Disaster Why Are So Many Americans Choosing to Not Have Children? - It’s probably not selfishness, experts say. Even young adults who want children see an increasing number of obstacles.


31childless-01-pbtf-jumbo.jpg
Researchers say that societal factors — like rising child care costs, unaffordable housing and slipping optimism about the future — have made it harder to raise children in the United States.

By Teddy Rosenbluth
Published July 31, 2024

For years, some conservatives have framed the declining fertility rate of the United States as an example of eroding family values, a moral catastrophe in slow motion.

JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, recently came under fire for saying in 2021 that the nation was run by “childless cat ladies” who “hate normal Americans for choosing family over these ridiculous D.C. and New York status games.”

Last year, Ashley St. Clair, a Fox News commentator, described childless Americans this way: “They just want to pursue pleasure and drinking all night and going to Beyoncé concerts. It’s this pursuit of self-pleasure in replace of fulfillment and having a family.”

Researchers who study trends in reproductive health see a more nuanced picture. The decision to forgo having children is most likely not a sign that Americans are becoming more hedonistic, they say. For one thing, fertility rates are declining throughout the developed world.

Rather, it indicates that larger societal factors — such as rising child care costs, increasingly expensive housing and slipping optimism about the future — have made it feel more untenable to raise children in the United States.

“I don’t see it as a lack of a commitment to family,” said Mary Brinton, a sociologist who studies low fertility rates at Harvard. “I think the issues are very much on the societal level and the policy level.”

To some extent, experts like Dr. Brinton share the concern that Americans are having less children.

Fertility rates have been generally falling in the United States since the end of the baby boom in the mid-1960s. That decline accelerated after 2008, a trend that has been widely attributed to the Great Recession, said Kenneth Johnson, a demographer at the University of New Hampshire.

Everybody thought, maybe they’ll just delay having their babies for a few years, and then they’ll make up for it when the economy and the country gets back on its feet,” he said. “It never happened.”

Last year, the total fertility rate dipped to 1,616.5 births per 1,000 women, a historic low that is far less than the rate needed to maintain the population size, 2,100 births per 1,000 women.

A recent survey by the Pew Research Center found that a growing number of adults said they were unlikely to ever have children. Even before the Covid-19 pandemic, nearly half of U.S. counties reported more deaths than births.

In addition, the average age at which Americans are marrying and starting to have children has increased, most likely contributing to the fertility decline. In 2023, the median age of women who were marrying for the first time was 28 — about six years older than in the 1980s.

The average age when women give birth to their first child has also risen substantially, from age 20 during the baby boom to 27 in 2022.

Immigration to the United States helps offset population loss. Yet experts fear that shrinking generations could cause schools to close, economic development to stall and social programs like Social Security to run an even larger deficit.

31childless-02-pbtf-jumbo.jpg
JD Vance, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, has proposed tax breaks and more voting power for parents. But experts say there is little evidence to suggest that policies rewarding people for having children are successful on their own.

Notably, studies of the reasons behind the fertility decline don’t reveal a dramatic shift in the desire to have children.

Many Americans in their teens and 20s still report that they want two children, said Sarah Hayford, the director of the Institute for Population Research at Ohio State University. The fact that many of those adults don’t realize those goals probably means that external factors are making it more difficult to be a parent, she said.

Survey data suggests that many young adults want to hit certain economic milestones before having children — they might want to buy a house, pay off student debt or comfortably afford child care, said Karen Benjamin Guzzo, a family demographer at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Reaching those milestones has become increasingly difficult, she said, as mortgage rates have risen sharply and child care costs have soared.

As fewer women opt to stay home to raise children, the absence of policies that support working families — like paid maternity leave and stable child care — may also be leading couples to believe they’re not prepared to be parents, Dr. Guzzo added.

The decision to have children, which she views as the “ultimate vote of confidence” in the future, may also be affected by how optimistic people are about the state of the world, she said.

A study by sociologists in the Netherlands found that people who said they thought the future generation’s prospects were “much worse than today” were less likely to become parents.

Right now, there are plenty of reasons young Americans might be pessimistic, Dr. Guzzo said, including climate change, frequent gun violence and the recent pandemic.

This might explain why fertility rates have been declining in most developed countries — not just in the United States — despite differences in their economic systems and social welfare policies.

“It’s not about being selfish and saying, ‘I’m not having kids because I want to sleep in all the time,’” Dr. Guzzo said. “When fertility rates are down, to me, that’s because people don’t feel like they have a future that they feel confident in.”

If there has been any shift in attitudes toward parenthood, Dr. Hayford of Ohio State said she believed that younger Americans were now more focused on whether they could offer a child “the best experience possible.”

In interviews she conducted with teenagers and adults in their early 20s, Dr. Hayford said, they often stressed the importance of improving their own patience and anger management to ensure they would be able to one day support their children’s emotional needs.

And some research suggests that younger generations have a higher bar for the amount of money required to raise a child.

Having children is something that people feel like they can make a choice about,” Dr. Hayford said. “They are really reluctant to enter into parenthood if they can’t provide what they think children need.”

Exactly how to change the trajectory of a so-called baby bust is still a mystery. Last year, former President Donald J. Trump floated the idea of offering a “baby bonus” to incentivize more families to have children.

“I want a baby boom!” he told a crowd of supporters. “You men are so lucky out there.”

Mr. Vance, his running mate, has advocated tax breaks for households with children and even an altered election system in which parents would have more voting power than people without children.

There is little evidence to suggest that policies designed to reward people for having children are successful on their own, Dr. Guzzo said. Governments in some countries have tried to increase fertility rates with cash incentives, tax breaks and generous parental leave, yielding modest or no success.

Since declining fertility is the result of a range of societal problems, Dr. Guzzo said, legislation that addresses broader issues — like student loans, unaffordable housing and parental leave — is more likely to spur change.

“In our view, every policy is a family policy,” she said.

A correction was made on Aug. 1, 2024: An earlier version of this article misstated the total fertility rate in 2023 and the replacement rate. The figures are 1.6 and 2.1 births per woman, not per 1,000 women.
 
I was raised by classic narcissist Boomers who had children, then went "fuck, we made a mistake," and didn't want to be parents anymore. My biggest fear is that, because I am a selfish narcissist, I will have a child and look at him or her as a burden which I am stuck with for the rest of my life.

People have told me that, once I actually hold a hypothetical child, I won't feel that way... but I really don't want to risk it. It is far easier to use contraception than it is to bring life into this world that I can fuck up just like my parents did.
I could have written this a few years ago. Just wanna tell you, man, that you are not your parents.

Here was my thought process in making the decision:

I will not let what my parents did rule over me or my life decisions. If I did that, I am letting them win. Being proven wrong is what a narcissist hates the most. Finding happiness by your own right, and knowing you are not a broken human (that narcissists who want to control you and put you underfoot so deeply insist) is not even the best "revenge," but the best gift you can give yourself.

But by all means, if you really don't want kids, don't have them. Just please don't let narcissistic monsters control you even when they are not there.
 
Housing is expensive, groceries are expensive, cars are expensive, and kids are the biggest expense most people will ever have (seriously they’re so expensive).

Plus I’ve talked to a good amount of women who would want to have kids, but losing income for a year or more isn’t feasible.

And it’s harder than ever to live on a one income budget, possible with careful spending, but harder.
This isn’t the times of The Brady Bunch anymore.

Working moms seem to feel constantly guilty and sad that they’re losing 40 hours with their children a week, but contributing to the household is necessary for them.

Kids are expensive in the early years, later years, and just wait until they do sports and extracurriculars and are enrolled in private school.

And outside of expense, it takes a seriously low amount of selfishness to be a good parent.
Some of the people not reproducing are self aware enough to realize they would be awful parents.
 
While losers whine about the cost of soccer practices (lmao) winners are having as many kids as they want, because they are winners.

"But what if the winners are people who don't deserve to win??"

By winning they define themselves as winners. Don't like it? Try harder.
I hate to be that guy but sentiments like this to me have always come off as "fuck already and make more taxpayers to fund social security and fat niggers, you asshole!" to me.
 
Housing is expensive, groceries are expensive, cars are expensive, and kids are the biggest expense most people will ever have (seriously they’re so expensive).

Plus I’ve talked to a good amount of women who would want to have kids, but losing income for a year or more isn’t feasible.

And it’s harder than ever to live on a one income budget, possible with careful spending, but harder.
This isn’t the times of The Brady Bunch anymore.

Working moms seem to feel constantly guilty and sad that they’re losing 40 hours with their children a week, but contributing to the household is necessary for them.

Kids are expensive in the early years, later years, and just wait until they do sports and extracurriculars and are enrolled in private school.

And outside of expense, it takes a seriously low amount of selfishness to be a good parent.
Some of the people not reproducing are self aware enough to realize they would be awful parents.
This right here is the answer.

I would love to have children, but at the time in my life when I was finally climbing up the corporate ladder making good money, inflation hit me like a bitch and I'm right back to where I started. I would feel tremendous guilt for my kid not being able to spend time with me because I'd be off pulling hours to make ends meet. I and my partner also wouldn't be able to afford one or the other being stay-at-home-parents.

The future nowadays is also just so wildly unpredictable now due to tech, economics, lack of community, and globalism. Who knows where we'll be in the next ten years? AI is going to cause serious disruption and change to our lives eventually and nobody knows if it'll be for better or worse. Everything is just too much of a gamble now. Change happens rapidly and far too quickly for our ape brains to keep track of.
 
I hate to be that guy but sentiments like this to me have always come off as "fuck already and make more taxpayers to fund social security and fat niggers, you asshole!" to me.
I just tire of the whining.

People had huge families during times of immense hardship. They pulled together and worked to make it through, maybe even scrape together something a little better. Anyone can still do that now- yeah it's clownworld, the obstacles are different and in some ways more complex, but they are not insurmountable. Will you be able to breeze through giving kids the kind of childhood the boomers or millennials had? Where every kid has his own bedroom fully kitted out with a racecar bed and two different gaming consoles and a big backyard in the suburbs? Probably not. But that stuff is just the dressing on life, anyways. The real reward is in the spiritual struggle, the relationships, the experience of just being alive.

You're gonna vote against the line that started with a caveman beating a mammoth and cooking it over a fire, give up on the line all your ancestors fought to preserve for millennia, because you can't buy a racecar bed and soccer camp?

Petulant loser attitude.
 
While losers whine about the cost of soccer practices (lmao) winners are having as many kids as they want, because they are winners.

"But what if the winners are people who don't deserve to win??"

By winning they define themselves as winners. Don't like it? Try harder.
I don’t understand, just a quality private school in most areas is $7000-$12000 a year.
Per kid.

Winners keep on winning cool, but add in martial arts and swimming lessons and dance/gymnastics amd tutoring and other sports for cost.
 
I don’t understand, just a quality private school in most areas is $7000-$12000 a year.
Per kid.

Winners keep on winning cool, but add in martial arts and swimming lessons and dance/gymnastics amd tutoring and other sports for cost.
I'm sure your ancestors would have preferred to just kill themselves rather than live without dance classes.
 
Among the younger set (under-30's) it seems to be ideological. Not that there's much thinking involved, I've yet to hear any interesting justifications (frankly I don't hear muh climate or muh money or whatever often either), it's more like a mental malaise, a "default" non-thinking thought of "but why I have kids durrrr". Moderns don't have much in the way of philosophy one way or another.

If finances were the reason then birth rates would be reversed with niggers and po whites having 1.2 kids and UMC or rich people having 12... though you do see the occasional rich person breeding a pretty big litter. I've noticed a novel phenomenon of the perma-couple, people who are together for years and years, pushing 30 or in their 30s, but they don't even talk about kids. These people are not financially strapped. They are often both working decent jobs. It's some kind of social malaise rat experiment shit like otterly said, hell even on this site, which is notably free of normies, you have people doing the "durrr but why I have kids" routine.

Because it's your purpose you fucking loser, you will never be anything greater than yourself, you will never transcend your cummies and sugar hits, your lifetime achievement stops at a teenage level (even some teenagers manage to reproduce), so enjoy your permanent childhood and lonely death.
 
I'm sure your ancestors would have preferred to just kill themselves rather than live without dance classes.
Goodness, you feel strongly about this one.

Rest assured I’ve fulfilled my biological purpose, but also have a very fortunate situation that not all women are able to have that allows me to keep them busy with extracurriculars and healthy peer groups.

No time for Discord or Roblox troon predators here.
 
The future nowadays is also just so wildly unpredictable now due to tech, economics, lack of community, and globalism. Who knows where we'll be in the next ten years? AI is going to cause serious disruption and change to our lives eventually and nobody knows if it'll be for better or worse. Everything is just too much of a gamble now. Change happens rapidly and far too quickly for our ape brains to keep track of.
I'd point out that, historically, a flood or an especially bad harvest or new disease or barbarian invasion were a constant possibility and you had no ability to anticipate them whatsoever.

I'm not trying to convince you to have kids, but I think perspective on modernity being so uncertain is important.
 
No one bringing up how biased the court system is against men?

I'm not risking having a kid and then losing access because an activist judge thinks it's ok to fuck fathers over.
I hear this excuse from incels constantly to justify why they refuse to be intimate with women, as if all women are going to back-stab the father from seeing their children. Just admit you'd fail as a father instead of shafting your problems onto the opposite sex.
 
People had huge families during times of immense hardship.
Are you as fossilized as your avatar, or what?

Dunno if you've noticed this or not, but families scatter to the four winds these days, they don't live in multigenerational households on plots of land large enough to grow crops enough to sustain both them and some livestock for extra labor/protein.
 
I hear this excuse from incels constantly to justify why they refuse to be intimate with women, as if all women are going to back-stab the father from seeing their children. Just admit you'd fail as a father instead of shafting your problems onto the opposite sex.
does your dumbass really think that's not an issue that needs to be solved?
if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be screaming and crying at the mere thought
 
You're gonna vote against the line that started with a caveman beating a mammoth and cooking it over a fire, give up on the line all your ancestors fought to preserve for millennia, because you can't buy a racecar bed and soccer camp?

Petulant loser attitude.
I'm sure your ancestors would have preferred to just kill themselves rather than live without dance classes.
Not sure if you misunderstood, but personally I'm not invested either way. If it happens, cool, whatever.

But something that always has tugged me towards not having kids was the foaming at the mouth fervor other people have about people not having them, and the understanding that more kids = more taxpayers to foot the bill for Israelis. In other words your tone is deleterious to your argument imo, even if I don't necessarily disagree with your logic.
Because it's your purpose
Debatable. The more I've thought on this the more comfortable I am with the conclusion that such thinking is too materialistic and myopic to be sufficient.

For instance if this is true, Ethan Oliver Ralph is a winner at life, Patrick Tomlinson is a winner at life, and Richard "Lowtax" Kyanka won at life.
 
Back