Emily MacDonagh, wife of singer Peter Andre and a respected doctor in her own right, has unexpectedly ignited a heated parenting debate after revealing just how strict she is with technology use in her home. The discussion began when Emily, who is 36 and shares four children with Peter Andre, opened up about the severe limits she has put in place regarding mobile phone usage for her 11-year-old daughter, Millie. The revelation came during an interview in which Emily spoke candidly about the pressures modern parents face while raising children in a world dominated by screens, constant connectivity, and the growing risks associated with online behavior.
Emily explained that although Millie now has a phone, she was one of the very last children in her class to get one. The only reason she finally allowed it, she admits, is because Millie had reached Year 6 and was becoming the odd one out among classmates. In the entire class, only Millie and one other girl did not have a phone, and Emily eventually gave in out of concern that her daughter might feel alienated or singled out. But while she agreed to give Millie the device, she made sure to restrict its use to an almost extreme degree. Millie is allowed to use her phone only on Saturdays for one hour and on Sundays for one hour — and that is it. No weekday use, no casual scrolling, no taking it to school. As far as Emily is concerned, Millie may technically own a phone, but she is not permitted to live with it the way most children her age do.
Emily joked about the irony of her decision, admitting that her strict rule has created complications for herself. She acknowledged that by depriving Millie of regular phone access, she has also deprived herself of the ability to track her daughter’s location. Since Millie does not bring her phone to school and rarely carries it, Emily cannot rely on technology to monitor her safety or know where she is at any given moment. “I’m punishing myself in a sense,” she said, noting that the decision reflects both her concern for Millie and her awareness of the trade-offs involved.
While the phone rule sparked debate on its own, the deeper issue Emily raised revolves around her concerns about the digital world and the hidden dangers children face once they go online. Speaking on the Made by Mammas podcast, Emily described the internet as “a dangerous place,” expressing fears that will resonate with many modern parents. She reflected on her own childhood, pointing out that she grew up without a mobile phone and never felt deprived. There was no expectation to constantly communicate, no pressure to participate in online culture, and no looming threat of cyberbullying — a phenomenon that has grown alarmingly common in recent years.
Cyberbullying, Emily explained, refers to the use of digital technology to harass, intimidate, threaten, or humiliate another person. And unlike traditional bullying, which stops once a child returns home, cyberbullying can follow victims everywhere, infiltrating their personal spaces through phones, social media, and messaging apps. Emily expressed deep concern about the psychological toll this can take, especially on children and teenagers whose sense of identity and emotional regulation are still developing. She pointed to clear evidence indicating that social media use can be harmful to mental health, particularly among young people who may be more vulnerable to online pressure, comparison, and negativity.
Emily emphasized that her strict rule is not meant to punish Millie but to protect her. She wants her daughter to enjoy as much of a “normal” childhood as possible — one not consumed by screens, notifications, and digital communication. Emily noted that when she was growing up, children socialized in person, spent more time outdoors, and developed relationships without the distortion of online personas. She believes that this kind of upbringing helped foster emotional resilience and healthier boundaries. By limiting Millie’s device use, she hopes to preserve some of that simplicity in a world that no longer offers it naturally.
Still, Emily is not oblivious to the complexities involved in making such decisions. She acknowledges the pressure children feel to fit in and the risk that being “different” can expose them to teasing or exclusion. This was one of the reasons she ultimately relented and allowed Millie to have a phone at all. She did not want her daughter to feel isolated or left out simply because of her parents’ choices. Emily’s approach attempts to strike a balance between protecting her daughter from the dangers of online culture and allowing her to participate in the social norms of her generation. The balance is delicate, and Emily admits it comes with challenges.
Public reaction to Emily’s parenting approach has been strong and divided. Some parents praise her for standing firm, believing that stricter boundaries are necessary in an age when technology can easily consume a child’s life. They argue that children benefit from reduced screen time, increased face-to-face interaction, and clearer structure. Others criticize her approach as overly controlling, suggesting that children need to learn to navigate the digital world rather than be shielded from it entirely. Some even argue that restricting phone access during the school week may leave Millie socially disadvantaged compared to peers who use their devices to coordinate meetups, discuss school assignments, and maintain friendships.
Emily has not responded to the debate directly, but her perspective remains grounded in what she sees as a parent’s primary responsibility: ensuring safety and wellbeing above convenience or social expectation. As a doctor, she brings a clinical understanding of mental health into her parenting decisions, paying close attention to research that suggests a correlation between social media use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, and other emotional struggles among young people. She has repeatedly emphasized that her firm boundaries are rooted in love and concern, not a desire for control.
Moreover, Emily’s concerns reflect a broader cultural conversation unfolding globally. Many parents are now grappling with how to navigate screen time, smartphone use, and children’s access to social media. Schools have reported rising incidents of digital harassment, and mental health professionals have been sounding alarms about the emotional burden placed on developing minds. At the same time, technology has become an essential part of the modern world, making it difficult for families to enforce restrictions without feeling at odds with societal norms.
Emily’s decision illustrates just how complicated these issues have become. By restricting Millie’s device use so dramatically, she may be protecting her from risks that many children are unprepared to handle. Yet she also sacrifices certain conveniences and tools that many parents rely on, such as the ability to track a child’s location or quickly communicate in emergencies. Her comments about “punishing herself” underline the personal sacrifices tied to her parenting philosophy.
Her stance also invites reflection about how much responsibility parents and schools should shoulder in teaching children digital literacy. Some argue that shielding children only delays the inevitable and prevents them from learning how to engage safely with technology. Others believe that delaying phone use as long as possible allows children to develop stronger foundations in emotional stability, communication skills, and self-confidence before being exposed to online environments.
At the heart of the conversation is the reality that parenting in the digital age is uncharted territory. There is no blueprint, no universally accepted guideline, and no perfect answer. Emily MacDonagh’s strict rule may not suit every family, but it reflects the concern of a mother who understands both the power and the peril of the digital world. Her choices highlight the difficult balance parents must strike between protecting children and preparing them — between granting freedom and maintaining boundaries. And as debate continues to swirl around her decision, Emily remains steadfast in her belief that mental health, emotional wellbeing, and safety must come first, even if it means making unpopular choices or facing criticism along the way.
Whether her approach becomes a model for others or remains a point of controversy, it is clear that Emily has forced an important conversation about what it means to be a parent today — a conversation that will only grow more urgent as technology continues to evolve and shape the lives of the next generation.