On Thursday, the CDC released fresh data shedding light on fertility trends spanning from 1990 to 2023. The latest figures reveal a slight dip in the birthrate for 2023, slipping to 1.62 compared to 1.66 in the previous year. Demographer Jennifer Sciubba highlighted these findings in her newsletter, pointing out that while fertility in the U.S. has plummeted by 22% since 1990, the most significant changes occurred after 2007, just before the onset of the Great Recession. Interestingly, while births among teenagers have decreased dramatically, there’s been an uptick in the birthrate among women over 30, particularly those over 40. Sciubba forecasts that we’ll see this birthrate stabilize between 1.55 and 1.7 in the coming decade.
Falling below the replacement birthrate introduces several economic hurdles, notably affecting Social Security. Yet, it’s not an immediate crisis. Arguing against the decline in teenage pregnancies seems difficult, considering that many teens aren’t fully prepared, either emotionally or financially, for raising children.
Concerns about the U.S. mirroring South Korea’s demographic crisis, where birthrates have plunged to 0.75, seem unfounded. In a recent New Yorker piece, Gideon Lewis-Kraus paints a vivid picture of this stark anti-natal society. He shares anecdotes, like that of a young South Korean woman describing the negative stigma around motherhood in her culture. Despite intense efforts by the government and society, boosting the birthrate in South Korea has proved challenging due to lingering traditional gender roles and a tendency to blame feminism for the demographic issues. This dynamic has sparked gender friction, with movements like the 4B encouraging women to reject traditional domestic roles entirely.
In contrast, albeit in a subtler manner, the U.S. displays its own version of this conflict. Some religious conservatives criticize childless women, while others embrace the “boy sober” trend among young liberal women. Despite these cultural skirmishes, they aren’t likely to drastically impact the birthrate soon, given the U.S.’s progressive and diverse societal makeup.
What if reducing judgment towards child-free individuals fostered a more child-friendly culture? This idea might seem paradoxical, but people tend to resist when they feel coerced. Name-calling often escalates into broader cultural conflicts, illustrated by the contrasting stereotypes of “childless cat ladies” and “parasite moms.” Notably, this scrutiny disproportionately targets women rather than men, who face little backlash.
The ongoing discourse often pits parents as societal pillars against nonparents, perceived as indulgent. Even Lewis-Kraus, despite his balanced reporting, falls into suggesting child-free individuals are frivolous. He notes a discomfort with comparing children to luxury items, such as fancy dinners or exotic vacations. Yet, many child-free individuals prioritize basic needs and financial stability over such extravagances. Concerns about retirement security or healthcare costs often outweigh desires for frequent travels abroad.
Choosing to have children is deeply personal and depends on individual circumstances, not a moral issue. Parenthood doesn’t inherently confer higher moral standing, yet the U.S. complicates it by lacking essential supports like universal healthcare and paid parental leave. Supporting children requires more than just lip service.
Advocating for a pro-child culture matters because, fundamentally, children deserve an environment conducive to their growth and happiness. If U.S. birthrates begin approaching South Korea’s levels, it could signal serious trouble ahead. Nobel laureate economist Claudia Goldin offers insight into stabilizing birthrates in a recent National Bureau of Economic Research paper. She explains that countries with the lowest fertility rates, like South Korea, experienced rapid economic growth before societal gender norms could adapt. This resulted in a profound mismatch between traditional family expectations and economically empowered women. In contrast, nations like the U.S., Denmark, Sweden, Britain, and France experienced more gradual growth, allowing for evolving gender norms.
Goldin suggests that men’s desire for more children doesn’t align with women’s, often due to the financial vulnerability associated with larger families. She believes that if men could reliably contribute time and resources, these discrepancies in fertility desires might disappear. The responsibility lies largely with men to demonstrate credible support for raising children.
Seemingly, the current pronatalist agenda often aligns with extreme viewpoints. The simplistic mantra of “babies = good, no babies = bad” monopolizes public discussions on pronatalism. It’s crucial to support those wishing to have children without alienating or shaming those choosing otherwise. The overlap of the pronatalist movement with contentious figures and ideologies, as noted in a recent Guardian article, only complicates this messaging.
On a lighter note, comedian Rosebud Baker offers a refreshing take on modern parenthood with her new Netflix special, “The Mother Lode.” Filmed before and after her daughter’s birth, Baker skillfully blends comedy with candid insights into the role of children in women’s lives today.
Thank you for tuning in. Feel free to explore past newsletter editions and share the insights with others who might find them valuable. They can subscribe here, and you can browse all our exclusive newsletters here.
