top of page

iOS data deletion

Navigating platform and regulatory conflicts to produce a high-impact support solution.

cerebral logo.png

At a glance

Screenshot 2026-03-14 at 4.35.43 PM.png

My roles

Content Designer and Strategist

Collaborated with

PM (Retention), Sr. Director of Client Support, Chief of Compliance, Engineers, Legal

Duration

~1.5 weeks from discovery to launch

Summary and problem

  • iOS users trying to cancel their Cerebral subscriptions were, instead, entering a data deletion flow due to unclear CTA wording.​

  • Support was burdened by recurring efforts redirecting users to the correct flow.​

  • Data deletion flow did not account for different user states, lacked explicit wording, and did not clearly specify legal constraints and consequences of deleting data

Solution

  • I clarified intent at the flow entry point (CTA)

  • Introduced state-based logic that reflected user subscription statuses (Active, Cancelled, Cancellation in progress)

  • Merged legal and operational requirements into a structured flow

Impact

93.3% decrease in support emails (6% -> 0.4%)

cerebral logo.png

User and business risks

Operational costs

Support teams were repeatedly redirecting iphone users who were trying to cancel their subscriptions, but instead were ending up in a flow about deleting their data.

​

This was creating avoidable ticket loops and accounting for 6% of support requests, tracked via Zendesk.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.24.30 AM.png

Regulatory exposure

Due to unclear wording, users were initiating full account deletion without understanding what data would legally remain.

​

This created risk of misinterpretation, compliance scrutiny, and potential legal complaints.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.22.14 AM.png

Platform dependencies

Apple required in-app account deletion (and associated data deletion request) for apps that support account creation. 

​

This limited our ability to redesign or remove the flow entirely, forcing us to resolve confusion within strict platform guidelines.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.26.20 AM.png

Retention tension

The Retention PM and Sr. Director of Client Support required intentional friction in the cancellation experience to reduce churn. 

​

Clarifying the deletion flow risked making subscription cancellation easier, requiring careful separation of the two processes without undermining business goals.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.27.25 AM.png
cerebral logo.png

4 Backend constraints

Apple mandate

We were required to provide in-app data and account deletion for iPhone users.

 

​​Apple’s App Store policy required that any app offering account creation must also provide a way to request account and data deletion in-app. 

 

​​Removing or hiding the flow was not an option, so the solution had to work within Apple’s compliance requirements.

HIPAA restrictions

Per HIPAA, we could not delete all client records.

​

As a healthcare provider, Cerebral was legally required to retain certain medical records even after a user requested data deletion. 

​

This meant we could not promise full account erasure, and had to clearly communicate what could and could not be deleted.

Technical timeline limits

A full architectural redesign was out of scope.

​

Engineering bandwidth was limited. Timelines did not allow for building a fully unified cancellation and deletion system. 

​

The solution had to work within the existing architecture and be implemented quickly without significant backend changes.

Friction requirements

We could not make cancellation "too easy" for users.

​

The Retention PM and Chief of Support wanted to include intentional friction to reduce churn. 

 

Any changes to the deletion flow could not create a shortcut or loophole that allowed users to bypass the existing cancellation process.

cerebral logo.png

Intervention

Intent clarification at entry point

I updated the CTA wording to reflect what the action actually does.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.53.39 AM.png

State-based flow architecture

I worked with our Retention PM and developers to design distinct, new flows for three identified subscription states.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.52.32 AM.png

Structured off-platform fulfillment

I worked with support to ensure an email template was included in the flow via Iterable to speed up data deletion requests.

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 9.51.30 AM.png
cerebral logo.png

Before

  • 1 flow for all user groups

  • No email template

  • No subscription cancellation requirement stated at entry point

    • This meant more work for support to untangle on a case-by-case basis

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 10.04.07 AM.png

After

  • Separate flows for 3 identified user groups

  • Email template for all groups

  • Clear differentiation between subscription cancellation and data deletion at entry point, to reduce support burden and client confusion

3 Individual user flows

Combined into 1 flow

iOS Data Deletion Flow (4).png
cerebral logo.png

Flow summary

Metrics

  • Eliminated recurring cancellation misinterpretation

  • Reduced support redirection loops

  • Removed regulatory ambiguity from deletion entry point

  • 93.3% reduction sustained over 2 months

  • No recurrence of cancellation confusion spike

Screenshot 2026-03-02 at 10.14.21 AM.png
cerebral logo.png

Outcomes

Takeaways

🏗️ Architectural management

​By preventing two legally distinct flows from sharing the same entry point

🤝 Business-aligned clarity

By balancing stakeholder needs with legal transparency 

📈 Operational scalability

By reducing support burden while preserving compliance

cerebral logo.png

Reflections

Future iteration 1

Run comprehension survey to ensure new data deletion language is fully understood 

Future iteration 2

Run usability test to ensure users are entering correct state-based flow within data deletion funnel

cerebral logo.png

Copyright © 2020–2026 Kate Muir | All rights reserved

bottom of page