UK Government responds to concerns over women's health content censorship online
Addresses Women and Equalities Committee report published earlier this year
The UK Government has formally responded to concerns about the suppression of women’s health content online, marking another step in the growing political scrutiny of how social media platforms treat information related to women’s health.
In March 2026, the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) dedicated a section of its report on menstrual health to the issue of social media censorship and shadowbanning, citing evidence from CensHERship as well as clinicians, charities and women’s health organisations.
The Committee recommended that social media platforms should be held accountable for the inappropriate suppression of women’s health information and called for greater scrutiny of how content moderation systems impact access to health information.
In its response, published this week, the Government pointed to provisions within the Online Safety Act 2023 that require platforms to consider users’ rights to freedom of expression and ensure their terms of service are applied consistently.
The response also highlights the need for platforms to provide complaints and redress mechanisms when content is wrongly removed or restricted.
The Government said it agreed with the Committee’s broader recommendations to improve women’s health outcomes and experiences, acknowledging the impact that menstrual health conditions can have on women’s lives, education and participation in the workforce.
However, while the response outlines existing legislative protections, it stops short of introducing any new measures specifically aimed at tackling the inappropriate restriction of women’s health content online.
The Government also declined to commit to several recommendations made by the Committee, including measurable actions on online misinformation, new initiatives to address censorship of women’s health content and additional commitments relating to the needs of disabled and Deaf women.
Calls for stronger action
Responding to the Government’s position, Women and Equalities Committee Chair Sarah Owen MP welcomed the renewed focus on women’s health but warned that progress must be backed by meaningful investment and action.
“There are both opportunities and risks when it comes to increasing use of technology in women’s healthcare,” she said.
Sarah Owen identified two areas of concern: the inappropriate suppression of women's health content online and the need for greater scrutiny of some digital health products.
“As the Committee’s report set out, social media companies should be held to account for inappropriate and disgraceful ‘shadow banning’ censorship of important women’s health content and there should be a rigorous approach to tackling the risks from ineffective, unsafe and exploitative for-profit FemTech apps.”
“The Government should take the problem of ‘shadow banning’ more seriously.”
The comments highlight how policymakers are increasingly examining not only access to women's health information online, but also the wider role of technology and digital health products within women's healthcare.
As FemTech adoption grows, questions around evidence, safety, transparency and accountability are also moving further up the policy agenda.
Significant gaps
Owen also raised concerns that the Government’s renewed Women’s Health Strategy lacks sufficient funding and measurable targets, warning that without stronger commitments it risks only “scratching the surface” of the issues facing women and girls.
The response follows the publication of the Government’s renewed Women’s Health Strategy in April, which included £1.5 million in funding for women’s health hubs and a renewed focus on reducing gynaecology waiting lists, improving patient experience and tackling what ministers described as “medical misogyny”.
However, the Women and Equalities Committee argues that significant gaps remain between the ambitions outlined in the strategy and the practical measures needed to deliver change. It said that it had produced a report back in 2024 on medical misogyny and called on the Government then to recognise the benefits of increased investment in early diagnosis and treatment.
“While it’s welcome to see a focus on tackling ‘medical misogyny’ in April’s renewed Women’s Health Strategy and an emphasis on women’s voices being heard, this must be backed by adequate funding, not financial half measures, particularly when compared to men’s health,” added Sarah Owen MP.
Alongside these concerns and those on online censorship, MPs also highlighted the absence of new commitments on other areas too.
“Significant questions remain following today’s response publication over the adequacy of investment being provided, including for workforce training, menstrual health education in schools, research and additional ring-fenced funding for women’s health hubs to deliver services within the emerging neighbourhood health framework,” continued Sarah Owen MP.
The response comes after recent analysis by The Times showing that the Government is allocating 60% more funding to its men’s health strategy than its renewed strategy for women’s health.
“A strategy which does not fully address the concerns set out in WEC’s report, alongside measurable actions and timescales, will only scratch the surface of the issues facing women’s health,” said Sarah Own MP.
“WEC will keep a close eye on progress and continue to push for long overdue tangible change for women and girls.”
Censorship moves into policy mainstream
On shadowbanning specifically, the Government’s response represents another milestone in the evolution of a debate that until recently was often dismissed as anecdotal.
Over the past two years, concerns about the suppression of women’s health content have expanded from individual complaints by creators, charities and companies to parliamentary inquiries, committee reports, parliamentary debate and now formal Government responses.
Research by CensHERship found that 95% of women’s health organisations surveyed have experienced censorship, shadowbanning or content restrictions online, with examples spanning fertility, menopause, sexual health, pregnancy, endometriosis and gynaecological cancers.
In May 2026, the issue was also debated in Parliament during a Westminster Hall debate on menstrual health and medical misogyny, where MPs raised concerns about the impact that social media censorship can have on access to information, support and health education.
“Just a few years ago, the censorship of women’s health content was routinely dismissed as isolated incidents or anecdotal experiences,” said Anna O’Sullivan, co-founder of CensHERship.
"The fact that it has now been debated in Parliament, cited in official committee reports and addressed in a formal Government response shows how far the conversation has progressed."
“Recognition is an important first step. But we now need Government, regulators and platforms themselves to ensure those protections are more than words on paper."