Background Childhood obesity is a key policy challenge facing governments globally. Three decades of policy initiatives in England have been largely unsuccessful in reducing prevalence and inequalities in childhood obesity. Parents and families are often portrayed as responsible for children’s weight in the media. Less is known about their portrayal in policy documents. Understanding how parents and families are framed in policy documents can provide important insights into the factors shaping policy decisions and could thus support the development of more effective policies. This study extends prior work by shifting attention from media and intervention framing to the representation of parents and families within national policy texts. Methods A qualitative framing analysis was conducted on how parents and families are framed in six seminal English childhood obesity policy documents published 2010–2020. Reflexive thematic analysis and framing theory were applied to identify themes. Results Four themes were identified: (1) Parents and families are decision-makers; (2) Public services should empower parents and families; (3) Assumption of maternal responsibility for the family; and (4) Individual responsibility via the family. There were notable omissions in policies related to parents and childhood obesity, particularly broader societal factors such as financial constraints, contemporary family constellations and food insecurity. Conclusions This research emphasizes the importance of both language and framing, and their potential biases in influencing policy approaches concerning parents’ role in childhood obesity. There is a need for re-evaluating commonly used frames that put excessive responsibility on parents to provide a healthy lifestyle for their children. Changes in framing in future policy are necessary to provide adequate support for parents and families for their effective involvement in addressing childhood obesity. Future policy should move beyond parent-blaming frames by combining recognition of family agency with practical, equitable support that addresses material, service and environmental constraints.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fell et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: