A calmer way through the scroll: helping parents judge pregnancy information online

Expectant and new parents do not need another voice telling them never to use social media. They need a practical way to pause, check and decide what deserves their trust. Registrants can help them build that confidence.

Pregnancy can transform an ordinary social-media feed. One search for birth bags, feeding positions or newborn sleep may be followed by a stream of confident advice, dramatic personal stories and perfectly edited “must-have” products. Some posts are supportive and accurate. Others are incomplete, commercially influenced or simply wrong. The difficulty is that they can look remarkably similar.

This is not a niche concern. Research published by the Government when it launched its Best Start in Life campaign in October 2025 found that 33% of parents of young children used social media for support. Sixty-eight per cent said they struggled to trust conflicting advice, while 69% felt overwhelmed by the amount of information available.

Ofcom’s *Online Nation 2025* report offers wider context. It found that 41% of UK adult internet users surveyed had encountered misinformation during the previous four weeks, and 22% reported seeing fake or deceptive images or videos. The Online Safety Act 2023 has introduced important duties for online services, but it does not turn every questionable health post into regulated or removed content. Parents still need usable media-literacy skills.

For antenatal educators, breastfeeding counsellors, doulas and postnatal practitioners, the aim is not to become the internet police. Nor is it to dismiss online communities, which can reduce isolation and help families find peer support. A better goal is to give parents a calm checking routine they can use when a post makes them curious, worried or ready to spend money.

The PAUSE check

A memorable five-part check can slow the jump from seeing a claim to believing or sharing it.

P — Pause at the emotional hook.

Does the post make you feel frightened, guilty, angry or urgently responsible for preventing a disaster? Strong emotion does not prove that a claim is false, but it is a good reason to stop before acting. Content designed for maximum engagement often compresses complex subjects into a crisis, a secret or a single “right” answer.

A — Ask who is speaking.

Is the creator named? Can their relevant qualifications, registration or professional role be checked independently? A large following, a blue tick, a white coat or the word “expert” is not the same as accountable competence. Look beyond a profile biography. Where a person claims to be regulated or registered, use the regulator’s or register holder’s own search facility.

Also ask whether the speaker is describing personal experience or giving general advice. A birth story can be honest and valuable without predicting what will happen to someone else.

U — Understand the claim.

What exactly is being promised? Be cautious with absolute language such as “always”, “never”, “guaranteed”, “toxin-free”, “doctors won’t tell you” or “one simple trick”. Pregnancy, birth, feeding and infant care are rarely well served by certainty detached from individual circumstances.

Notice what is missing. Does the post discuss benefits but not risks, or quote a statistic without saying who was studied? Is a treatment being recommended without contraindications, alternatives or advice about when to seek clinical assessment?

S — See the source and the sale.

Can the original evidence be found, or does the post refer vaguely to “research”? A link to an NHS page, a professional guideline, a peer-reviewed paper or an official public-health source lets the reader examine context. A screenshot of a headline does not.

Then follow the money. Is the creator paid, receiving commission, selling a course or using the post to funnel viewers towards a supplement, test or device? Commercial involvement does not automatically invalidate information, but it should be declared and weighed. Advertising rules apply online too, although non-compliant content can still appear.

E — Escalate when it is personal or urgent.

General content cannot assess an individual. If a post leads someone to question a symptom, medicine, test result, baby’s movements, feeding difficulty or mental health concern, the right next step is an appropriate healthcare professional or service. Urgent concerns should go through the urgent maternity or emergency route advised locally.

The safest educational phrase may be: “That is worth checking with the professional who knows your circumstances.” It respects the question without turning a class or direct message into a clinical consultation.

How to teach the check without creating more anxiety

Media literacy works best when it is practised, not preached. Put two fictional posts on a slide and ask the group what they would check first. One might be broadly reliable but missing a source; the other might combine a real fact with an exaggerated sales claim. The exercise is not to catch people out. It shows that credibility is rarely judged by one clue.

Build a small “trusted starting points” page into course materials. It might include the NHS, GOV.UK, the family’s local maternity service and relevant recognised charities or professional bodies. Keep the list short enough to use and review it regularly so broken links or outdated guidance do not undermine confidence.

It is also helpful to explain how professional accountability differs from popularity. A FEDANT Registrant has met requirements for entry to a National Register and works within a Code of Ethics and Practice. Their registration can be checked. That does not mean a registrant will know everything, but it does mean there is a defined scope, a duty to keep knowledge current and a route for concerns. Online, those safeguards are not automatic.

Practitioners should apply the same discipline to their own posts. Separate education from individual advice, cite the source of important claims, date material that may change, disclose advertising relationships and avoid implying certainty that the evidence does not support. Before sharing a dramatic story, ask whether it informs families or merely borrows their fear for attention.

Confidence, not dependence

The most useful outcome is not a parent who checks every question with one practitioner. It is a parent who can recognise a reliable starting point, notice when something does not add up and seek the right help. That is informed choice in a digital environment.

Social media will remain part of pregnancy and early parenthood. It can offer humour at 3 a.m., connection on an isolated day and ideas that prompt valuable conversations. The answer is not a scolding ban on scrolling. It is a small pause between the post and the decision—a pause filled with curiosity, evidence and appropriate professional support.

Sources and further reading

• Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care, *Parents supported to navigate early years misinformation online*, 14 October 2025: Read source
• Ofcom, *Online Nation 2025*: Read source
• Ofcom, *Enforcing the Online Safety Act: platforms must start tackling illegal material*, 17 March 2025: Read source
• FEDANT, *Check a Registration*: Read source