Obstructed alternative
Guest checkout hidden behind account copy
A fictional shop displays account creation as the only button and places guest checkout inside a collapsed paragraph titled “Other information”.
Individual HTML example · Obstruction
Rejecting optional tracking needs multiple panels
A fictional consent layer accepts optional tracking in one click but requires opening three panels and disabling twelve switches to refuse it.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
Rejecting optional tracking needs multiple panels
A fictional consent layer accepts optional tracking in one click but requires opening three panels and disabling twelve switches to refuse it.
Your privacy options. Acceptance is immediate; refusal is distributed across three nested screens.. Selected: Accept all. Not selected: Reject optional tracking
Choose optional tracking. Accept all, reject optional and customise are visible at the same level.. Not selected: Reject optional tracking. Not selected: Accept all. Choice consequences, expanded: The consequence of selecting “Reject optional tracking” is displayed beside the option.
Why the first version can mislead: The route adds avoidable effort between the user’s stated intention and completion. In this cookie preferences example, the obstacle is: “Acceptance is immediate; refusal is distributed across three nested screens.” Evidence should show whether the alternative remains usable and whether “Reject optional tracking” reaches the represented state. The asymmetric path can deter a user from reaching a genuine lower-data choice.
What a fairer design does: Offer equally direct accept, reject and customise paths while preserving granular settings for users who want them.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
- Not selected: Reject optional trackingIn “Rejecting optional tracking needs multiple panels”, this element shows how obstructed alternative can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
- Choice consequences, expanded: The consequence of selecting “Reject optional tracking” is displayed beside the option.In “Rejecting optional tracking needs multiple panels”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- How many steps, waits and channel changes separate “Accept all” from the completed cookie preferences outcome?
- Capture every peer option, its default state and visual prominence; do those states support “The alternative is available in principle but requires additional discovery, interaction or recovery from obstruction”?
- Measure the same task through the clearest available route: does the effort difference persist once “exit from an existing subscription, which is classified as hard to cancel” is accounted for?
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Obstructed alternative
A relevant alternative within the current decision is hidden, blocked or made materially harder than the business-favoured action. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, harms, fair design principles, evidence questions and the relevant EU legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
Continue comparing
Related examples
Open this example
Account deletion obstruction
Deactivation presented as deletion
A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.
Account deletion obstruction
Deletion buried behind an unsupported ticket
A fictional retailer places account deletion behind six help pages and requires a support ticket containing an order number even for users who never ordered.
Sources and provenance for this example
Evidence base
Sources
- Dark commercial patternsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 336
- Unfair Commercial Practices DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2005/29/EC; CELEX 02005L0029-20220528