In partnership with:

A tired mother folds laundry at midnight while reviewing work emails on her phone. On the living room screen, a fictional TV mother effortlessly manages a spotless house, sports a pristine wardrobe, and glides through family life without mentioning childcare costs or messy schedules. This sharp contrast defines this Geena Davis Institute study, Rewriting Motherhood: How TV Represents Moms and What We Want To See Next. Conducted in partnership with Moms First, our analysis explores whether scripted television reflects the true diversity of American mothers or simply reinforces unrealistic social expectations that generate guilt and strain family structures.

Our team evaluated 2022 scripted television programs that feature mothers in the title cast. While authentic moments occasionally appear, current programming frequently reproduces outdated stereotypes. Consequently, these portrayals set unrealistic benchmarks for mothers while simultaneously sidelining fathers.

Key Findings: Quick Overview

Our analysis reveals major disparities between real-world families and fictional households:

  • Homogeneous Demographics: White characters make up 57.5% of all TV mothers with kids under 18. Meanwhile, Black mothers account for 23.8%, Latina mothers represent 9.2%, and Asian or Pacific Islander mothers comprise 7.0%. Furthermore, only 1.8% are fat [1], 6.2% are queer, and 0% are disabled.
  • Invisibility of Primary Breadwinners: When a TV household features a clear primary earner, a father fills that role nearly nine out of ten times. In reality, before the COVID-19 pandemic, 44.4% of U.S. mothers in families with children ages 6 to 17 earned at least half of the household income.
  • Erasure of Childcare Realities: Only one in five TV parents with children under age 11 ever mentions childcare. Audiences rarely see characters navigate the logistics or costs of care, despite 85% of primary caregivers in the U.S. reporting that childcare challenges negatively affect their work focus.
  • Unseen Domestic Labor: Less than 1 in 10 TV family homes appear messy, yet only 15.0% of parents are shown performing domestic chores. In real households, 70% of mothers carry the majority of domestic tasks and cognitive mental load, performing chores twice as often as fathers on screen.
  • Unrealistic Aesthetic Standards: Over three times as many mothers are depicted as explicitly desirable compared to those portrayed as unattractive. Nearly eight out of ten TV mothers are slender, including six out of ten mothers with infants under one year old, without showing the time or financial resources needed to maintain these appearances.

Dissecting the Invisible Labor and Aesthetic Standards of TV Caregivers

Although popular entertainment shapes everyday social norms, television frequently erases the daily work required to maintain a household. When shows depict pristine living rooms without showing anyone sweeping or managing schedules, the mental load of parenting disappears. This erasure creates a false narrative that managing a career and a home is smooth and effortless.

Similarly, television casting choices perpetuate narrow body standards. By featuring predominantly thin, young, and perfectly styled mothers, television broadcasts an implicit message that constant physical attractiveness remains attainable and mandatory for everyday parents. Real mothers carry immense financial and emotional burdens, yet screen narratives rarely reflect their daily struggles or structural needs.

Actionable Recommendations for Writers, TV Producers, and Industry Leaders

To transform how media reflects parenthood, Moms First and the Geena Davis Institute offer concrete recommendations across the entertainment landscape:

For Television Executives and Producers

  1. Provide Flexible Work Schedules: Offer hybrid and flexible arrangements so mother-writers can thrive in television writers’ rooms.
  2. Invest in Family Benefits: Provide expanded childcare support and gender-neutral paid family leave to retain talented women in the industry workforce.
  3. Expand Casting Diversity: Cast mothers from underrepresented backgrounds, including women of color, queer mothers, fat mothers, disabled mothers, and parents who look authentically unstyled.

For Television Writers

  1. Incorporate Real Structural Challenges: Weave current issues, such as the childcare access crisis and parental leave debates, directly into character storylines.
  2. Reflect Everyday Parental Responsibilities: Show mothers managing logistical details and parental duties, even when mothering is not the central plot of an episode.
  3. Adopt an Intersectional Approach: Avoid relying on old media tropes by writing mothers who represent diverse intersections of race, body size, sexual orientation, and physical ability.
  4. Draw Inspiration from Real Life: Look beyond existing television characters by engaging with real mothers, reading maternal authors, and following advocacy organizations.

For Viewers and Parents

  1. Reflect on Media Expectations: Notice how internalized media standards might influence personal feelings of inadequacy or parental stress.
  2. Share Authentic Stories: Speak openly about the real-world experiences of parenting on social channels and with community leaders to shift public expectations.

Supporting Evidence-Based Media Research

Accurate, research-backed representation shifts cultural standards and fosters systemic change across industries. At the Geena Davis Institute, we collaborate directly with studio executives, creators, and advocacy groups to ensure screen stories reflect the full complexity of human experiences.

Support our ongoing media studies to help replace harmful tropes with authentic representation. Give to our evidence-based initiatives or Donate to the Geena Davis Institute today to advance gender equity in entertainment.

Suggested Citation

Meyer, M., Conroy, M., van Houten, S., & Ferguson, A. (2024). Rewriting Motherhood: How TV Represents Moms and What We Want To See Next. The Geena Davis Institute.

Footnote Context

[1] The term “fat” is utilized as a value-neutral descriptor that is not rooted in medicalized terminology (such as “obese” or “overweight”), nor does it suggest deviation from an arbitrary norm. Destigmatizing the word helps actively combat anti-fat bias across media analysis.