Child safety experts have warned the UK government against enacting an Australian-style social media ban for children under 16, which they called a “retrograde step” that would “do more harm than good”.

On Thursday, Australia became the first country in the world to ban under-16s from using social media platforms. The move was supported by a large majority of the Australian public – but academics, politicians and child rights groups said it could backfire, driving teenagers to the dark web, or make them feel more isolated.

These concerns were echoed by child safety experts in the UK, who called the ban “retrograde” and said a similar move in Britain would “penalise children for the failures of tech companies”.

Peter Kyle, the technology secretary, has indicated that Britain could follow Australia’s lead. Last week, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that a similar ban was “on the table”, before telling the Guardian days later that such a move was “not on the cards” for now.

Peter Wanless, the chief executive of the NSPCC, has objected to a ban in the UK, saying social media was an “integral part of young people’s lives”. He called on Ofcom to use the Online Safety Act to hold platforms accountable for tackling the risks children were facing online.

“We understand the concerns about children having access to social media that is fundamentally unsafe for them. However, children deserve to have age-appropriate experiences online rather than being cut off from it altogether,” Wanless said.

“To introduce a blanket ban on under-16s, as Australia have now done, would penalise children for the failures of tech companies to make their sites properly safe for young users and deliver age-appropriate experiences.”

Andy Burrows, the head of the Molly Rose Foundation, which was set up to focus on suicide prevention, called the ban a “kneejerk response that would do more harm than good”.

He said: “Banning under-16s from social media is a retrograde step that would push risks and bad actors on to gaming and messaging services and leave young people at a cliff edge of harm when they turn 16.

“It is crucial the UK government delivers strengthened legislation to make online platforms safe and age appropriate rather than bans that would erase the benefits of regulation and come with a slew of unintended consequences.”

Lady Kidron, a cross-bench peer and influential campaigner for children’s online safety, praised Australia for “pulling the starting gun on tech” but said there were questions about how broadly the ban would be implemented.

“If companies want to build products that are OK for kids, they need to change their extractive models that are both toxic and addictive,” she said. “I hope that Australia uses this moment to demand that the tech sector proves it is fit for purpose.”

Andrew Przybylski, a professor of human behaviour and technology at the University of Oxford, said: “There is no evidence that a ban such as this, even if it was perfect, would provide a benefit to the wellbeing of young people as the underlying science linking social media to wellbeing is itself flawed.”

Effective legislation should be evidence-based, he said, and “include the voice of young people, and hold tech companies to account. This law as it was passed does none of these things and it’s more a question of when, not if, it will be repealed.”

Supporters of the ban say it sends a clear signal that society can stand up to big tech firms. Clare Fernyhough, the co-founder of the parent-led campaign group Smartphone Free Childhood, said: “Australia’s move … proves that together we have the power to create a better future for our kids.

“These companies’ models treat children as a product and seek to profit from them by monopolising their attention. There are undoubtedly positives to social media but they are far outweighed by the downsides – exposure to harmful content, online bullying and a huge opportunity cost.

“Big tech can and must be regulated. These companies have a responsibility to make their platforms truly safe, with robust age verification to prevent underage use. Until then, the only reliable way to protect our children is to delay when we give them a smartphone.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said: “There are no current plans to implement a smartphone or social media ban for children.

“We are focused on finding the best way of ensuring young people are kept safe while also benefiting from the latest technology. By next summer, the Online Safety Act will bring in protections for children to make sure their experiences online are appropriate for their age.”