Most parents track their 18-25-year-old kids on their smartphones. Is that healthy? 42%

By Allison Aubrey0%

6/15/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Confirmation Bias, and Negativity Bias, with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 35.7% saturation with 366 hits. Analysis detected 2,158 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,025 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.2% and a BS Rank of 42% (12,341 of 21,198 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 58.20% of the article peer group.

Imagine it's the 1980s or early '90s, and there's a queue for the pay phone in a college dorm hallway. 
Students line up, waiting their turn for the once-a-week, brief check-in with a parent. 
That was the norm, says Laurence Steinberg, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Temple University. 
"Parents and their adult children are much closer emotionally these days than they had been in past generations," Steinberg says. 
The shift, from what he observes as a professor, is dramatic. 
"To the point where sometimes during midterms or finals, the students have to kind of block their parents from texting them because they're interrupting them too much," he says. 
More than half of parents of 18- to 25-year-olds say they track their adult children using smartphone apps, according to a new University of Michigan survey. 
And as technology becomes ever more present, and the boundaries between independence and reliance in late adolescence and early adulthood continue to evolve and shift, researchers say tracking can be both a way to stay in touch that is healthy and supportive, but may also cross the line to surveillance or too much interference. 
Steinberg says he is not surprised by results of the new survey showing how many parents track their adult children. 
The tracking technology built into smartphones has become a part of society  both the adoption and expectation of more virtual connection. 
### The findings 
Sarah Clark is co-director of the University of Michigan Health C.S. 
Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health. 
She explains the first question put to the 1,542 parents surveyed was whether they tracked their adult child's location using a cellphone. 
"I was just shocked, 52% do that. 
And when they do it, the majority of the time the location tracking is always on," she says. 
> Want the latest stories on the science of healthy living? 
Subscribe to NPR's Health newsletter. 
Most parents cited peace of mind about their child's safety as a main reason to track. 
But Clark says about 25% of parents who track their adult children said the ability to monitor their location may sometimes cause anxiety, more than reassurance. 
The poll found parental tracking is more common with 18-20 year olds, compared to adults in their twenties. 
She says the practice can become problematic when parents use it as a way to meddle or control. 
"Tracking your young adult's location and then using it as a way to micromanage their life. 
'Hey, why aren't you in class? 
I thought you had to work at 9. 
Didn't you have this appointment? 
Weren't you going to exercise today?' 
That's a signal that that's a parent who's having difficulty making the transition from parenting a child to parenting a young adult," she says, acknowledging that "it can be tough to let go" and that technology makes it easy to stay connected. 
### Come up with a family plan 
Steinberg, who is author of the book, *You and Your Adult Child*, says it's "probably a bad idea" to track adult children all the time unless both parties have agreed to it. 
"This period of the late teens and early twenties is a really important time for young people to develop a sense of autonomy and independence and to have parts of their life that their parents aren't necessarily in on," he says. 
As an alternative, he suggests setting a regular time each week to catch up, framing it as a way to stay connected rather than to hover. 
Leah Beel, 19, a University of Michigan student who works as a research assistant on the poll, says her family tracks one another on their smartphones. 
She tracks her parents and her brother, and they track her in return. 
"I feel really reassured knowing that my parents always know where I am and I know where they are," she says. 
"My whole family kind of tracks each other, and it's not a way of forcing it on each other, it's just a way to stay updated," she says. 
Beel says she was surprised the survey results showed only half of parents track their young adult children because nearly all of her peers track and are tracked by their parents, so it feels like the norm. 
Her advice for young adults who want more privacy: Approach parents about a gradual shift. 
"A young adult could tell their parents that they can have their location if they're out late or if they're traveling somewhere new," she says, noting that tracking in higher-risk or novel situations may offer mutual comfort. 
### Safety and independence 
Beel also tracks about 10 of her friends, which is common among her peers, and it gives her a broader safety net that doesn't rely solely on her parents. 
Clark echoes that point. 
She advises parents considering scaling back on tracking to ask whether their adult child has a peer group already keeping tabs on them. 
"It's reasonable to ask if you have a peer group that's checking in on you," she says. 
"This technology can help with personal safety, but parents don't necessarily need to be in the middle of it, which to me seems like a more developmentally appropriate way to go about this," Clark notes, especially for those in their 20s. 
The results certainly point to a mixed bag: Nearly half of parents surveyed said they do not track their 18- to 25-year-olds, Clark notes, and there is no "right" answer, as expectations vary from family to family, and each family sets boundaries in their own ways. 
"The non-trackers were more like, it kind of feels like an invasion of their privacy and it might hinder them from owning the responsibility to get themselves places and keep themselves safe," she says. 
Clark points to one telling anecdote: A parent who texted their college-aged child asking, "Are you OK? 
Why are you in an alley?" 
The tracking app made the location look suspicious, but the 19-year-old was in the drive-through lane at a Taco Bell, which technically is an alley, but not necessarily a dangerous one. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 16.8%Allison Aubrey: 4.1%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias16.8%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 2.0%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.8%Allison Aubrey: 4.4%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic9.8%This article: 9.5%Allison Aubrey: 1.1%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic9.5%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 1.0%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%Allison Aubrey: 3.4%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias1.8%This article: 3.2%Allison Aubrey: 9.3%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect3.2%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 1.4%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.1%Allison Aubrey: 1.5%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.6%Allison Aubrey: 5.8%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias7.6%This article: 0.3%Allison Aubrey: 1.7%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.3%This article: 12.4%Allison Aubrey: 4.1%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias12.4%This article: 3.6%Allison Aubrey: 0.5%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias3.6%This article: 4.1%Allison Aubrey: 0.6%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error4.1%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.4%Allison Aubrey: 1.6%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias5.4%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.4%Allison Aubrey: 2.3%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.4%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.1%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.3%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect4.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.8%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.7%Allison Aubrey: 10.3%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority11.7%This article: 4.9%Allison Aubrey: 1.7%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma4.9%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.3%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 4.3%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.6%Allison Aubrey: 1.7%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon3.6%This article: 6.8%Allison Aubrey: 2.1%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion6.8%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.1%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 1.5%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.2%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 6.1%Allison Aubrey: 0.9%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature6.1%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.2%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 30.1%Allison Aubrey: 6.2%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal30.1%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.1%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 35.7%Allison Aubrey: 5.0%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)35.7%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.8%Allison Aubrey: 1.0%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground9.8%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 2.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.3%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote2.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.4%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 3.3%Allison Aubrey: 2.1%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice3.3%This article: 10.0%Allison Aubrey: 7.0%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination10.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Allison Aubrey: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Allison Aubrey: 3.2%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…1.6%

1025 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers68%attributed speech323writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 16 words • 0.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 0.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 22 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 7 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 18 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 16 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 8 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 5 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 6 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 32 words • 100.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 41 words • 0.0% coverageLaurence Steinberg • 26 words • 100.0% coverageLeah Beel • 26 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 13 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 21 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 28 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 37 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 15 words • 100.0% coverageLeah Beel • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageLeah Beel • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 23 words • 100.0% coverageSarah Clark • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 34 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 17 words • 0.0% coverageSarah Clark • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Leah Beel

94%flagged-word coverage
206 attributed words29% of attributed speech88% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-10.5 ptsWriter: 10.5%Leah Beel: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+5.1 ptsWriter: 2.2%Leah Beel: 7.3%7.3%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.0 ptsWriter: 5.0%Leah Beel: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.