One in two parents continues to geolocate their child after age 18. The technology, once reserved for minors, now finds its way into the lives of young adults. But this practice, while reassuring, raises questions about the limits of parental surveillance at an age when one is supposed to become autonomous. A recent American survey highlights the tensions between safety, privacy, and individual responsibility.
Conducted by the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital at the University of Michigan, this national poll gathered responses from over 1,500 parents of children aged 18 to 25. The results show that 52% of them use a phone or similar device to track their offspring's movements. This proportion is higher for 18- to 20-year-olds and concerns daughters more than sons. In 71% of cases, tracking is permanent, not just occasional. Parents check the location mostly in the evening, in unfamiliar areas, or during a ride-sharing trip.
Unsplash illustrative image
The drivers of reassuring… and anxiety-inducing surveillance
For 68% of parents who use tracking, the main reason is peace of mind. Next come preparedness for an emergency (64%) and, more marginally, checking places visited (17%). However, 23% admit that this practice fuels their anxiety rather than soothes it. A paradoxical finding: knowing is not enough to calm fears; it can even exacerbate them by letting the imagination fill in the gaps.
Researcher Sarah Clark, co-director of the survey, points out that constant access to location can make it hard not to check, especially during times of worry. One in ten parents admits to having no particular reason for activating tracking, revealing a form of digital automatism. This habit, if left unexamined, may blur the line between caring vigilance and excessive control.
Parents who do not practice tracking are significantly more critical: 65% see it as an intrusion into privacy, and 51% believe it hinders the development of independence. These figures show a clear divide between two conceptions of education in the digital age. On one side, safety seen as an absolute priority; on the other, trust placed in the young adult to learn on their own.
Gray areas in consent and reciprocity
While 96% of young adults know they are being tracked, only 54% of parents say they offered them an opt-out option. In other words, in nearly one in two households, tracking is imposed without real discussion. When the young person has no say, the practice can be experienced as mistrust, which weakens the parent-child relationship and limits the learning of autonomous management of daily obligations.
Another unexpected finding concerns reciprocity: 48% of parents say that their child tracks their own location. In 90% of these cases, tracking is mutual. This symmetry offers a rare opportunity to step into the other's shoes. Sarah Clark suggests that parents use this experience to start a dialogue about expectations and boundaries, thus turning a control tool into a support for exchange and mutual trust.
For experts, tracking is not to be banned, but to be framed. In certain situations – a nighttime trip, a meeting with a stranger – it can serve as a safety net. However, constant and non-negotiated surveillance risks encroaching on daily life, even pushing the parent to interfere in choices that belong only to the budding adult. The challenge is therefore to define together the circumstances where geolocation is useful, and those where it becomes unnecessary.