On a Tuesday morning last October, Dani Osei put her phone in a drawer and didn't take it out until Thursday evening. This wasn't a punishment or a productivity hack. It was, she told me, "something I've been doing once a month for about two years." She's a graphic designer in Prospect Heights, Brooklyn. She has 11,000 followers on Instagram and a client list that includes two well-known consumer brands. The drawer is in her kitchen.
"People assume I'm detoxing," she said. "Like something bad happened and I need to recover. But I'm not recovering from anything. I'm just making space. It feels more like watering a plant."
Osei is one of a growing number of people who have built deliberate, recurring practices of disconnection into their lives — not as a crisis response, not as a trend, but as something closer to a discipline. They're not luddites. Most of them are active and even enthusiastic technology users the rest of the time. What they share is the conviction that being connected by default is not the same as being connected intentionally, and that the difference matters.
The case against smartphones and social media has been made so many times, by so many people, that it risks losing its force. We know the argument: these platforms are designed to capture attention, they're doing it successfully, and extended use is correlated with anxiety, fragmented thinking, and a diminished capacity for sustained focus. The research is contested at the margins but broadly consistent in its direction.
What's less often discussed is the variety of ways people are responding — not by abandoning technology wholesale, but by building structures around it. The digital sabbath, a practice borrowed from religious observance, has spread well beyond religious communities. The "dumb phone" movement has attracted people who want something that makes calls and not much else. There are writers who draft longhand, therapists who schedule "no phone" hours, parents who maintain device-free evenings. These aren't unified by a philosophy so much as a shared intuition: that default-on is not the only option.
Marcus Bell, a 34-year-old software engineer in Astoria, Queens, keeps his phone out of his bedroom and charges it in the hallway. He has done this for three years. "I was spending the last hour before bed and the first thirty minutes of the morning on my phone," he told me. "Not doing anything in particular. Just scrolling. I was tired all the time and I didn't understand why until I tracked my sleep and realized I was getting to sleep about 45 minutes later than I thought I was." The bedroom phone ban didn't solve everything. But he describes the mornings now as quieter in a way that has compounded over time. "I have thoughts before I have reactions. That sounds small, but it's actually quite different."
There's a body of research on what happens when the mind is not occupied — when attention is neither captured by a task nor bombarded by input. The default mode network, a set of brain regions that become active during mind-wandering and self-referential thought, is implicated in creativity, emotional processing, and what psychologists call "prospective memory" — the mental simulation of future events. It's not downtime in any pejorative sense. It's a different kind of work.
The problem is that it requires a kind of boredom the modern environment makes hard to achieve. There are always more notifications, more content, more people trying to reach you. The slack in a day — the moments of waiting, of transit, of nothing in particular — has been colonized. Researchers at UC Santa Barbara have found that even the presence of a smartphone on a desk, not in use, reduces available cognitive capacity. The pull of potential connection is itself distracting.
"We're not studying people who've opted out of technology. We're studying what happens to attention when technology is ambient — always available, always potentially demanding a response."
— Dr. Patricia Nguyen, attention researcher, paraphrased from published work
Deliberate disconnection, in this context, is less about the device itself and more about removing the ambient potential of it. When Osei puts her phone in the kitchen drawer, she's not primarily avoiding Instagram. She's removing the low-grade monitoring that comes with having a device that might need her at any moment.
I spoke with nine people who maintain some form of deliberate disconnection practice. They ranged in age from 26 to 58. Some were in creative fields; others in finance, medicine, and education. What they described as benefits was strikingly consistent across very different contexts.
Almost everyone mentioned boredom, and almost everyone described it positively. "The first few hours, I'm restless," said Osei. "By the second day, things start coming to me. Ideas. Memories. Plans I'd been deferring." Bell described a similar sequence: an initial discomfort followed by what he called "the good kind of quiet." A therapist I spoke with who maintains phone-free Saturday mornings said her best professional thinking happens in those hours — not because she's thinking about work, but because "my mind starts making connections I don't make when I'm responsive."
Several people mentioned that they'd become better at tolerating uncertainty. When you're not checking your phone, you don't know things — whether a message arrived, whether an email was received, whether someone responded. Living with that unknowing, even briefly, seems to reduce the compulsion to check. "I used to pick up my phone if it was charging in another room," said Rachel Vos, a 38-year-old teacher in Crown Heights. "Now I can leave it there for hours without thinking about it. I don't think I could have done that before."
The hardest part, most people said, is not the absence of the phone. It's explaining the absence to others. We've built a social infrastructure around the assumption of immediate availability. Unanswered messages carry implied meaning. A person who doesn't respond within a few hours is either busy, ignoring you, or something is wrong. The expectation of presence has become a social norm so pervasive it's largely invisible — until someone violates it.
Osei handles this by telling close friends and colleagues about her Tuesday-Thursday practice. "They know. And actually, a few of them have started doing something similar. I think when someone you know does it, it makes it seem possible rather than weird." Bell posts a short note to his calendar and occasionally to a group chat when he's going to be less responsive. "I don't make a big thing of it. But I used to feel like I needed to justify it. I don't anymore."
What strikes me about these accounts is how practical they are. There's no spirituality in them (or not necessarily), no anti-technology politics, no productivity guru framing. These are people who have found, through iteration, that time spent genuinely alone — not just physically alone while monitoring a device — gives them something they weren't getting otherwise. They're not rejecting the world. They're making room in it.
Osei put her phone back in the drawer when I left. She smiled the way people do when they're explaining a habit that sounds stranger than it is. "It's just watering the plant," she said again. "You don't have to think too hard about why plants need water."
Post is reader-supported. No ads. Subscriber access funds the journalism.
Subscribe from $7/month