on the part of the parents, it also leads to exchanges, the teenager having to explain why he suddenly disappeared from parental radars. However, because the decision to temporarily disconnect makes sense to him, the young person is generally ready to argue when he faces his parents. On the other hand, the episodes of involuntary disconnection rather provoke a need for the teenager to justify himself when he had not wanted the situation. The latter then tries to "repair", which is not without revealing in some of them a feeling of guilt:

*I was in the evening, tells us Hector, 16 years old. I had gone to Strasbourg to have an evening with a friend and when I left, my mother was a little ill and then I was in Strasbourg at my friend's house, we stayed 5 to 10 minutes on the smartphone afterwards, I ran out of battery, she got a little worried but as soon as I managed to charge my smartphone, I saw that she was worried so I sent her a message and called her right after.*

Since the norm is to be connected, the episode of disconnection leads to the need for justification. The adolescent who has not been contacted must provide explanations, the validity of which is subsequently judged by the parents:

*It must have been an evening when I had no more drums, says Theo, 17 years old and that I had answered them the next morning. They were upset, they were a little stressed, but after when I explained to them, it was okay. I just told them I had more drums and then it was okay. They were stressed out that I wasn't responding to their message and everything, logically, so I respond well. So all of a sudden they asked what was there and everything, but then they were reassured.*

The terms of the connection pact are therefore called into question in the tension between the desire to protect the parents from the worry that temporary silence may arouse and the desire to assert one's capacity to judge the urgency of an exchange. In the background, the perception that teens have of their parents' feeling of insecurity sometimes dampens the urge they feel to surrender to the present day of their activities by bracketing incoming calls and received messages.

If the link is maintained at a distance in a connected world, a phone call or a text message has little to do with an actual presence of parents with their children. The co-presence effect of remote communication is in no way equal to the experience of live presence. It is hard to imagine a father or mother sitting patiently in a corner of a living room or a cellar watching his teenager feasting with his friends without this causing a certain discomfort or at least limiting them. Still, it's easy to imagine a teenager texting his parents "to reassure them" while a friend serves him drinks at a party night. The constant gaze on the child when the parents share the same physical space with them imposes the permanent possibility of reaching him when the distance separates them. However, for this possibility to be reassuring in the eyes of parents, it is important to regularly reactivate the suspended link when the children are absent. In other words, sometimes it's not the information you get from a call or text message that matters. It is the confirmation that the adolescent is reachable that becomes the most meaningful and ultimately reassures.

Is it getting news from your child or receiving a sign of life from him? One thing is certain, however: the exchange of relatively trivial news between parents and

#### *From Connection to Disconnection for Teens DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99140*

children who communicate regularly with each other shows that it is not always the content that counts but the contact that is reassuring [4]. So the simple fact of taking the time to phone or text can even play this function of comforting parents. Because the maintenance of the link is checked again. It is always possible. It is effective:

*When I'm not at home, admits Estelle, 15, I call them every evening or send a message to reassure them. So I basically tell them what I did that day. Anyway, I know that if I don't I would have some complaints after like "we haven't heard from we told you to call" and I'm not sure I'll be able to leave next time. So every night I call or send a message. Afterwards, it's a bit normal for them to worry but afterwards when I'm at a friend's house, her parents are at her place so things aren't going to happen to me, it's not like I'm going out in town on my own one evening I mean there is no reason I think. But hey they want to know how I'm doing and in return I have the right to go to my friends so it's okay for me.*

Since the feeling of being reassured is nourished by the very fact of keeping the bond alive despite the distance, the sometimes pressing request from parents to "wave" is justified, even when their teenagers are not in particularly difficult situations. Risk. It is in this context that many parents do not just text or call their children to make a decision they think is important. Several prefer to go there, in the presence, when it comes to obtaining reliable information about their children, as Estelle once again evokes:

*"I was able to go to my friend's house the following day," says - she, and on the spot she offered me to sleep at her place so I asked my father by SMS and he didn't want to. My mother had to come and pick me up in the evening, but when she got there she saw that it was really cool and that her parents were nice".*

The need to reactivate the link has also disrupted the school time formerly devoted entirely to those present in the college or high school. In fact, few teens go without texts, or even calls, during the day, even when they are in class. Admittedly, as mentioned by Patrick, 14, this communication most often fulfills an organizational function: "During recess, he mentions, they ask me at what time I finish, whether to come and get me. During class, they do not send me a message. "Ditto for the young Marion, 17, who occasionally receives messages and calls when she is in high school: "from time to time, she said, between noon and two when they need information", a situation that Emilie, 16, also experiences:

*I answer my mother, she admits, well it depends, sometimes she calls me but I tell her stop calling me because here I am in class so either I do not answer because I am in class or so you will have to come and get me during the day. And if not, she sends me messages. And a lot of times it's for stuff yeah there I go do you want me to take you? It doesn't matter if you answer if you are in class or if you are not.*

Just like Ellie, 16, who admits that this type of exchange is frequent with her mother: "With my mother," she confirms, "we often send each other messages or even call each other during the hour. Midday. Otherwise, between lessons, at the 10 hour break".

But to this practical dimension seems to be added most often the phatic function of making contact according to several teenagers who, like Eric, 15, are telephoned: "for everything and nothing". Thus, in the opinion of Pierrette, 14, it is the need for reassurance that motivates her parents who have already contacted her on several

occasions while she was at school, with her teachers and her parents. Classmates: "Well at noon," she said, "it happened several times, they contacted me. They checked that everything was fine". The relevance of these exchanges during the day is then questioned by young people who, once again, resist the temptation to respond, defeating attempts at contact on the part of their parents:

*"It depends," says us. Eric, 15 years old. I don't always answer. If it is important or not because sometimes frankly (…). She contacts me for anything, something about information that she could very well tell me in the evening. In fact, if it's urgent, yes, I find it normal to send me a message but if not, frankly, it is of no interest".*

However, some teens do not wait for their parents to call or text them when they are in school. Because they have already gotten into the habit of spending part of their break time communicating with them: "It's me," says Ketty, 15, from time to time, who sends them a message. It's often noon to tell them that everything is fine, if I got any notes or whatever. It's to keep them informed".

Moreover, whether the origin of the exchange is attributable to a request from the parents or caused by an initiative of the child, whether the relevance of the telephone or text messages is or is not validated by the teenagers, It is clear that break times are no longer fully experienced at school in the same way in a connected world. These interstitial times, punctuating school days, are for some teenagers more and more often devoted, in part at least, to exchanges with their father and mother, as Corrine, 17, recounts:

*They text me sometimes during class, she said, but they don't know I'm in class, well, they text me but they don't know if I'm in class and I answer in class or if I am on a break or between two lessons. But yes they send me messages because, in any case, they say to themselves that I will answer when I have a break.*

To resolve the tension between the parents 'desire to keep the bond alive through regular contact and the teenagers' desire to preserve time spent away from parental gaze, the micro-signal that is texting is again revealed as a solution that satisfies parents and children. Parents then obtain confirmation that the link can be reactivated, that their children are still within the security perimeter of the connection, while the latter fulfill their part of the "pact" by reassuring their parents, without ever questioning the progress. Activities to which they lend themselves. But the use of the micro-signal is only a temporary resolution of this tension. Because over time, and therefore the transformation of the expectations of parents who gain confidence or who are more suspicious of their growing children, the connection pact is broken or renegotiated, at the very moment when teenagers wanting to signify their independence take the path of occasional disconnection to assert themselves.

The desire for disconnection, partial and temporary, emerges in filigree even among young children, beyond the apparent desire for hyperconnection that would characterize the relationship of the youngest to ICTs. A desire which, as we will see, sometimes turns into an attempt to disconnect, even into concrete experiences of disconnection, which is hardly surprising: the first individuals to be interested in the disconnection of ICTs in their lives were, there are already more than ten years, those who had already experienced hyperconnection, that is to say discomforts felt subjectively and which they attributed to the fact of being connected "permanently" [5]. The disconnection attempts first appeared in the form of desire, of attempt, then in the establishment of a temporary and partial disconnection strategy, a way of regaining the feeling of mastering the use of tools which, previously, precipitated their discomfort. The impression of being subject to the schedules

#### *From Connection to Disconnection for Teens DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99140*

of others and of being literally invaded by requests from outside. However, these attempts at partial and temporary disconnection among the youngest often manifest themselves in a subtle way. And some adolescents even consider that their own parents do not notice these efforts they express, these attempts to resist the pull of the permanent connection:

*I know, Jennifer, 15, confides to us that my parents are right and that I spend too much time on it, sometimes I make a good resolution I tell myself that I will go less, I go basketball or cycling and I answer my messages an hour later but I have the impression that the hour when I don't have my smartphone lasts a really long time and I'm happy to finally see who spoke to me when I get home. And when I make an effort like that, it doesn't last long but my parents don't encourage me, they say that nothing has changed because as soon as I come home I run into it. So they don't see that I'm using a little less.*

The desire to disconnect, even concrete attempts to partially and temporarily distance ICTs, seems to exist. But their visibility is sometimes blurred, the actions of disconnection not always being perceived beyond these numerous moments, when adults see, again and again, adolescents in front of screens. This invisibility of a sometimes manifest desire to disconnect has consequences, because it is the very possibility of supporting these young people in a world less and less connected that adults will then question. Yet, like their elders, the younger generations seem to have an ambivalent relationship to technology. Fascination does not always gain the upper hand, as the limits of ICTs have often been experienced in adolescence. Thus, Fanny, 20, sums up this relationship fairly well with technologies that have their advantages and also have limits: "I am quite reluctant," she says, "with regard to the very strong evolution that there has been compared to all this technology, I'm afraid it will break human links. It has its uses but I think you have to know how to detach yourself from it ". Partial and temporary disconnection from ICTs is therefore not a utopia. She was born among young people who had known the "normality" of the connected world. Among a generation of which some members dream of moments of respite from an early age. And if this desire for disconnection embodied silently through punctual attempts at disconnection is not always noticeable, it is precisely because this desire and these attempts arise at the very moment when the hyperconnection is felt its effects on a generation. a young person whose members are undoubtedly more and more numerous to feel the discomforts which are attributable to him. Thus, attempts to disconnect arise in the tumult caused by this norm of being permanently connected, a norm which is more and more obvious in part because, henceforth, it is within families that it has become commonplace and reinforced.
