abortion on television:

how fiction is perpetuating real obstacles against reproductive justice

media & gender | fall 2016

Almost half a century after its legalization, the polarizing topic of abortion access has reemerged on the forefront of the political agenda. The face of the conversation has shape-shifted from the actual lived experiences of women to an inaccurately infamous scapegoat. The main star of the debate: Planned Parenthood. Increasingly in the last decade, false narratives have surrounded the legitimacy of America’s most well-known abortion provider and medically-inaccurate depictions of a late-term abortion “industry” have crept into the mainstream. Media representation of women’s health is a crucial outlet in which reproductive care is understood, specifically on television. With a lack of standard and universal health class curriculum on the subject, many children and adolescents learn about their bodies from the images they see on-screen. Portrayal of abortion remains a rare theme in prime time television. Despite these instances being few and far between, the depiction of abortion on fictional television programs spanning from the 1970s, in wake of the Roe V. Wade decision legalizing abortion, until present day have helped shaped the American public’s false understandings of the procedure, vilified abortion providers,  as well as solidified gender stereotypes and socio-economic misconceptions. 

Common television storylines with abortion as a prominent plot tenet contribute to an inaccurate abortion stigma in four main ways. Firstly, on-screen abortions contain demographic anomalies that are statistically egregious. Secondly, the way abortions are portrayed suggests a much higher medical risk for the procedure than is realistic. Third, situational abortion is related as a moral quandary, with implications that the procedure is inherently a selfish decision accompanied by guilt. Finally, abortion plot lines follow patriarchal codes with a “father-hero” archetype in which the “fathers” of the unborn fetuses are constantly depicted as being against the decision to abort. These false depictions of abortion on fictional television programs contribute to general public misconceptions surrounding the realities of the procedure and contribute to an unsubstantiated narrative stunting the advancement of reproductive justice, or the complete and total human right to bodily autonomy. 

In a majority of instances, fictional women considering abortions are middle class, white, and in committed relationships. This is statistically improbable and contributes to the fabricated consensus on why women choose to have abortions. Sociologists from Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Katrina Kimport and Gretchen Sisson, conducted a study in which they identified all fictional portrayals of women considering abortions in American television from 2005 through 2014. Compared to statistics on real women seeking abortions, “characters who obtained abortions were disproportionately white, young, wealthy and not parenting” (“Fictional TV Distorts Abortion” 1). These representations are widely disconnected from reality. While it is often the driving force in decisions to pursue abortion, on television, the socio-economic burden of an unwanted pregnancy is removed from the conversation to focus on the dramatic scandal of a teenage ‘good girl’ caught in a bad situation. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a leading research organization dedicated to reproductive justice, forty-nine percent of abortion patients in 2014 had incomes significantly lower than the federal poverty level.  The Guttmacher Institute further reports that “disparities in reproductive health outcomes by race and ethnicity are well documented and may be an important indicator of systemic barriers to preventive services.” (Jerman). Black women are almost five times more likely to have an abortion procedure in comparison to white women. The gap can be attributed to limited access to reproductive education and health that women of color undergo. Women of color have higher rates of unintended pregnancies based on the reality that racial and ethnic disparities plague the health of communities at large, including the ability to receive high-quality contraceptive services. Still, women of color and impoverished women are rarely seen contemplating abortion in television. Most roles for African-American women remain “outside of drama and within situation comedy” as Beretta Smith-Shomade relates in analysis of the history of Black representation in television (22). Navigating the state-by-state restrictions against public access to abortion is an extreme issue for low-income women and disproportionately affects women of color, yet true demographics of the women who choose to abort are almost completely misrepresented, with few exceptions. However, toward the end of 2016, the show Jane the Virgin, known for tackling the theme of unplanned pregnancies, was able to break ground on television abortion scenarios with an honest and refreshing narrative of a Latina mother choosing what is best for her and her family. One of the show’s main characters, Xiomara Villanueva became pregnant at sixteen and decided to give birth and raise her child as a single mother. Now in her 40s, her daughter is grown with a son of her own and she is a new grandmother. Again, she faces a decision about an unplanned pregnancy, and it is revealed that Xiomara decides to have an abortion off-screen. While the episode focuses primarily on the reactions of her family and how they all come to accept her choice, the narrative provides a fully comprehensive view of what pregnant people have to consider and how anti-abortion advocates can learn to respect the sanctity of choice. Xiomara’s mother, a very devout Catholic, struggles with her daughter’s decision, yet they come to a consensus on how they share different views, but are free and supported to make their own decisions. Show-runner Jennie Snyder-Urman “consulted with Planned Parenthood to get statistics— including on the Latino community’s points of view on abortion— and find out what kinds of portrayals the organization commonly sees on TV” (Bradley). With a main character who has already chosen to have a child in the face of an unplanned pregnancy, Jane, the show delves into several options for people in this situation, as earlier in the show the main character, Jane, considers both abortion and adoption in the face of her own unplanned pregnancy, before ultimately choosing to have her child. The effort taken to understand the nuances of different communities, collaborate with healthcare professionals, allowed Jane the Virgin to portray a more realistic storyline surrounding its characters' decisions. These plot lines can serve as a prime example of how the subject should be handled to break taboo and fight stigma with fact. 

The Guttmacher Institute maintains that “a first-trimester abortion is one of the safest medical procedures and carries minimal risk—less than 0.05%—of major complications that might need hospital care” (Boonstra 6). However, the same Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health study mentioned previously found that 9% of women choosing an abortion on-screen died during the procedure. Females even just considering abortion also seemed to meet an untimely death, regardless if they actually went through the procedure or not. As sociologist behind the study, Gretchen Sission, told the Huffington Post in an interview, “The cloaking of TV abortion stories with the subtext of tragedy is a prime example of abortion stigma” (Blay). Television’s subtle link of abortion and death propagates false assertions that abortion is inherently dangerous. In medical reality, a person is more likely to die from pregnancy complications than from induced abortions. In the movie Revolutionary Road, when Kate Winslet’s character dies from an unforgettably bloody and horrifying abortion complication, we see an example of how society has come to digest this and mischaracterize the procedure. This same imagery persists on television. The misinformation about abortion safety portrayed by inaccurate television tragedies for the sake of plot translates to stigmas “displayed across society from state laws enacted with the express purpose of preventing women from having abortions to outright lies,” as Sission further scrutinizes (Blay). Pairing the decision to terminate pregnancy with calamity communicates an inevitably tragic fate—a punishment for a crime. This implication cultivates a shared cultural understanding that abortion is somehow morally wrong, socially unacceptable, and threat to our values. The real socio-economic reasons women choose to have abortions are obscured in an effort to support themes of ethical quandaries for fictional women to overcome.

Abortion is often portrayed as a moral dilemma for a character to traverse. An International Communication Association Conference titled "Discussions of Religio-Moral Objections to Abortion in Prime-Time Medical Dramas: A Feminist Perspective" evaluated the stigma surrounding morality and religious protestations to abortion that convey personhood on the fetus in question and upset “the sanctity of motherhood” (13). The narratives maintain a stigma that abortion is a drastic decision, only to be utilized in the most extreme of cases. The controversies and tensions surrounding abortion plotlines narrate the notion that the procedure is generally frowned upon and condemned by society. The ER episode “If Not Now” depicts a white fifteen year old girl, Amanda, raised by strict Catholic parents. Amanda becomes pregnant as a result of rape. When her female doctor gently suggests abortion as an alternative, she maintains, “I could never do that. That would be against God” (Zabel). The discussion is not of her trauma as a rape-victim or of the socio-economic implications of an unwanted pregnancy, but rather the episode’s drama revolves around questions of faith and morality. Her religious male doctor, Dr. Kovac, also struggles with advising her on whether or not to terminate. Tormented by Amanda’s tragic situation, he uses a logic that inducing a chemical abortion would be “God’s will” to allow the procedure to be successful or not. The male lead decides the standards of morality for the helpless female victim. Communications professor and author Lisa M. Cuklanz examined 25 episodes on prime time television that featured rape as a prominent plot point from 1976 through 1978, three years after the legalization of abortion. Despite the abortion debate being a prominent political theme during this time, the experience of the victim is virtually unexplored and the threat of unwanted pregnancy to the wellbeing of the mother is completely void. Rather, rape plots serve as a vehicle for toxic masculinity with the main protagonist as the hero-male seeking revenge on the savage rapist, “depicting them as nurturing and concerned for victim rights and feelings” (Cuklanz 423). Similarly, the slow emergence of abortion as a plot device in television reinforces hegemonic masculinity with a ‘hero-father’ stereotype. 

This ploy subtly enhances a patriarchal control of the female body and implies that males are inherently more self-sacrificing, responsible, and heroic while establishing dictation of morality for the females who are seemingly victims of circumstance. In its fourth season, which aired in 2010, Friday Night Lights ran the episode “I Can’t,” in which high school sophomore Becky becomes pregnant by her boyfriend, Luke. Having been raised by a teen mom, Becky does not want to face the same challenges; however, Luke is strong-set in the values of a strictly Christian home and has full intentions of marrying Becky and raising the child. The 2015 Girls episode “Close Up” follows the twenty-something character Mimi-Rose who has an abortion without telling her boyfriend, Adam. When she very casually drops the news, Adam is furious with emotion in contrast to her nonchalant demeanor. He refers to the fetus as “ours,” humanizing it with a demand to know the gender and other details. The International Communication Association conference papers mentioned earlier  further analyze the perpetration of patriarchal constructions regarding reproductive health in which “women characters are portrayed as being subjected to the ‘expertise’ of the ‘heroic’ male physician characters” (“Religio-Moral Objections To Abortion” 1).  In the same ER episode previously analyzed, Dr. Kovac uses religious rhetoric to justify the abortion as an exception to a general code of morality, taking on the role of Amanda’s “savior.” Similarly, in the medical drama, House, Dr. House counsels—again—a young, white, religious rape victim, who is non-coincidentally named Eve. The episode “One Day, One Room” still contemplates abortion as “murder,” Dr. House philosophizes for the victim that in this case, the victim should not feel any guilty objections to pregnancy termination because the life of a rapist is not sacred. As Laura Mulvey classically examines in "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," on-screen depictions reflect “the unconscious of patriarchal society” (833). While abortion is unquestionably a women’s health issue, the male protagonists maintain influence over decisions regarding the female body. 

In the midst of what has been referred to as the ‘Golden Age’ of television, abortion portrayals presented in fictional television programs are beginning to develop more ground-breaking and honest depictions of the procedure. However, the history of limited perspectives through which abortion-driven plotlines have unfolded crafts negative messages surrounding the pro-choice vs. pro-life debate. Understanding the inaccuracies of abortion portrayals on television enables reproductive justice advocates to identify misconceptions, learn from where they stem, and respond. During the course of the 2016 presidential election campaign, debates over abortion access have mirrored the same fallacies discussed above. As on television, the way abortion access disproportionality affects women of color and women of lower-class is thoroughly underrepresented in discussion. The fictional motif that abortion is a life-threatening decision has weaved its way into reality with false “horror stories” serving as casual evidence in policy discussion. Fictional depictions have been given real life representation within the Trump cabinet, anti-choice politicians debate the religiously rooted moral codes behind abortion bans, and male opponents to abortion access, Vice-President elect Mike Pence for example, serve as the “father-hero” stereotype, disputing ethics and establishing control over the female body with healthcare restrictions. Restrictions the administration has already proposed, such as dismantling cost coverage to proposing strict bans. Roe V. Wade established the right for women to make their own choices regarding their own reproductive systems. To make educated and informed decisions, one must be equipped with access to accurate information. But, reproductive justice means more than the legalization of abortion. It means political, social, and economic power to make healthy judgements regarding spiritual and bodily well-being. Until women’s health and sexual education can be adequately covered in standard public education, society will be susceptible to inaccurate and dangerous representations of reproductive care from the media that will continue to shape the way we understand women's bodies and healthcare. Television has the power to challenge abortion stigmas with straightforward and more accurate portrayals, requiring showrunners to write plotlines that are rooted in facts, not in tired rhetoric, about the decision to have or not have an abortion. With the future of healthcare currently being reimagined in the onset of a Donald Trump administration, it is crucial for the general public to see and feel the reality of abortion and for fictional television to begin reflecting genuine representational narratives and to stop contributing to skewed understandings based upon misrepresentation.