In the wake of heightened digital surveillance and the erosion of privacy, concerns about period tracking apps have come to the forefront, particularly since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. The use and access to reproductive data have become hotly contested. Period tracking apps are widely used digital tools designed to help women monitor their menstrual and fertility cycles, providing insights into various health aspects. Although often celebrated for their convenience and user-friendliness, these applications, used by millions globally, bring with them significant privacy implications. The femtech industry’s rapid growth is underscored by its potential to reach a market value of $60 billion by 2027, highlighting both the demand for and the controversy surrounding these apps. As developers harness the personal information users willingly provide, questions arise regarding the ethical and lawful handling of this sensitive data by companies.
Exposing the Commercialization of Personal Data
The business model of many period tracking apps typically relies on the commercialization of user data, selling valuable information to third parties for revenue. Various companies in the femtech sector have adopted this approach, often involving social media companies, data brokers, and advertisers who exploit insights for targeted advertising. Such commodification of personal data presents serious privacy and safety risks, as noted by entities like the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge. While users gain insights into their health, they inadvertently pay with their privacy, as apps routinely share sensitive health data with external parties that may not prioritize user protection. Among these, Flo Health, one of the most popular apps, faced legal challenges in a class-action lawsuit launched in 2021 over allegations of sharing sensitive health data without informed user consent. While Flo Health has been prominent in discussions, it’s far from isolated; across regions with less stringent data protection laws, users find themselves similarly vulnerable.
Moreover, in regions like Asia where data protection mechanisms are less robust, apps like India’s Maya have faced scrutiny. In 2019, it was reported that Maya shared user data with Facebook, raising privacy concerns despite the app denying sharing personally identifiable information. The data extracted from these apps carry considerable commercial value as users’ life stages and purchasing behaviors change. This syndicated data can guide advertisers in targeting women with personalized marketing, such as promoting cosmetic products or healthcare solutions. Beyond commercial exploitation, digital menstrual data presents additional concerns relating to legal frameworks and use by authorities. The extent of data access has practical implications, as demonstrated by instances where U.S. law enforcement has probed individuals’ online histories, like social media and search activities, to build cases related to abortion. Such utilization aims to translate digital evidence into legal action, posing significant threats to individual privacy.
The Threat of Digital Surveillance and Legal Risks
Digital surveillance leaves users vulnerable. Legal risks have been highlighted following recent legal reforms, such as those seen in Britain. Here, the Supreme Court decision allowed for scrutinizing unexpected pregnancy losses, with possible criminal consequences if terminations occur after twenty-four weeks. This heightened scrutiny indicates the willingness of authorities to delve into private information sourced from digital devices during investigations. Accessing search histories, app data, or online interactions allows digital surveillance to supersede traditional privacy rights, translating individual health tracking efforts into legal scrutiny. Examining digital footprints to prosecute women has sparked debates on how embedded surveillance has become within legal practices. The personal autonomy of women is now increasingly under observation, manifesting a troubling reality where devices intended for personal health management are transformed into tools capable of contributing to evidence against end users.
Anchored by such unforeseeable risks, it’s evident that current operation models adopted by most period tracking apps prioritize profit over privacy, elevating user data security vulnerabilities. While users might be initially drawn by health benefits, the complexities surrounding potential misuse by authorities amplify existing risks. Navigating this landscape involves reconciling technological innovation with ethical obligations towards individual rights, emphasizing the pivotal need for legal frameworks and governance that bolster user protection. As the debate ensues, stakeholders—ranging from tech companies to policymakers—are urged to reassess practices to harmonize privacy with digital advancements while setting precedents for conscientious data handling.
Navigating a Path Forward for Privacy and Innovation
Many period tracking apps operate by monetizing user data, selling it to third parties, such as social media companies, data brokers, and advertisers, for targeted marketing. This practice is prevalent in the femtech industry and poses significant privacy and safety risks. For example, the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge highlights these concerns. Users receive health insights but often at the cost of their privacy, as their sensitive data is shared without prioritizing user protection. One well-known app, Flo Health, faced a class-action lawsuit in 2021 over accusations of sharing personal data without proper user consent. While Flo Health faced particular scrutiny, similar issues arise in regions with lax data protection laws. In Asia, for instance, India’s Maya app came under fire in 2019 for allegedly sharing data with Facebook. These apps use data to target users with personalized ads, potentially relating to their purchasing behaviors. Additionally, there are concerns about legal authorities accessing digital menstrual data for legal proceedings, threatening individual privacy.
