Young California Woman Testifies Social Media Addiction Harmed Her Mental Health in Landmark Trial Against Meta and Google

BY MIRABLE ODETA

A 20-year-old California woman suing Meta Platforms and Google told a Los Angeles court on Thursday that years of heavy social media use beginning in early childhood left her struggling with anxiety, depression, and deep insecurity about her appearance. Despite recognizing what she describes as the harmful effects, she testified that she feels unable to separate herself from her cellphone without experiencing overwhelming distress.

The plaintiff, identified in court as Kaley G.M., said she began using YouTube at just six years old and later joined Instagram at age nine. What started as casual use, she said, quickly became obsessive. Over time, she told jurors, her reliance on social media began interfering with nearly every aspect of her life — from declining school performance and chronic sleep deprivation to diminished face-to-face friendships and strained family relationships.

Kaley testified that her mental health deteriorated significantly during her adolescence. She described feeling persistently anxious and depressed, explaining that she struggled intensely with self-image issues fueled by online interactions and content. She acknowledged that she experienced thoughts of suicide during this period and said she began harming herself at age 10 as what she described in court as a coping mechanism for depression. She clarified that she never attempted to take her own life, but emphasized that her emotional state was deeply troubling and frightening at such a young age.

Her lawsuit forms part of a growing international backlash against major social media companies over concerns about their impact on children and teenagers. Governments around the world are increasingly scrutinizing how these platforms are designed and marketed to young users. Australia, for example, has moved to ban children under 16 from accessing certain social media platforms, and lawmakers in other countries are considering comparable measures.

Both Google and Meta deny the allegations in Kaley’s lawsuit. The companies maintain that the evidence does not support her claims and argue that their platforms include tools intended to promote safer and more balanced usage.

During her testimony in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Kaley described the intense emotional reactions she experienced when her mother would confiscate her phone for short periods. She said those moments triggered anger, panic, and heightened anxiety. Even now, as an adult, she told the court that she feels incapable of giving up social media entirely. “I can’t, it’s too hard to be without it,” she said under questioning from her attorney, Mark Lanier.

When asked why losing access to her phone felt so devastating, Kaley explained that she felt as though a fundamental part of herself was missing. Without social media, she said, she feared she would miss out on important experiences or social connections, a fear that often spiraled into panic. Although she endured online bullying and negative comments, she testified that being disconnected from social media felt worse than the hurtful messages she sometimes received.

The lawsuit, initially filed by her mother before Kaley turned 18, alleges that Meta and Google deliberately designed their platforms to maximize engagement among young users, prioritizing profit while knowing that excessive use could harm children’s mental and behavioral health. To prevail, Kaley’s legal team must demonstrate that the companies’ design choices were a substantial factor in causing or worsening her mental health conditions.

The court heard testimony a day earlier from Kaley’s former psychotherapist, who treated her at ages 13 and 14. The therapist stated that excessive social media use was a contributing factor to her mental health struggles, which were diagnosed at the time as social phobia and body dysmorphic disorder.

Since the trial began in late January, proceedings have also examined what company executives knew about the psychological effects of social media on children and how corporate strategies targeted younger audiences. Mark Zuckerberg, chief executive of Meta, testified that while the company discussed creating products specifically for children, such products were never launched.

Attorneys for Meta pointed to Kaley’s medical records, which show a history of verbal and physical abuse and a complicated family background, including her parents’ divorce when she was three. In opening statements, the company’s lawyer argued that these factors played a significant role in her mental health challenges. Kaley acknowledged on the stand that her mother had at times been physically abusive but described her overall upbringing as loving. She said her mother, who worked while raising three children, remains a nurturing presence in her life, and the two continue to live together and share a close bond.

Today, Kaley works as a personal shopper at Walmart and has earned an associate degree in communications. She told the court she hopes to pursue a bachelor’s degree and eventually build a career in social media — a goal that underscores the complicated relationship she maintains with the platforms at the center of her lawsuit.

Her attorney cited an internal Meta study indicating that teenagers facing difficult life circumstances were more likely to use Instagram habitually or in ways they did not consciously intend. The lawsuit alleges that features such as autoplay videos and infinite scrolling feeds were deliberately engineered to keep users engaged for longer periods, even as evidence mounted about potential harms to younger users. The suit also claims that “like” buttons amplified teenagers’ need for validation and that beauty filters distorted their perceptions of themselves.

In response, YouTube’s legal team has argued in court filings that Kaley did not consistently use available safety features designed to limit bullying or manage screen time, including tools to delete comments and restrict viewing duration. The companies maintain that responsibility also lies with users and families to make use of these protective measures.

As the trial continues, jurors will be asked to weigh complex questions about corporate responsibility, personal accountability, and the extent to which technology companies can be held legally liable for the mental health effects associated with the design of their platforms.