This study is part of an ongoing research project, “The parent-child communication implications of IFAs,” that aims to better understand the impacts of IFAs on parent-child communication among Australian families. The project broadly problematizes the inclusion of a screen as a novel component within early processes of infant feeding, but also acknowledges the potential benefits IFAs offer, especially to first-time parents. A key aim was to explore the motivations and concerns that support parents’ use of IFAs and the reasons why some parents might choose not to use them or might discontinue their use. Of particular relevance to this paper were motivations and concerns around privacy practices and terms and conditions.

The data used in this study were collected using a descriptive qualitative design comprising 2 rounds of interviews followed by focus group sessions. The data reported here are derived from 1 of the 2 focus groups conducted as part of a larger study. For inclusivity and flexibility in recruitment, participants were able to join either session according to their convenience. Data collection was concluded once thematic saturation was reached and when additional sessions were unlikely to yield new insights or generate further data.

Having multiple points of data collection created a degree of semilongitudinal data to capture parents’ evolving views, while focus groups have the potential to expand data as participants’ views may be supported or challenged by engaging in collective dialogue with others [18]. A semistructured interview guide was developed with questions designed to explore parents’ data privacy perspectives in the use of IFAs and in their broader digital parenting (Textbox 1).

A total of 24 English-speaking participants were interviewed in 2024. Although recruitment targeted parents of infants aged 0 to 4 years, the actual age distribution was 1 to 10 months at the time of the first round of interviews. The IFA project collected qualitative data from participants through 2 rounds of semistructured interviews, followed by a series of focus groups. Of the initial 24 participants who took part in a first-round interview, 22 returned for a second-round interview approximately 6 months later, with 7 returning for a focus group. All participants were breastfeeding mothers of children at the time of the first round of interviews. A total of 46 interviews and 2 focus groups were conducted online between mid-2023 and mid-2024. Recruitment took place online via social media, predominantly through Facebook mothers’ groups, using the snowball method. Participants received an AUD $50 (US $33) gift card at each data collection point.

The semistructured interviews were conducted online. The interviews were recorded with a digital audio-recording device and transcribed by the same researcher who performed the interviews. The interviews lasted a mean of 45 (SD 15) minutes.

Interviews and focus groups were transcribed and deidentified before coding in NVivo software (version 1.7.1; Lumivero). Before coding, the research team read through the interviews several times to become familiar with the transcripts and achieve deep immersion in the data. Subsequently, initial codes were systematically developed inductively and organized into subthemes and overarching thematic categories. Multiple researchers assisted in reviewing and examining the coded material within each theme and assisted in defining and refining the themes through the writing up of this study. Of the 5 final codes, the most relevant to this paper is number 4, “Data and/or Privacy Practices,” which was divided into further subcategories and themes.

To ensure rigor, interpretations of the coded data emerged from ongoing iterative discussions between all authors of the paper using reflexive thematic analysis [19]; as such, the authors acknowledge that their differing disciplinary and lifeworld perspectives influence their readings of the data, and that more comprehensive readings are potentially made accessible through interdisciplinary dialogue. This study employed reflexive thematic analysis to systematically elucidate patterns of meaning within parents’ narratives. The analytic process was strengthened by deliberate reflexivity, enabling critical examination of researchers’ preconceptions and fostering methodological transparency. Furthermore, the integration of surveillance theory as an interpretive framework informed the development of latent codes, thereby enhancing the conceptual depth and analytic rigor of thematic constructs.

In the context of this research, IFAs constituted any smartphone app that assisted parents to support or track their children’s feeding routine; overarchingly, this meant breastfeeding mothers; however, as the data are semilongitudinal, some participants were in the process of shifting to solid food. The most common IFAs used by parents were “Huckleberry” and “Solid Starts.” Of the 24 participants, 6 either did not regularly use IFAs at the time of the research or had never regularly used IFAs.

Data collection was undertaken by researchers from the Edith Cowan University node of the Australian Research Council Center of Excellence for the Digital Child under the oversight of Chief Investigator Professor Lelia Green. The project received approval from Edith Cowan University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number 2022‐03677-GREEN) and was funded by the Australian Research Council Center of Excellence for the Digital Child (project number CE200100022).

All eligible participants were provided written information about the study, and their consent was obtained before data collection.

A total of 24 English-speaking participants were interviewed in 2024. Participant characteristics are reported in Table 1. Infants ranged in age from 1 month to 10 months at the time of the first interview, with balanced representation across genders and the highest proportion observed at 7 months. The duration of IFA use varied between 6 and 24 weeks at the time of the last interview and/or focus group. The majority of participants were based in Western Australia (n=13), with additional representation from New South Wales (n=4), Queensland (n=4), Victoria (n=2), and the Australian Capital Territory (n=1). Across the sample, patterns of parental engagement with IFAs were diverse. While some participants reported minimal or selective use, others actively engaged with multiple apps. Huckleberry, Solid Starts, and Wonder Weeks were the most frequently used.

Across the entire project, 4 initial codes were generated through NVivo software (version 1.7.1). The final initial themes included the following:

This paper specifically focuses on Theme 4: Data Privacy, which was refined through reflexive thematic analysis across 3 iterative cycles. During this process, the 3 initial codes were refined and reorganized into two main themes:

Under this theme, mothers reflected on the measures they employed to mitigate their concerns around data privacy. This included various measures, such as selective disclosure when participants withheld or altered personal details, or avoiding child images or using shortened names.

Some mothers adopted privacy-conscious behaviors such as using pseudonyms or incomplete personal information (eg, incorrect birth dates) to reduce their exposure.

Similarly, Lucia emphasized her ability to control disclosure, stating:

Several other mothers, such as Helena, Lauretta, and Semra, shared actions that reflected privacy-conscious behavior and increasing awareness of data vulnerabilities and concern over potential surveillance of their data:

Another participant echoed:

Overall, mothers’ awareness of privacy risks generally did not strongly influence their behavior, and many admit they haven’t given much thought to the potential risks. As Morgana noted, her concerns about data privacy increased after a Facebook hack, leading her to reduce her online activity:

Our findings suggest a dynamic interplay between awareness of surveillance, leading to selective disclosure and deidentification. It shows that mothers acknowledged vulnerabilities and privacy concerns, yet they actively negotiated their engagement and adopted everyday privacy practices that allowed continued use with unease.

In this study, we explored mothers’ understanding of the terms and conditions associated with IFAs and their data privacy concerns. The first emerging theme was awareness and acceptance of terms and conditions. Our findings show that participants demonstrated awareness that engaging with IFAs involved data collection and potential privacy risk. Despite this, many described accepting terms and conditions without reading these in detail, often citing limited time or the perceived inevitability of such practices. For some, this acceptance was framed as a trust in implied digital security, while others expressed resignation, noting that data collection is now an unavoidable aspect of online activity. A few participants articulated the belief that “everyone‘s data are up for sale,” reflecting a broader recognition that privacy compromises are inherent in the use of digital devices and apps.

Building on these insights, it is important to note that control over data remains a fundamental right. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s report [20] emphasized reforms to ensure consumers are informed and protected in how their data are used (p. 3). Privacy is negotiated through balanced disclosure with protection [21], but information shared through IFAs may persist, be widely distributed, and be repurposed in unintended ways [22-25]. Our findings show that while some participants acknowledged the potential of their data to be distributed or reused, most participants expressed acceptance of such practices as an unavoidable aspect of digital engagement. In Australia, the Privacy Act sets out 13 Australian Privacy Principles based on a notice and consent model, which places responsibility on individuals to manage their own personal information and to interpret complex privacy policies [26]. For many participants, reviewing such policies was unrealistic due to time constraints or trust in implied protections, a finding consistent with prior research [27]. These findings underscore the limits of privacy self-management and reinforce calls for a mandated “privacy by design” approach, embedding protections into platform development from the outset [28].

Digital privacy is critical for all users of platforms that collect personal data and is widely regarded as essential for protecting consumers from unwanted access and misuse [29].

Privacy carries a positive value, while invasion of privacy is seen as a violation of a protected interest. In this way, participants in this study reflected the broader social narrative that privacy should be protected in digital space [30]. This is consistent with the right to privacy in the digital age that was affirmed by the United Nations General Assembly and the Human Rights Council [31], requiring that any interference meet the principles of legality and proportionality, while noting that emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, can affect this right [32].

Despite these protections, many remain resigned to threats from big data, cloud computing, and profiling [33]. Participants in the study accepted that app-collected data could be commodified, expecting it might be used or sold. This raises complex questions about when online data are classified as public or private, whether their reuse constitutes intervention without consent, and how individuals’ privacy can be safeguarded [34].

The second emerging theme was risk-mitigation behaviors, where participants described exercising a degree of control over the data they shared by adopting strategies to mitigate perceived risks. These included using pseudonyms rather than real names and obfuscating identifiers such as date of birth. Participants also constructed personal boundaries around what information they considered acceptable to disclose. For example, not sharing visual images was important to one mother, while another noted that the type of information shared, such as the number of feeds or nappy changes, did not feel too personal to share more widely.

Overall, participants perceived the benefits of engaging with IFAs as outweighing the potential risks. Many described a willingness to forgo privacy concerns in exchange for higher levels of perceived convenience. The majority of mothers described focusing more on the mobile app’s utility than on the potential data privacy violations. Trust in the security of digital systems and a belief in having some control over the information shared contributed to this sense of acceptance. These findings highlight the complex interplay between utility and privacy trade-offs and are discussed in relation to current debates on data privacy in online environments.

Some participants in this study believed they could protect their privacy by altering key identifiers, such as date of birth. This highlights which types of information about themselves were considered more sensitive than behavioral data like feeding or changing routines. Obscuring personal information is not new and is practiced offline as well [35], with individuals deciding how much to reveal in different contexts.

Online, people sometimes create “Amateur Artists” [36] to protect their privacy. These disguises can range from complete reinvention [37] to small changes, like those seen in this study, where mothers adjusted details but still felt their data reflected real experiences while giving them some protection. Not everyone supports this practice. Zuckerberg argues that having more than one identity shows a lack of integrity and that people should present a single, authentic self online [38,39]. Similarly, Google’s Eric Schmidt claimed that “Innocent people have nothing to hide” [40], suggesting privacy concerns are unnecessary.

Our finding is that self-disclosure is complex, with different views on what counts as personal and sensitive information. Literature highlights dimensions such as the depth and value of what is shared [41]; for example, demographic details may be seen as less sensitive than private photos or emotions. However, individuals may share private data unknowingly due to limited risk awareness [42,43], lack of knowledge about ways to protect data [44], or not being aware of how data are distributed postsubmission [45].

Consent remains central to the use of digital data; reliable collection depends on mutual respect and trust between parties [30]. IFAs that require login, membership, or subscription create a sense of “perceived privacy,” yet most participants in this study did not expect their data to be shared beyond the app and may not have realized this was possible [46]. Consistent with earlier reports, concerns relating to the security of their data have led some users to stop or delete IFAs [47,48], but research on the link between privacy and security in mobile apps remains limited [49,50]. Evidence shows that privacy risks reduce trust in app security, while clear policies can strengthen it. In the health context, privacy can only be assured where individuals control their information and prevent unnecessary disclosure [51,52]. Digital safety is increasingly recognized as essential, particularly for children and young people [53]. Building digital safety requires self-efficacy, knowledge, and skills related to managing risks. Awareness of digital safety can assist parents in adopting strategies to safeguard themselves and their families [53].

The findings of this study were limited by the restricted demographic data collected and the sample profile. This study was limited to English-speaking Australians, breastfeeding mothers recruited mainly via Facebook, which may limit diversity and generalizability. This recruitment strategy may have introduced selection bias and limited the diversity of perspectives, particularly among culturally and linguistically diverse parents or those with lower levels of digital literacy. Consequently, the findings should be interpreted within the context of the participant profile and may not fully reflect the experiences of caregivers from different backgrounds.

Another limitation is the absence of information on socioeconomic and educational data, which further constrains contextual interpretation. These factors may have influenced perspectives on digital privacy and engagement with IFAs, and their absence restricts the ability to fully contextualize findings. However, the study was designed to focus on parents’ experiences and perceptions of IFA use rather than to compare outcomes across demographic groups. While this approach provided valuable insights into usage patterns and parental perspectives, future studies would benefit from including broader demographic variables to capture how diverse backgrounds may shape digital practices and privacy concerns. Use of mixed methods and longitudinal approaches can enrich data by combining both qualitative and quantitative insights into privacy literacy and behaviors.

Parents of young children carry dual responsibilities as advocates and primary caregivers [54], and many now rely on digital apps, such as IFAs, to track and manage health behaviors. Breastfeeding as a socially and emotionally charged practice has become increasingly mediated through digital tools, reflecting the demand for accessible, time-sensitive information [55,56]. While such technologies present opportunities for increased access to education and health promotion [57], they also introduce risks that require careful negotiation [53]. Our study shows that mothers’ engagement with IFAs is shaped by 2 key dynamics: awareness and acceptance of terms and conditions and risk-mitigation behaviors. This paper has highlighted the varying levels of awareness among mothers of how data about themselves and their child can be used and their expectations of how personal information will be kept confidential and secure through their engagement with a breastfeeding mobile app. The findings highlight the need for action toward privacy by design, transparency in privacy policies, and nonalienation in relation to the use of data. The use of IFAs reveals a paradox: mothers acknowledge the inevitability of data collection, yet actively resist through boundary-setting and risk-mitigation. Embedding privacy by design and fostering genuine trust in IFAs is essential to protect both parental and child well-being

Our findings highlight the importance of transparent privacy policies and respect for contextual integrity and user-centered safeguards that enhance digital safety, protect against hidden risks, and ensure accountability in data use.