Women Challenge Meta Over Targeted Ads After Miscarriage

Published: 12 October 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

For many women, discovering they are pregnant prompts a flurry of questions: What does my baby look like at six weeks? When should I book my first midwife appointment? How far along am I? Search engines and social media platforms quickly respond with ads, products, and content aimed at expectant parents. But for some women, these adverts can turn from helpful guidance into a source of profound distress, particularly after a miscarriage.

Sammi Claxon from Blidworth in Nottinghamshire is among those affected. After her first miscarriage in 2021, Sammi suffered four more over the next three years. As she navigated her grief, targeted adverts continued to appear on her social media feeds. “As soon as you get that positive test, you feel like a mother,” Sammi recalls. “You have this future plan in your head and when that’s stripped away from you, it’s awful.”

The psychological impact of these targeted ads was significant. Feelings of shame, embarrassment, and isolation prompted Sammi to turn away from social media entirely. “I ended up taking myself off social media to preserve my mental health,” she says. The constant bombardment of baby-related advertisements became a painful reminder of what she had lost, intensifying the trauma of repeated miscarriages.

Similarly, Tanya O’Carroll experienced intrusive targeting when she became pregnant in 2017. “I just found it unnerving—this was before I’d even told people in my private life,” she told the BBC. Targeted advertising algorithms, designed to identify and engage potential customers based on personal data, had flagged Tanya’s pregnancy and began sending her pregnancy-related adverts, long before she shared the news with friends or family.

Frustrated by the invasive nature of these adverts, Tanya filed a lawsuit against Facebook, now part of Meta, arguing that its targeted advertising system fell under the UK’s definition of direct marketing. The case centred on individuals’ legal rights to object to the use of their personal data for promotional purposes. Meta contended that adverts could only be targeted to groups of at least 100 people, rather than individual users, and therefore did not constitute direct marketing. However, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) disagreed, supporting Tanya’s claim.

In March, Meta agreed to stop targeting Tanya with personalised adverts, effectively allowing her to turn off the intrusive content that had caused significant distress. “In non-legalese, this means I’ve essentially been able to turn off all the creepy, invasive, targeted ads on Facebook,” Tanya explained. According to her legal team, Tanya is now the only Facebook user in the UK who is not subjected to personalised advertising, despite the platform having over 50 million users nationwide.

Tanya’s case has wider implications. More than 10,000 people have since filed objections to Meta, requesting that their data not be used for direct marketing. These objections could lead to further legal challenges, potentially reshaping the way social media companies handle personal data. While the outcome is a landmark victory for Tanya, it has yet to resolve the issue for thousands of women who have experienced miscarriages and continue to be bombarded with pregnancy-related advertisements.

Rhiannon Lawson, from Suffolk, shared her experience with the BBC. The first sight of two blue lines on her pregnancy test filled her and her partner, Mike, with hope. They even gave their baby a name—Fantus, inspired by a children’s character they had seen during visits to friends in Denmark. However, tragedy struck when Rhiannon experienced bleeding, and subsequent tests revealed she had miscarried at eight weeks. Despite this loss, targeted adverts for baby products and pregnancy-related services continued to appear, compounding the emotional pain.

The experiences of Sammi, Tanya, and Rhiannon underscore the sometimes harmful intersection of technology and personal life events. Algorithms designed to assist or engage users can inadvertently amplify trauma, particularly for those navigating the grief of miscarriage. Experts note that while social media platforms often implement safeguards to prevent excessively invasive targeting, the systems are imperfect and reactive rather than proactive.

The legal case against Meta also highlights broader concerns about consent and personal data protection in digital spaces. While the UK’s direct marketing regulations grant individuals the right to object to the use of their personal data, enforcement remains challenging, particularly against global technology companies with complex algorithms and advertising frameworks. Tanya’s successful objection illustrates that meaningful control over personal data is possible, but it is often a legal and bureaucratic hurdle that many users may be unaware of or unable to navigate without support.

Social media companies argue that personalised adverts provide users with more relevant content and enhance engagement. However, the emotional toll experienced by users like Sammi and Rhiannon demonstrates that relevance does not always equate to appropriateness or sensitivity. Targeted adverts triggered by personal milestones—such as pregnancy—can inadvertently cause distress when circumstances change, particularly in cases of pregnancy loss, bereavement, or other sensitive life events.

Sammi emphasizes the isolation that such adverts can create. “It’s not just the ads—it’s the feeling that your grief is somehow visible to the world, or that technology is reminding you of what you’ve lost every day,” she says. For many, this creates an environment where turning off social media or disengaging from digital platforms becomes necessary for mental health, highlighting the need for more compassionate algorithmic design.

Legal experts and privacy advocates are calling for stricter regulations around algorithmic targeting, particularly in cases involving sensitive personal data. They argue that platforms must implement better safeguards to protect vulnerable users and allow individuals more meaningful control over how their data is used. Tanya’s case sets an important precedent, demonstrating that social media companies can be held accountable under existing data protection and marketing laws.

For Rhiannon, the continued exposure to pregnancy-related advertising served as an unintentional trigger, reigniting grief and disappointment every time she logged into social media. “Even though we named our baby and had a moment of hope, seeing adverts constantly made the loss feel fresh again,” she explains. This reflects the broader societal impact of algorithm-driven content, where personal milestones and tragedies can become commercialised experiences.

As legal frameworks evolve and public awareness increases, there is hope that more users will be able to protect themselves from invasive, emotionally triggering advertisements. Meanwhile, the experiences of women like Sammi, Tanya, and Rhiannon serve as a cautionary tale about the unintended consequences of digital marketing systems. Their stories highlight the urgent need for platforms to balance commercial interests with the well-being of users, particularly when dealing with sensitive life events such as pregnancy and miscarriage.

The ongoing debate also raises questions about accountability and transparency. Users must often navigate opaque settings and complex privacy policies to manage targeted advertising. The challenge lies not only in enforcing regulations but in creating digital environments that respect the emotional and psychological needs of users, particularly those in vulnerable circumstances.

While Tanya’s legal victory provides a glimmer of hope, it remains clear that many individuals continue to struggle with intrusive advertising in deeply personal contexts. The broader implications for Meta, other social media platforms, and the advertising industry as a whole are significant, with the potential to reshape practices and policies around personalised marketing, data privacy, and user consent.