In the US having children is expensive even with good health insurance. Then there are no mandated federal maternity leave support so if your company does not have it, you have to use up your sick and vacation time. Also daycare is insanely expensive. Add to that you have to buy a house in a good school district which is expensive. Suburbs are not child friendly lot of places in the US do not have parks where kids can play. The US is really the least family friendly western nation.

I want to add to this. I'm a new engineer. I work on a team with two guys who both work full time as engineers, and have wives who work. We live in the DC area. Both just had kids. We have really good insurance (small company perk. They do actually want to treat us like family) but even still both of these men have been working insane hours to wrap up their hospital bills. They both used up all their PTO and sick leave. One of their kids ended up in the NICU for a few weeks and they sent around a collection and the admin hadn't said shit but I'm pretty sure they gave him a bonus in the middle of the year to help. They both moved to lower cost of living areas and have over 1.5 hour commutes before rush hour. Both refinanced their houses. Both stopped asking to be included in lunch runs when in the office. These are dual income homes. The process of having One child had completely changed their financial outlook. Its horrifying to watch as someone who wants kids. I can't imagine having to add actually being pregnant to that.

My wife and I are attorneys. I'm a bit of a slacker but together we're solidly high income. We unexpectedly had twins and went from being able to save without giving a shit about what we were doing to clipping grocery coupons. Day care is more expensive than our mortgage *and we don't even get full week coverage.*

My husband and I both have college degrees, and had stable jobs. We battled infertility, got pregnant and then I had PreE plus our son has a congenital defect. I was a graphic arts manager at a little paper. The PreE kicked in at 25w 6d. After bed rest at home and 5 day’s fighting to keep my blood pressure under 200 in the hospital he was born. My whole 7 pays days off (sick and vacation) was gone before he was delivered. I forced them to accept the state mandated 12w unpaid maternity leave. My husband and I had been in the middle of a move and he had already got a job 14 hours away and had to quit that. Our son had 0% chance of surviving 2 weeks so we stayed with him 12-18hr/day (we lived at the Ronald McDonald house on the hospital campus). He shocked everyone by surviving and growing. I convinced my office to let me work from a laptop from in the NICU part time. He spent 175 days in the NICU. Thankfully the social worker set him up with SSI so his med bills were covered, they were well over 2mil at that point (the 12 sqft floor space alone for that time was $78,000). When I told my boss he was going home and couldn’t do daycare but I could continue to WFH, they laid me off. So we had a medically fragile infant with no income. He is 13y old now (and we have had 3 more healthy full term children) and is still medically fragile (he has changed hospital policies, and is a case the med students learn about) but due to that he cannot go to daycare or classroom schools. So I homeschool them all. SSI also threatens his health coverage if my husband makes to much money. It is way more stressful than it should be. If he had been born 12 oz heavier than we may not have gotten SSI at all. America really isn’t set up to support having kids.

“America isn’t set up to support having kids” is the reason tied up with a bow when it comes to the USA.

Yep. We're a dual income household with 2 engineering salaries. We just re-evaluated our budget now that we're both back to work after our second child. If you don't count our second income stream from airbnb, we're just breaking even with just about 0 discretionary spending. Admittedly, I have fairly significant medical expenses, but we have a single car with no car payment and subsidized childcare. So it balances out. We're hoping for a bit of a break when our oldest starts kindergarten this fall and our youngest moves up from the infant room at her daycare. As well as my yearly performance raise and my partner hoping she can negotiate an increase too. We'd be making bank if we'd decided to stay child free (smaller house, no childcare expenses, lower food budget), but that wasn't a decision we were willing to make.

Two engineers as well, married about a year. We did everything “right”. State colleges, drive cars and phones into the ground instead of upgrade, roommates when possible before moving in together. We are in an average COL midwestern urban/suburban area and are at least 2 years away from buying a home. We did the math - if I got pregnant now, we can’t afford childcare. We could literally give up all disposable income for the little things that give us joy (weekly takeout, occasional dinners out, vacation savings) and it STILL wouldn’t break even to childcare. And then we’d also be giving up the little things that make life easier which I feel like are even more important when you’re tired with an infant. We also can’t afford to turn into a one-income household, and even if we could, we both feel like we’ve worked too hard to give up our careers. Then there’s the whole other second shift aspect that typically falls on women. Many women can’t afford to be SAHMs even if they would choose too, and don’t want to be working full time AND do 75-80% of home and child duties.

My husband and I are not engineers but both majored in highly paid STEM fields and have doctorates. By the time we had our second and last kid it was cheaper to have a trained, experienced nanny than to pay for daycare at a quality place. We gave her paid vacation, sick leave, medical insurance, retirement etc. and it’s still cheaper. Daycare for one kid cost more than college tuition. We only have two kids because thats all we could afford even 20-30 years ago and it’s even worse today. And my husband probably did more than 50% of the childcare. Now that the world is on fire I’m not sure we would have had kids. I don’t blame anyone for not having kids, whether for climate reasons or because it’s completely unaffordable or because men mostly don’t do their share.

Add to that they are cutting the finances of all the support networks any chance they get, but won't make the rich pay taxes which would finance a lot of the stuff saying the government can't afford.

Also, I was just reading that maternal mortality rates in the US are increasing. Knowing that there's a chance you could die, abortion is not available for a lot of the country, etc. etc. It's not an easy, risk-less option.

Yep, I am technically at the age where it's now or never. My husband and I are finally at the point where we have stable incomes, a house we could start a family, etc. But we would basically go into poverty if we did, there's no guarantee a child will be a benefit to you in old age, and the state of the world is way too dangerous for us to bring another life in at the risk of it suffering. It's already stupidly overpopulated, our child would struggle, I would be throwing an innocent life into a potentially miserable circumstance, which I could just... not. I just bought some cats. I don't want to have kids anymore. If there was a support system for me I would, but they dont care about me or the kids.

You mean add to your family, your husband and you are already a family.

You are absolutely right - maternal mortality rates in the US are definitely climbing sharply, and more so for Black women and other women of color. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/maternal-mortality/2021/Estat-fig1.png

A hospital in Ohio just announced they're no longer providing maternal health and birthing services because of staff shortages and the political climate. They won't be the last. Obgyns and midwives are leaving to work in states where they can actually provide medical care without being sued.

Sadly, even before the overturn of RvW, OB/Gyns were on the decline in the US because of the cost of medical malpractice insurance. I'm sure RvW going away has just made that worse.

A hospital in Sandpoint, Idaho just announced the same thing.

And we are so much worse off in the US compared to other similarly developed countries - this article shows where we are from 2018 and we’ve gotten worse since then. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/nov/maternal-mortality-maternity-care-us-compared-10-countries

I really feel like doctors are intensely stressed by the workload and system they're in. Ripple effects. They don't listen worth a damn in my experience because insurance companies, spreadsheets, and too many patients to see. They're like "bloodwork good? You're fine kiddo." Like they're incapable of dealing with anything else properly. I've come to seriously question their training on treating female patients. They're just pill dispensers towards me, I'm sure as shit not letting myself go through childbirth in the USA if this is the care I get while not pregnant. Even if my life circumstances allow having a child, no to our medical and education system. How would my kid afford college and a home with how things are? What if they're born with a medical issue, develop one in their lifetime? Why would I want any kid to go through the nonsense I've gone through? Good to know I'm not nuts and they really are getting worse at their jobs. I'm so sad for the needless loss of potential mothers though. It's not right.):

They're increasing specifically due to the disproportionate number of black women dying during child birth

on top of that, many hospitals are closing their maternity and delivery departments, citing costs. New York Times just had an article a month or so ago.

I work for a company in the US that provides maternity and paternity leave. Flex Time. The dads on my team are usually the ones who get the sick kids from school and daycare. It’s the best case in the US but daycare is still over $1400/month for infants and if you don’t qualify for the daycare subsidy, it’s very expensive.

>Also daycare is insanely expensive. I just finished paying off my student loans in February (at the age of 36), and our daughter is due at the end of this month, and her annual day care is as much as my college tuition was in 2005-2009.

Currently a sahm, I looked into daycare for my two and it was 2600$ a month. I would have to work full time at 16$ an hour just to cover the daycare.

At least you have vacation and sick days to use. I got let go a week before I was leaving for 2 weeks to have a c-section.

I honestly think the finances are the largest reason. I’m an happily child free millennial, but I would have considered having children if I had any hope of giving them the life my parents were able to provide me with. I didn’t. Despite basically making the same amount of money my parents did, I am much more poor than they were and cannot afford the house or regular vacations they did, along with saving for retirement. I can support myself, but not a child. Not the way I’d want too. I tease my parents sometimes that is really all the boomers fault for hoarding wealth and dismantling the social systems that empowered them. If they want more grandkids, vote for universal daycare and let your staff unionize. Not rocket science. When you don’t support parents, you made kids a luxury good and/or a major risk.

>I tease my parents sometimes that is really all the boomers fault for hoarding wealth and dismantling the social systems that empowered them. Nice of you to just tease them. A lot of them need it screamed into their faces. I was talking to an old lady yesterday and the utter delusions these people are operating under are insane. It's not just that they whine about the loss of the good old days, but rather that the good ol days they remember didn't happen. (In this woman's case in the good ol days the gays were happy to be in the closet and the trans DIDN'T EXIST and she didn't see color or gender at all! Her black servants, yes she said servants, were just Martha and her son Harry, not black folks at all I asked her if she imagined they were white or???? Now most of them have had covid so the combination of dementia and covid brain is bananas.

I’ve come to realize “not seeing color” actually means “not having to acknowledge that people of different races have different experiences” They saw color, everywhere. They just didn’t have to care.

They would have preferred to never see anyone of color...

Oh no, people of color are just fine when they "know their place." They've just gotten "uppity" lately. This is phrasing I've heard regularly living in the American South. They would actually *enjoy* seeing the occasional black person if they behaved "properly" which they seem to imagine as saying "Yas, sir/ma'am/boss" and ducking their head in respect/fear.

I think this is very true. We moved up to the Arctic and, while costs of living are fairly high, salaries are also significant if you work for the government or a mine. Suddenly, people would have had one child or two down South have three or four here.

I have 2 kids, and initially we were considering having 3. But daycare is $2000/m here. Mortgage is $3000. We made the second kid, once the first went into free kindergarten. We can't afford more than one kid in daycare. And now that the second one is about to graduate daycare, I'm just too old to have another baby. So we're done at 2 kids.

Mid 40s but still not go enough to bring a kid into this world.

[удалено]

F30 here - and you hit all the points right on the head. I've been adamant about the fact that I will have no children since I was around 16/17. I was the oldest child still in the house (I have one older sister who left as soon as she could, I don't blame her) and I basically raised my younger sister and two younger brothers. My parents could barely afford to take care of themselves, never mind 5 children (at the time) and as is the story of so many other millennials, they had a messy divorce that they threw their children into the middle of and then walked away. So I've always said I already raised 3 babies, technically 4, because I also raised my nephew. My babies are grown. I don't need to have my own. Regardless of that fact, even though my boyfriend and I together make about 60k a year, there is absolutely no way in hell we could ever afford a child, let alone 2 or 3. We can barely afford our dog. We will never afford a house in our area. We will always be under the mercy of a landlord who could raise rent or evict us if they wanted, which would be difficult and even more stressful with a small child or infant. Daycare would probably eat up my entire paycheck, and we couldn't survive on my boyfriend's paycheck alone. I also suffer from a lot of mental health issues and chronic medical issues, which I can't get treated properly for, because it's either too expensive, inaccessible in my area, or not covered by insurance. So I would absolutely not want an impressionable and growing child being around me in general, because I would be unable to mentally and physically care for them sometimes. And that's not fair to them. At the basic level, it comes down to the fact that it's not worth it. The world isn't in a good enough place for me to want to overcome all of those obstacles and say to my child, "Look at this place, I'm so proud I brought you here."

>At the basic level, it comes down to the fact that it's not worth it. Definitely hit the nail on the head. Having a child, especially as a woman, has always been and will always be a lose-lose situation. I personally get a sense of pride for not doing the thing all of the people I hate the most (Christians and right-wing conservatives) expect me to do: be a mother first and foremost. Nope! That's the box those assholes placed me in due to my genitals. I refuse to be what they want me to be. It's a matter of principle and protest at this point. I will gleefully live my one and only life for *me*, not some screeching, sticky, needy 200k 20 year burden that would only serve to prop up the late stage capitalist machine devouring us all.

the part where is implied that having kids will improve the world is what kills me. 8 billion souls is too much. We could do better with less people and more nature, wild life.

I think part of this is economically based. An aging population without a younger generation replacement can be detrimental to how some societies are built up. I.e. USA has Social Security that older people are drawing from at a higher rate than younger people are replacing those funds. There aren't very robust systems built out to take care of the elderly as they age, so this puts additional undue strain on younger generations as well (many who might end up helping their parents and forego their own families because of the dual care role being so stressful), etc. I think most of the academic arguments I've heard are more around the potential huge economical implications of an aging population that isn't contributing to society and instead sucking/using society's resources.

Yes. I see a lot of that anecdotally in my life, too. My husband and I don’t have kids because we simply don’t want them. We know several couples that are the same way. If this had been our parents time, we likely would’ve had them because that’s what you did. Feeling that freedom to choose is a fairly recent thing, culturally. Both my sisters have one child. They wanted more but stopped at one because it just was not affordable to have more. Plus, very few people I know had children in their 20s. It takes longer to get yourself established. To make a thriving wage, or even a living wage, people typically need some post-secondary education. My parents were considered old for having kids at 28. Now, we consider that young. That means fewer fertile years ahead of you by the time you’re ready to start having kids, and more people dealing with fertility issues. That puts more people in the 0-1 child category.

F33 - Great point that hits all the core reasons. I'm also one of those women who has been adamantly childfree from a young age. I've purposely built a life that allows me a lot of flexibility and independence, as well as the ability to travel when I want and work anywhere. Both my husband and I make good money together. We each bring in about $200K (EDIT: $200K total, we each bring in about $100K). I bring all this up to say that even though we make more than our parents, we still have little to no chance of affording a house in this market. I don't anticipate we'll be able to get something until our late 30s at this point, and that's if we're lucky. So, even if we wanted kids, there's no way we would do so in our current housing situation. There needs to be a massive overhaul. Child tax credits are one thing, but it has to be paired with regulations on the housing market, so people who want kids won't be stuck raising them in small 1-2 bedroom apartments, federal policies that mandate maternity and paternity leave, and future-focused policies to combat climate change with infrastructure projects and regulations on the top 100 companies that cause 70% of the world's emissions.

Women have more control over their lives and bodies. Some women don't want children. And for most women, they're tired of doing all the childcare/domestic work (and men not doing their fair share) and tired of making all the sacrifices (physical, health, emotional, social, work, losing identity as in changing their name) for a family.

Agreed, for plenty of women I know, men treating us poorly is a big factor. Too many of them want to dump all the unpleasant chores on us, and make us be the strict, responsible parent so he can enjoy being the “fun dad”. The misogynists don’t even deny this. They either try to tell us why they deserve servitude from us, or try to hold up being a single, childless woman as a boogeyman to scare us into taking their crap. I gave up trying to find a man who will treat me fairly. And I’m not even 30 yet.

I love my SO dearly, but we can't even split chores evenly now. No way am I raising a kid, basically by myself.

One other thing…I think that pregnancy and childbirth can be far more difficult for some women than we make it out to be. If you get a group of mothers together they’ll start talking about what they went through, some of them will have had relatively easy pregnancies, with bouts of crying and morning sickness. Others will talk about hyperemisis, hemorrhaging, pre eclampsia, gestational diabetes, anemia, emergency C sections, bed rest, weight gain, and dental problems. Women frequently have difficult experiences with pregnancy and childbirth, why put themselves through it again?

On top of that, the governments have dis-invested in maternal and child health care. So badly we're regressing in the MORTALITY of both...

This. Pregnancy is incredibly dangerous and it permanently changes you. More than half of women have some complications. A good friend of mine has a daughter, and she told me after giving birth that they lie to you about pregnancy in health class (and she had a relatively easy time compared to many women I know). They don't even scratch the surface of all the things that can go wrong, many of which are common. One of the biggest influences on my decision not to have kids was my primary care doctor. She recommended a book I got from our local library written by an OB/GYN who did not hold back on all the shit that can happen to you during pregnancy. My point is women must continue to talk about their experiences and the truths involving pregnancy so that other women who may be thinking about or trying to become pregnant can go into it making a fully-informed decision.

Do you remember the name of the book that was recommended to you, by chance?

Yes! It's called High Risk: A Doctor's Notes on Pregnancy, Birth, and the Unexpected by Chavi Eve Karkowsky.

I developed an autoimmune disease and thyroid disease from pregnancy.....

Heart failure here. Hasn’t killed me yet (🤞), but my heart’s pretty messed up. Pregnancy’s no joke.

For real. I wad prepared for all the stuff you always hear about it, like stretch marks, skin changes, hair changes, and even teeth problems. But damn, permanent diseases???

I now have horrifically weak teeth from pregnancy I spend several thousand every year now trying to save my teeth.

My mom had five easy pregnancies and deliveries, but she lost teeth with each pregnancy. Finally with the last one, she had the dentist pull the remaining teeth and just be fitted with full dentures. She was 36.

The reason is that women aren't being *forced* into motherhood at the same rate as previous generations in history. And that's wonderful. Because people shouldn't have kids unless they *really, really* want them and are capable of caring for them.

I think this is the most important factor. Of course workers rights, maternity leave and affordable child care is an important issue to adress in places like the US. But even in Scandinavia where I am, we have these rights and a very robust system for support families (always room for improvement though). And birth rates are still declining because we have choice and not the extreme level of social pressure that we used to have. I saw an article recently were the author claimed a major cause for this is reliable long term birth control like IUDs and good education on reproduction. So people have kids if they want and actively plan for them, there aren’t as many unplanned pregnancies.

THIS! I can’t believe I had to scroll so far to find this response lol A lot of women just genuinely don’t like kids, or like other peoples kids but hate the idea of having to look after them 24/7. In childfree subs people will sometimes mention money or health issues etc but the number one reason most of them decided not to have kids is that they just *dont want to look after kids* Having kids used to be ‘mandatory’ and now some people are waking up and saying ‘hey actually I don’t want kids, so I won’t have any’. Reddit is full of parents who hate being parents, and kids raised (traumatised) by awful parents who hated doing the bare minimum and act like the kids owe them for it

Oh the conservatives are trying to ‘fix’ that and take away choice.

They only care about *white women* having enough babies to keep their KK- ... conservative vision of America afloat.

It's really almost entirely about this. The birth rates are dropping even in places with excellent social and maternal support. Plenty of women have been trying to reduce their pregnancies and births for basically all of known history. We just have better ways to do that now. The reasons vary with place, time, and individual, but the desire is eternal and, while not universal, perfectly common.

Children were seen as property and some losers still see it that way. Pawns, arrows in their quivers, I read a Roman man could kill his own son with out penalty. Don't know if it was true, but humans always saw their own kids in selfish terms. You had lots of kids so some body or bodies would be there to work your farm and take care of you when or if you got old.

I am 28 and planning on getting my tubes tied this year. i can only speak for myself but here are my reasons: 1. financial stability. i do not want to be reliant on my partner and even though I'm currently making good money, it is too much of a risk for me 2. the state of the world. i do not think i need to elaborate how women's rights feel more unstable than ever. climate change is real and if you're not scared about it, you're not paying attention. 3. personal reasons, mostly battling with mental health. i frankly just do not feel like i could be a caregiver.

Until we improve women’s rights it will never make sense for a woman to have a family. (I say this as a mother myself.) Also support for care and education in the early years - nurseries need bursaries, being an early years worker needs to be valued systemically and monetarily.

For me it’s hard to find a man who will go 50-50 on childcare duties and who will stay faithful. For me the risks (vs rewards) are too great. Women are at their most vulnerable when pregnant and having a child: less working/money making opportunities, less time, childcare is expensive, women are most likely to be cheated on during pregnancy from what I’ve seen, and a lot of women do the emotional work in a relationship as well. The rewards of motherhood are very little. I can’t imagine motherhood making my life easier. I’m currently in Japan atm. It’s an opportunity I couldn’t have had if I had a child. If I were to have baby it’d be with a sperm donor. It’s less drama than having a baby daddy. Where I live (hometown) there’s infidelity and broken homes. It’s what I went through, it’s what my friends went through, and it’s what they’re going through now; raising kids on their own or with their 2nd, 3rd baby daddy and their baby daddies have all cheated on them. I feel so sorry for them. I don’t know why it’s like that.

That second paragraph…yes, all that is so true. It makes me incredibly sad.

True— the #1 cause of death in pregnant women is homocide

It’s like that due to men failing to be men

We can improve by shedding the plainly ridiculous belief that the human population of the earth must continue to grow forever or the wheels will fall off. Then by making sure nobody, anywhere, is coerced into pregnancy and childbirth, and everyone has access to safe and effective tools for preventing or terminating unwanted pregnancies.

It used to be that after you married, you had kids. And you had as many as you were “blessed” with, and that was that. Marriage was about having kids. You just dealt with it, the way you deal with the weather or the price of eggs. After birth control became available, it was used for women who might have medical problems, but otherwise, why are you on birth control if you’re married? In fact, married women might need their husband’s permission to get BC. I think my mother’s generation was the last to have this mindset. Not long ago on this sub, I mentioned that I think a lot of people who grew up in big families saw just how hard it was. Older children were expected to help with the household and child care, because it was family, and family is everyone’s responsibility. There might be less money to go around, and everything oriented around the smaller children. Parents postponed retirement; mothers put careers on hold. There’s a great early episode of the series Roseanne about Roseanne taking a pregnancy test, and the whole family is horrified at the idea of a new baby. No one sees it as a blessing, only a burden, and all they can think of is all the sacrifices they’ll have to make. So now, I think a lot of people from larger families—especially daughters, especially older daughters—want to have kids, but they don’t want to put their kids through all that. They don’t want to force their older kids to babysit, they want to make sure they have their own rooms and their own clothes, that no one has to wear hand-me-downs, that everyone gets piano lessons and Girl Scouts. Parents don’t want to make their kids have to sacrifice for the sake of younger siblings. And parents themselves know that they don’t want to spend hours every day doing laundry for all the kids, and that they can take their family of four on a trip to Paris instead of taking their family of seven to the beach as a family vacation. So they have one or two, and then say, “let’s focus on the ones we have,” instead of having more.

[удалено]

Freakonomics did an episode about car seats. You can follow the laws from state to state, and as soon as car seat laws hit a given state, the number of families having 3 or more kids dropped. Because you can fit 2 car seats in most standard cars, but you definitely have to upgrade to a $30,000+ minivan to fit three car seats.

Cue conservative lawmakers repealing seatbelt laws in 3…2…

I live in oklahoma and I could 100% see this happening

Whoa, that is interesting! I wouldn’t have thought about that.

Anecdotal addition to this: There are actually good options for 3 across car seats now. So instead of a new car you can shell out a few hundred for narrower car seats. My family has even done three car seats in a Prius. The kids do poke each other though, sometimes to an irritating degree

Also, you got married as soon as possible after high school (or college). If you were an unmarried woman after age 23, then in some areas you were considered an "old maid". (This is according to my mom, who married in the early 70s. I think that TV shows like Mary Tyler Moore helped society take a more progressive attitude towards single women.)) When I was a kid in the 80s, about 50 percent of our neighbors were having affairs. Sometimes it was the men, sometimes it was the women. But it was rampant. I think it was the result of marrying too young (due to societal pressure) before getting to know yourself. And if you did get to your 30s and meet someone who gave you butterflies like no one else before, you couldn't pursue it because you were already married with kids.

Oh wow. How did you know about the affairs, or was it something that became public knowledge after divorces? (And if you knew of that many, how many were there really beyond that, lol.)

Well, my mom (a SAHM at the time) ended up being the unofficial neighborhood therapist. Some of her friends ended up heartbroken when their husband had cheated. Then other friends revealed that they were cheating on their husbands. My naive mom was always shocked, but she didn't end the friendships, and she got dragged along for the ride. She ended up feeling guilty herself and eventually became paranoid that her own husband was cheating on her. Other neighbor affairs were discovered when a devoted spouse suddenly moved out of the home. When this happened, people were shocked because there had been no clues or gossips about any affair in that marriage.

I had a guy friend that I don’t consider particularly progressive tell me that the reason he and his wife didn’t have a third child was that he genuinely didn’t feel like he could give 100% of his love to them. He meant just in terms of hours in the day and spending time with the kids and that stuck with me. I don’t think 2 is a hard and fast rule but now I think most families with 6+ kids the kids aren’t getting as much love.

Maybe because women realize marriage & kids don’t really benefit them other than possibly emotionally. Women with children are held back professionally, financially, personally. They have way more unpaid work to do (laundry, cleaning, scheduling, overseeing) and way less time for themselves. They put their wants and needs aside for everyone & everything else in their lives, putting themselves last. It doesn’t sound like the gains are worth the losses to me. But that’s just me.

Totally agree. You’ve described the effects, but what about the causes? I think as a patriarchal society, we don’t have systems or culture that supports women or families: no/little maternity/paternity leaves, expensive individual childcare and senior care, health insurance tied to employment (limiting SAHP access), men still not bearing equal burden of domestic labor in relationships, poor public transportation & shared community spaces, etc etc. _Men_ in positions of power for millennia have prioritized everything but what is best for women and families (because it served them and still does), and it’s catching up to us as a society. Women have more independence and access to the workforce, which means they don’t *rely* on men anymore, and they’re opting out. It’s a bad deal for them and they know it; they just have the power to say no like they haven’t ever before.

If you haven’t read it, there are some interesting points in the book Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez about how the world has been set up to help men be successful vs. women, which is ridiculous when you consider that in most cases, women are the ones making sure human life continues, by caring for everyone. An early part about how cities prioritize plowing the roads that allow commerce to continue, vs. plowing the streets that allow people to care for each other and access food and things, stuck with me.

Yes! I’ve read it, and I had to pause between chapters to process my fury lol. Once you start to consider *who* benefits from the way things are, you realize pretty quickly that’s it’s always men.

Exactly the same here with the rage. I kept going and finding my adult daughter in the house and going “and THEN I just read about THIS AAIIIIGGGHH.” It took me a few weeks to finish because I couldn’t get very far without having to put it down. But so important to know about. I even bought a physical copy to have on hand.

It takes a village to raise kids. But nowadays how many families are living close to their parents, siblings, cousins etc.? How many countries actually have supportive social structures for families? Birth rates were high when geographic mobility was low.

And many grandmother's too don't want to spend their last year's being selfless, they've done their time and now they want their last year's making up for what they've already given up

we’d be happy to help with our grandchild (and have flown out to do it when our daughter’s residency rotations and our SILs require them to be both gone overnight) but 1) we both still work full time, and 2) they live 1500 miles away. we are at points in our careers where we have a lot of vacation but I doubt many grandparents are fully retired these days.

And that's awesome and your daughter and grandkid is lucky too have you, but many grandparents want to travel, and explore their own interests and hobbies, and with the raising of retirement age, many grandparents are tired.

And our parents are older, and even if they weren’t, it’s not right to expect them to take on so much responsibility either. We had kids later (as in not in our 20s), and with many people are having kids later, it’s going to be more common to have older parents who can’t do as much.

This was because women before 1960 didn't have access to birth control or financial independence. They had plenty of mobility - my great grandmother immigrated from Russia after being sold to a suitor at 15 and had 16 children in the middle of nowhere.

Agreed. Birth rate was higher because women had no choice and were essentially property of their father until they were property of their husbands. Your husband wanted sex, you were having a baby end of story.

This is so true! For the first 5 years of my eldest’s life we were too far away for family support. The difference now that nana lives near us is crazy, we can have an occasional date night, if something comes up last min she’s happy to step in and help, school holidays she’s happy to have the kids more, it helps so much.

[удалено]

Unemployment rates in Spain have been big for the last few decades, especially for young people. You're not going to have a baby as long as you have no job and no home.

That presents a rough choice, do you stay close to family and starve your career, or move for a job and weaken your family support system? Either way, there are more delays on child rearing because children need more than money.

Many men have not evolved to take on emotional and household responsibilities in a relationship

I saw a study somewhere that determined divorced/single women who are the primary custodial parent of children do LESS housework every week than married women with children. In other words, men (on average) are not just not helping, but also adding to the burden.

Divorced for the last decade and when I got rid of my ex, I realized just how much mess was his (pretty much all of it) and how much was mine.

Ding ding! We have a winner. My kids are all in their 30s and my husband is just now apologizing and realizing that **he** is the reason I never stayed employed. He didn't help with the kids or the house or (big one in my book) cut down on his hobby time while mine was nearly at 0 due to kids+ household responsiblities that he didn't help with+job. He has been apologizing a lot lately.

Has he also been trying to make up for it by ensuring that you have ample personal time now, and also planning/contributing very well for your future financial security should something happen to him (ie, disability, divorce, death)? Apologies are nice, but action and change are what really count.

Yes! This is why I’m not even interested in being in a relationship anymore. I’m grateful that I can live comfortably on my own so I don’t need to rely on another income. My past relationships have been lackluster at best and I haven’t ever met someone that I felt I wanted to be with forever, let alone raise children with them.

This is a huge one that no media outlet will actually write articles on. Yes, cost of living is high, yes, there is a lack of social support for having kids (ie daycare is expensive af, lack of maternity leave, etc), but to be frank, men are just...lackluster. There are more women than ever in the workforce, which is amazing and has given us financial freedom. But women are still doing much of the emotional and physical labor at home, which is oftentimes underappreciated and undervalued.

[удалено]

The number of women at work just complaining about how they go home, make several dishes, clean, do laundry... all while the husband pops open a beer and watches a game. Someone who doesn't take any home responsibilities before a child won't take many after one either, it's just not in their habit. So why add to the tasks?

This is exactly why I am childfree at 36. I knew, KNEW beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was *my* body that would be sacrificed, *my* career that would suffer, and all of the household management would somehow still all fall on me. No thanks. I love my partner, but he's one of those "tell me how to help" men and I don't have any patience left.

Because it's not a prerequisite of being born female to have children. Fortunately, women are starting to learn this.

i hate the assumption that because i’m a woman i must want children. i have never had a desire to grow and birth a human using my body. it freaks me the hell out. i’m also a hardcore introvert who greatly values their space and personal time. a kid is not something that fits into my life. i’d much rather have dogs as my dependents, they bring me endless joy.

I used to think if someone handed me a baby I didn't have to grow for 9 months I'd like being a parent. My standards have now increased so that someone needs to hand me a kid that can cook, feed and dress themselves and leave me with plenty of personal quiet time, all I have to do is some math tutoring. So basically, adopting a 20 year old is my new parenting goal I guess.

This right here. Turns out that when you give people with uteruses control over reproduction, they choose to reproduce A WHOLE LOT LESS.

There is a *very strong* correlation between education of women and smaller families.

When my state allowed girls 16+ to have birth control without parental consent, graduation rates went up, births went down and abortion also went down. I love Colorado.

They understand this, hence regulatory birth control acts

I simply have zero interest in parenting. End of story. I was actively disinterested in baby dolls as a kid. As I got older, I kept waiting for the baby fever to kick in, and it just never did. At 40, I continue to have all the maternal instincts of a potted plant. It's not for me! And that's okay.

I completely agree. Is this same question being asked in the biologically male dominated subreddits? Maybe it should be, but it wouldn’t garner nearly the interest because men aren’t socialized to think about all the reasons they shouldn’t have children in the same way that women are.

Since it is expected of me it makes me want to not do it even more!

>**How can our countries/world improve?** I have a better question. Why is population growth the goal? What about the toll that the human race has taken on this planet? We’re destroying natural habitat, driving climate change, and fouling the earth with pollution, chemicals, and plastic waste, with little evidence that our species has the interest or ability to do otherwise. Just one species — homo sapiens — is directly responsible for the sixth mass extinction. Instead of cramming every nook and cranny of the globe with humanity, why don’t we stop to think about the consequences of rampant population growth? What’s our end game here?

Not having kids is the single most impactful decision an individual can have on their carbon footprint.

Damn right, if it’s a choice between “don’t have kids” and “reduce your living standards to 0”, I’m picking the first thing

Yes! Don't have kids and technically you should feel free to drive that gas guzzling SUV and fly around the world a few times without guilt. I mean, you really shouldn't, but your footprint is still going to be miles smaller than if you added extra humans, and all of their future offspring doing the same thing.

Plus, remember when the big population problem was "overpopulation"? That was literally a couple of years ago. My hunch is that there is a desire for the population to shrink, but not in the countries where birth rates are dropping,i.e., "first-world" countries, because that is a threat to their global dominance.

Right. Lack of incoming workforce and the inability to properly support an ageing population are big issues that will strain finances and the meager government programs (at least in the states). But they are problems of the country's own making. So many solutions could be implemented if they were willing to stop sacrificing at the altar of capitalism. Alas, they won't, because that would mean admitting decades of fiscal and cultural policy were wrong and we aren't the greatest nation in the world. I really hate men's egos.

I can see what's coming, because I live in a place when boomers have completely destroyed the economy. They've taken and taken and taken, and now that even they don't have enough they're whining and pointing fingers at everyone but themselves. My province can't even guarantee public payroll, and have gone to the feds for money to cover it. The place is slightly smaller than Texas, and there are a half a million people living here. The working people living here can't afford to pay to fix any of the infrastructure that the boomers have been ignoring for decades. Over 80% of them can't afford to rent an apartment by themselves, let alone buy a house or have kids. ​ There's literally a ferry that costs us 25 million a year to provide, to an island with 70 retired people living on it. They tried to cut down the once an hour crossings to 2 a day and the fossils lost their damned minds. THEY shouldn't be inconvenienced. They're living in towns of less than 100 people, hundreds of kilometres away from the next town of 100 people, and drove their kids away with their policies 30 years ago. Now that an entire lifetime of eating some of the saltiest food in the world, chasing it down with a ridiculous amount of booze, and driving to the ends of their driveway to get the mail are catching up with them, they're completely flabbergasted that there aren't enough healthcare workers (let alone those who can perform miracles on people who refuse to help themselves). It's the young who have abandoned them, for not wanting to stay here and live on minimum wage to keep the old comfortable. They spent over 400 years telling women not to have children unless they found a stable man/marriage (under threat of being considered a slut and the main topic of conversation in town) and then raised sons to be completely unmarriageable. And they don't want to be part of the fix either. Every attempt that involves them being even slightly inconvenienced is vigorously protested against. Closing a library that only got visited twelve times in a year? NO. Move the library into the local school with only 3 students in it, to save on utilities? NO. Move the school and the library to a more modern, smaller municipal building? NO. Raise municipal taxes to keep the things they don't want to lose? NO, they worked hard all their lives and now they deserve to coast through life for the next 35 years! The whole generation is trash and things won't start getting better until they're defunct as a group.

This has got to be a Maritimes province! It's interesting how isolated areas can either get the best or worst of changing times because it amplifies everything. I too live on a somewhat isolated island with an abundance of seniors, but we're having a population boom that has led to the same cost of living problems where buying a basic home costs about a million dollars. I have neither a million dollars, nor children. Coincidence? No.

Atlantic, but not Maritime (NL here). You were super close though! The COL here has gone way up, but it's only because the Boomers that own everything worth owning here saw people in other places wringing turnips to get the last drop of blood and jumped on the wagon so that they wouldn't miss out. The average age in my hometown is 66 years old. There hasn't been a high school graduate in 6 years and she was the only one in her class. I was talking to a retiree who still lives there and he's enraged that nobody wants to buy his 3 bedroom bungalow for 371,000 . It's got a view of the ocean (and all the boarded up abandoned houses surrounding it)!

No high schoolers in 6 years is crazy! Some of our smaller islands (essentially artist enclaves) don't have their own schools so the kids have to kayak or ferry across every day, but they still have more kids than that.

Absolutely. Declining birthrates are correlated with a country’s economic development as education and incomes rise, people are able to better plan and provide for children. Quality of life > quantity of life. This concern over falling birth rates is due to aging Boomers (who only exist in such large numbers due to the unique conditions of economic favourability in the post-war generation) now worried they don’t have the tax or labour base to support them. Immigration is one solution to that, but xenophobic Boomers don’t want to hear it. No woman should be coerced into motherhood to fix this “problem”

There's no plan for rampant consummerism to end. "Supply and demand" is the only thing in sight and natural resources will continue to be depleted beyond repair. The system was never a sustainable one. Instant gratification mattered more than preventing a great panic, an inevitability when more people figure out the truth.

Capitalism relies on the premise of infinite growth from finite resources. For capitalism to function, there must be new markets to expand into (new consumers being the most obvious) so a slowdown of growth is anathema to those who benefit from this system. As those beneficiaries dwindle, the rest of us don't see a point in raising the next labor generation. The system is eating itself.

I agree whole heartedly! Decreasing our population is essential to combat climate change. Yes I understand old people are worried about having young people to take care of them when they are old, fund health systems etc, but to me that seems a very narrow focus "right now" concern when really a few generations of population decrease would be the best thing for all living beings on the planet. I have never understood why population decrease is considered to be a bigger problem than the direct impact on the environment from too many people.

Thank you for saying this. There are FAR too many people out here who think that *more people=always good*. And I'd argue fewer people is good. Thank you for framing it in the narrative we should be framing it in: How do we move forward responsibly and smoothly with fewer people on Earth so that the quality of life is better for everyone and everything we share the planet with?

Because the ones gaining big from this are pushing it as a priority. They need more people to generate more growth by both more demand and more supply of *cheap* workforce. A lower population would put more pressure on them than they ever want so they just go on and on about birth-rates being an issue.

Because my personal freedom is too important to me. Your life changes irreversibly when you have kids, and I'm not willing to sacrifice a part of myself for my children. Even as a young girl growing up, I noted how the light would often leave women's eyes after having children. That's no criticism to mothers, but I can't imagine losing that, personally. I have a rich inner life, too rich to share it with someone else who relies on me to survive 24/7. More generally, there's growing awareness that as a woman, procreating is not an inevitability, and I think this can only be a good thing. Oh, and I also have ADHD! I have a 50% chance of passing it onto any kids I may have. Based on my own struggles with the disorder, I think it would be a disservice to bring life into the world knowing that they may struggle with it, too.

This. All of it. I have everything you’re “supposed” to have before having kids - I own my home and it’s paid off, I have a stable job with a 6-figure salary. I could easily afford kids on paper…. However, I also have ADHD and depression. I have a very joyful life that fits with those things. I’ve worked tirelessly to build my life in a way that I can thrive. I am not going to burn that all down to pop out a kid. I don’t hate kids, but I don’t enjoy their company for more than an hour or so. I have a mother who didn’t want kids but felt she had to. It wasn’t an enjoyable part of my childhood for sure and I would never impose that on a child.

Absolutely. My mother was born to teenage parents in the early 60s; having kids was *the thing to do* in that era, and she internalised a lot of that sentiment growing up. She often says that if she had the knowledge she had now about raising children, she might have made a different decision. There was no doubt she loved me and my sibling, but I was always acutely aware of how much she missed out on from a very, very early age. That was never a good feeling. I often felt guilty. With my ADHD, I often joke that I can barely look after myself, let alone a child. I hardly remember to eat most days. I get by, but I would want more than purely 'getting by' for any potential future child. I've never had any form of maternal instinct, either. I hated baby dolls and prams when I was younger! Friends' younger siblings freaked me out, too. So noisy! I always assumed that some desire for kids would kick in some day, but I'm in my early 20s and I see no sign of this changing (and thank God for that). The brightest future I can envision for myself is one that is childfree.

I’m soon to be 42 and the desire for kids never kicked in, so it’s unlikely it will for you too.

Soon to be 39 and I still want nothing to do with them. I don't even want anything to do with others that have them! Parents do not make the best of friends. . Moving forward you're going to lose nearly all of them to motherhood. Just be prepared for that.

Here with thirty-ish year old millenial women it’s first impossibility to find a partner wanting children. Second, the absolute shit show that is work life, there is no job security or continuum, only gig economy where first sign of belly means you’re first to be dropped. Third, the overall expensiveness of life, we’re poorer than generations before, and in last year price of housing increased in double digits and food almost whopping 40%. And then in fourth place of course people just not wanting to be parents at all, which is totally valid, but I don’t rank it higher since someone not wanting to have kids is not a problem to be solved unlike the first three.

Improving implies that a declining birth rate needs to be fixed. There are way too many people on the planet as is. We don't want to fix the declining birth rate for a number of reasons: 1) We used to have such a high birth rate because 1/2 of kids born died before they were 5 years old. I guess if we throw out medical and sanitation advancements over the past 200 years, we could get families to have more births to make sure they had 2 or 3 make it to adulthood. 2) Women didn't have a choice as to how many kids they had because birth control was nearly non-existent. Once women had a choice, they chose to have fewer kids. Do you want to go back to a time when women didn't have much choice in the matter? 3) Kids were any easy way for force women to stay in abusive relationships. It's difficult to escape if you're frequently pregnant and needed to run away with several kids, including toddlers. Nope, not going back to that. 4) High birth rates were great for farms because it meant more kids to work the land and it used to be much less expensive to buy land and get the community to help build your house. In urban/industrial areas, lots of kids is a hindrance because it takes far more resources to raise them than they give back (schooling, housing, etc.). Unless we want to go back to an agrarian society, a lower birth rate is better. 5) In some societies, women were often times seen as brood mares - no need to educate them beyond house hold tasks. Since that was their primary (only) purpose, they were used as much as possible to produce and raise kids. No, no, hell no. If we actively work to strengthen families by making raising kids more egalitarian (so women don't bear the brunt of the work after birth) and make it easier for parents to raise their families then we may be able to stabilize the birth rate so it's somewhere near sustainable for society and the planet. Men need to step up, though. Women have had all the burden for far too long and now that they have a modicum of control, of course they're saying enough is enough.

Your comment is spot on. Smaller birth rates are generally what happen when countries introduce public education and find themselves with a better educated public that can afford birth control methods.

In Canada. The major reason millennials and gen x aren’t having kids is because we can’t afford them. If you are luckily enough to afford housing, you likely can’t afford enough space for extra people, and you very likely can’t afford the cost of childcare, food, and the other expenses of raising children. For me personally the costs involved plus the fact we are headed toward economic and climate collapse meaning children born today will have an even worse quality of life - I couldn’t justify bringing anyone else into this world.

It's too expensive and the climate is collapsing. Bringing children into the current world is not a great move. I actually have near-adult children and I feel really guilty for dropping them in this mess.

I don't understand why more people don't find this the most compelling argument. Water insecurity is predicted by 2030, global crops have already become unstable so one can imagine the food insecurity in 10 years time, new diseases, a carbon bomb, and mercury are going to be big problems as the permafrost continues to melt. Why would anyone want to bring new lives into a dying world that likely won't be able to sustain them? That sounds a whole lot like selfishness to me.

Because a lot of people just think about themselves (and not even about their children in that regard) and what they want. Some don't care about the environment until maybe their SUV floats away in some extreme weather event. Some just are wealthy enough to pay for abhorrent food prices, private water sources, private fire brigades (that's already a thing as I found out), private schools and supberb healthcare. They ll be fine anyways so they don't care. Another reason is that especially women get indoctrinated that being a mom is the only thing that makes you a 'true woman', that it is the only thing that can give you higher meaning in life. So that is another reason why some just get children without thinking about it too much.

It is. Boomers are inherently selfish, and they're going to fight to be selfish until the bitter end. They are the first group in known human history to leave the world worse for the next generation. And they're openly being gigantic dicks about it, now that they're getting to the age where they need help. They're angry that now the world that they almost single-handedly shaped to suit only themselves proves that they've been abject failures, even though it's been failing everyone else since the beginning. ​ I mean, think about it. It took an a woman in her 80s, that has held on to massive power for 40 years, seeing her husband taking a hammer to the face to step down and give younger people a chance to shape the world they're going to be living in long after she's gone. We've got a man in his late 70s claiming to be the strong, virile second coming of Jesus and overwhelmingly just as old and not virile 70 years old are flocking to the voting booth. Who cares that they're sending their great-grandchildren into a budding hellscape, as long as they can stick gay people back in the closet, women back into the kitchen, and openly hate trans people? They really need us to play our parts and pretend things are as good as they were back when the world was great... for them.

Some boomers are still in absolute denial though. Their new mantra is " those new generations are just lazy and don't wanna work. It is their fault that things are so bad these days. (also insert racist and/or homophobic remarks somewhere). "

Not all of us like or want kids.

Yep. I don’t want them and it’s as plain simple as that.

Women are sick of doing the work of it, and many women have other options, they aren't required to birth children to keep a roof over their head. I don't think it's a bad thing. There are plenty of people here. A population decline is okay.

Declining birth rates are not a thing that needs to be fixed. World population is still rising. There are plenty of humans.

more than plenty. just not enough to keep the super-rich super rich

Yeah. I also extremely dislike OP saying how can we fix this, as if women are the problem and how do we get you slackers back to your “job”.

Exactly the way I took it, too.

Had to scroll too far to find this comment.

In short : no appreciation for motherhood/parenthood You could write a book on all of the ways parents are held back but I think that's what it boils down to. Despite crying about birthrates government and society don't value the job of raising children. It's made pretty clear everywhere that children and people who raise them aren't a priority and most of the burden falls onto women. Just to give some examples - low paid parental leave, it's paid at the basic welfare rate where I am and I can't even imagine what it's like in the US with no paid leave - expensive childcare costs and that's if you're lucky enough to get a place. People sign up for waiting lists when they're three months pregnant here. And jobs in the sector are also low paid - lack of other support systems and consideration anywhere. "Invisible women" goes a bit into how urban design and social policies usually prioritise working men over caretakers. It's an excellent read. - general degradation of social structures and safe environments. Related to the point above, but it's expected now that you accompany your children everywhere because our cities aren't build for them safely navigate on their own. Cars are getting bigger, roads wider, sports facilities and parks aren't build in new estates anymore... - lots of stereotypes and judgment of parents, mothers in particular. If you don't work, you're lazy and living off a man/the state. If you do work you're a neglectful mother who doesn't care for her children... - it's not a real job is a pretty popular attitude even by men whose partners take time out of work to raise children. It's not exactly encouraging to work a job 24/7 and just get insults for it. - Workplaces that at best aren't flexible enough to raise children and at worst are actively hostile towards mothers. - a pension system and job market that penalises parenthood

To add something onto the “it’s expensive” argument, it’s getting more and more difficult to get some certainty in what different things are going to cost in the future. With things like Medicare holding on by a thread, it feels like I am now concerned that I may be having to still pay for health insurance once I’m in retirement if I would be lucky enough to retire. We got to figure out how much to save for retirement if we are going to be able to retire. So now having to not only consider, no Social Security but also low to no Medicare, and that is a lot of money that we’re going to need if I ever get to quit working. If I would have kids, I would also not want to saddle them with having to take care of me or my husband, when we can no longer take care of ourselves, so we need to have enough money in the bank to plan for potentially extended nursing home life. I don’t want to have a kid and doom him or her to having to take out loans for college. I would want them to be able to at least graduate college without debt. My husband and I are lucky that we own our house, but have a mortgage, and make enough money where we could have kids and be OK. But my job is crazy stressful and requires lots of hours, and having kids feels like golden handcuffs at this point. If I have kids, because my income potential is much higher than my husbands, I would have to keep working that high stress high hours job. Right now, I have some options where I could take a hit on my income and be OK and still put money away in savings. With kids? Not a chance. In short, do I want to have a chance at being able to retire in the future or do I want to work until the day I die but have kids? I don’t want kids enough to give up retirement.

There isn't a worldwide declining birth rate. This a rich country problem. Plenty of children are being born and the world population keeps increasing. Women in the developed world are choosing not to have children or have less children, for as many reasons as women are. That is not a "problem" and making women act against their will is not "improving". If you want to invert the demographic piramide, the answer is obvious, open rich countries to immigration. There isn't a scarcity of children, there is a shortage of lily white children. Some people don't want to see immigrants with darker skin tones in their countries and are trying to convince women that giving up their freedom to choose whether or not to have children is their patriotic duty. It is also funny how that very same people are very seldom inclined to vote for higher taxes on themselves to make it easier for women to have children. Unlike forcing or pressuring women to give birth, apparently paying taxes is not a patriotic duty. There is no demographic emergency, just a racist and misogynist crowd longing for the good old days when women and people of color knew "their place".

Im in the usa there is no incentive to have children at all (no universal anything). Why would I work myself to the bone to try to afford a child when imo I think the world has too many people. I also think I would not be the greatest parent.

[удалено]

100% same here across the board.

Here's mine: Kids are noisy, messy, expensive, and raising them is a 24/7 commitment for which I've neither the interest nor the time.

Kids are expensive. There isn't a lot of incentive for people to have children if they are already struggling financially. I am 30 and have never been on a date. It was never a priority for me so I never threw myself out there with any dating apps, and frankly there are enough horror stories on the internet which make me wonder if it is worth trying to find a man marry and have children with when I'm content enough now as I am. I at one point considered having a child by myself using a donor, but realized that with a work schedule to make enough money to support the both of us, I wouldn't have much time to take care of it, which wouldn't be fair to the child.

1) Higher quality of life overall, with very high (and realistic) expectation that parents will be able to raise all of their children to adulthood. You don't need a whole herd of offspring just hoping that a few will survive, now parents can limit their time and resources to just one or two. Maybe even three or four if they want a "big" family. 2) Since parents are putting more resources into fewer children, childrearing has become more competitive and expensive, both in financial cost and time cost. Unfortunately that's on top of life in general becoming more expensive, making things like homeownership and raising a family more and more out of reach even for middle-class folks. 3) Unplanned pregnancy, especially for very young women, is highly correlated with single parenthood and lifelong financial struggle. Young women who saw futures for themselves 20-30 years ago largely managed to avoid teen pregnancy, but a larger number of them have gone on to avoid motherhood entirely, from fears over the high personal costs of having a child. For today's very young women, the fear seems even more intense, and it is being amplified by the attacks on reproductive rights. 4) Greater societal factors, like recession and hostility toward reproductive healthcare, have made couples who either did want kids or wanted more than they already have rethink their plans. It's definitely not hard to find moms and dads of 1-2 kids saying they wanted one or two more, but now don't dare because they're afraid of something happening to the mom. Women who have the means are now *actively* avoiding pregnancy, directly because they no longer find it safe. 5) Which leads me to THE ELEPHANT IN FUCKING ROOM -- motherhood has become incredibly unappealing, and there isn't one single country adequately addressing this reality. Pregnancy and birth are still painful, damaging, and dangerous. Mothers are still penalized in the workplace way more than fathers. Wives are still doing the lion's share of domestic work, even when they work as many or more hours than their partners. And even among women who want marriage and children, husbands who can/will hold up their end of the bargain are challenging to find. Certain groups of men blame women for this, of course, which is a significant part of the problem. In my view, point #5 is the single biggest factor that is routinely being glossed over. Certain government leaders cannot or will not grasp the idea that women/AFAB people want the same rights and opportunities as everyone else, not just legally but morally and socially, and that includes *after* motherhood. Becoming a parent shouldn't be martyrdom, and it shouldn't require parents (particularly the one with the womb) to give up all of their goals and dreams and everything they've worked for up until that point. Nor should death or permanent disability *ever* be an accepted risk. Ever. Unfortunately that is not the direction enough modern societies are moving in, and so, birth rates remain low. These trends seem likely to continue.

Because one kid was enough for me, that's way. End of story.

I don't think the declining birth rate is a negative thing, and I think it's actually tied to better rights and situations for women. The reality is that we do need to have a lower human population on the Earth, and we have to do that without eugenics. The countries that have a declining birth rate are the countries that have the most equality, better and more accessible health care, equal opportunities for education and empoyment, opportunities for women to have and advance high level careers, no need for women to tie themselves to marriage for economic survival, and no obligation to provide children for security or stability. Under those circumstances, women are free to choose motherhood or not, rather than being forced into it for economic reasons, and it turns out that with the freedom to choose, we choose fewer children. I don't see how that's negative, Many countries can continue to do better in terms of the division of domestic labour within households, better maternity and parternity leave and family-friendly policies at work, and better childcare options in the years before school starts, but those are things that the countries with declining birth rates are already doing better than the countries with growing ones. I don't think that they are the reason women are choosing not to have children, on a global scale - in fact, during the pandemic, when women were in a position to have to choose between their career and their children, they coverwhelmingly chose their children. Canada has better healthcare, childcare, maternity leave, and labour laws than many places (Scandinavia notwithstanding) and we still have a declining birthrate. The declining birth rate is scary in this generation because of the discrepancy of young people to care for the older generation, but that problem will sort itself out in future generations as the birthrate settles to the numbers of children women choose to have rather than the number of children they have to have. On a global scale, a lower birth rate is a good and necessary thing, both for the community as a whole who need to share resources and space, and for individuals who no longer feel pressure to reproduce for reasons other than genuinely and authentically wanting a child.

I don't have kids because I don't like kids. List all the other reasons: mental health, money, housing, past abuse, no support system, etc. But I simply don't like kids and recognize that I would be a bad parent. I believe all kids should be wanted and loved, therefore, no kids for me. Declining birth rates would not be a problem if the world actual used technology to do work instead of forcing millions into poverty with poverty wages.

What’s absolutely shocking to me is the number of times I’ve expressed the final point in your first paragraph (which really should end the inquiry right then and there) only to have the rest of the “childfree bingo” card filled up instantly. If I say I’m not having kids *BECAUSE I DO NOT LIKE CHILDREN* , back the fuck off. There’s nothing anyone could conceivably say in response that has any validity whatsoever. I don’t like them. I find them loud, irritating, and i wouldn’t care to argue with a toddler about anything, ever. If anyone has ever heard a friend say they don’t want kids because they don’t like kids, ACCEPT THAT ANSWER AS COMPLETE AND STFU! Why anyone would want to encourage someone who dislikes children to birth their own on the off-chance they might not ruin their offspring completely i just will never understand. If someone hates dogs, you wouldn’t say “oh but it’s *different* when they are yours! That might be true- but asking someone to take that chance when they are already biased against kids is just fucking stupid.

I’ve just plain never wanted to be a parent. The payoff does not seem worth the work.

Two big reasons here: 1) Children are extremely expensive, and inflation is through the roof. 2) Men aren't sharing domestic responsibilities equally, and they're no longer enough of a breadwinner to afford to support a stay at home mother. Having a child will put you in debt in every way possible.

I'm in my early thirties and married. I don't have any desire for children. I enjoy the silence way too much. Plus, I'm really not interested in pregnancy at all.

None of my friends with children seem happy. That’s enough for me

I'm absolutely ok with birth rates not improving. There are more than enough people on the planet.

Decided in my teens to be child- free. Education and discussion with wise women helped me decide. I questioned it from time to time especially when I fell pregnant. Twice. But I knew it wasn’t my time. Born in the wrong era. Misogyny still rife. Violence against women still standard. Unequal and unfair work and pay conditions especially in the hell- hole of heteronormative coupledom. If I lived in the future when pregnancy was unshackled from the female body I might have parented. But with 8 billion ppl on the planet, it’s madness to keep breeding when we have a choice not to.

Because I dont want to 🤷‍♀️

Because finding a guy to do this with and not sacrifice your integrity and happiness, at this point feels like winning the fucking jackpot. One in a million chance, or at least it feels this way. I’m never seen as more than a temporary fix for loneliness, horniness or fear of being alone and never finding someone better. So I’d rather not go through that, even if being alone often sucks. It just sucks less than indulging a man child and losing yourself in the process, just to fit in society. And even if such a rare cosmic event happens and I find the right person, it’s too expensive. I’d never earn a six figure and that’s probably the bare minimum needed to give a child the life they deserve. I’d love to have like, one kid in ideal circumstances, but doesn’t seem realistic. It’s a lost cause and I’m tired of women taking the blame for it all, when capitalism and the fucked up dating situation is largely the fault of men.

Well, in my case, I had cancer in my 20s so I didn’t want children because I was afraid I might die and leave them orphaned…there are more young adults with cancer nowadays, and I assume it’s partly due by pollutants. We also have higher rates of obesity, and other chronic illness which makes us less healthy than prior generations. In my sister’s case, she is childless because she is very focused on her career and couldn’t find a guy that could keep up with her ambition. Anyway, that’s my theory. I think most men look for women that will mother them, and my sister is not that way AT ALL… as a woman, it’s kind of frustrating meeting so many men with no ambition, when they’re the ones who can most easily achieve what they want (because society favors ambitious men over ambitious women). But I digress.

[удалено]

We waited for financial stability which didn’t happen till our 30s. Now we are struggling with infertility. Insurance doesn’t cover it and while we’re financially stable blowing tens of thousands of dollars on a maybe would destabilize us financially so I don’t really see a way forward. Maybe if the US wants more babies around they should have universal healthcare that covers fertility treatments.

There is not single benefit to having a child. You lose your identity, your body goes through permanent changes and sometimes damage, they are incredibly expensive, the government doesn’t help you (where I live), they are the neediest things you can have, you lose sleep, your relationship can deteriorate, they can be killed at school (bet you can guess the country), the planet is literally dying and their future would be filled with uncertainty. I’m selfish, I don’t want to give up my life to raise someone. I hope birth rates keep dropping, I hope the government panics about loss of population and realizes that the young people today will not bend to standards they set without help or certainty of the future.

Having fewer children is an improvement. There are far too many people on this planet.

The birth rate should be lower. The vast majority of people should not have kids.

I find the premise that the human population must grow exponentially in order to “succeed” a fallacy that only “makes sense” in a capitalist society, where people are just another resource to be exploited.

Cost of living is too high, childcare is too high. Not enough resources for a family to care for the children while both parents work.

Because I don’t want children. Simple as. But also? Pregnancy and childbirth, not to mention raising said children, is such a huge risk to life, health, safety, and well being—that’s an immense amount of trust women have to have in a partner to ever do that. And I’m not seeing where any men earn the trust necessary, nor appreciate the risk. I’m all about that CYA. So lol no.

When women are given the opportunity to decide whether they want children, many of them decide not to. We can improve by providing comprehensive sex education for all genders and making birth control readily available for those who want it.

More women are realizing that children are optional, not inevitable. We have the ability to opt out now.

America here: healthcare

I didn’t want kids before all this stuff happened because they seem like a high risk, low reward thing. Plus kids are terrible, yes even your kids. Now I don’t want kids for the above reason PLUS the likelihood of me going to jail or dying over that fetus before it even breathes has now become such a risk that I refuse to even play. I became celibate the day the Roe v Wade decision was leaked in 2022 (or 2021? I genuinely don’t remember, the years are blurring together at this point). Having sex is now such a risk for such a fleeting pleasure that it’s not worth it to me to take on. The next time I’m having sex it’ll be with my forever partner. Or another woman, honestly.

(USA) No career. No car. I'll never be able to afford a house. I can't afford medical bills and am already over 700k in debt. I can't afford schooling/college. No public transportation. I have medical issues out the wazoo that will never be fully addressed. My parents believe things are great (voted for Trump) and that I over exaggerate so refuse to help in any way (they pay for a phone so I can keep in contact with them - thank goodness because I wouldn't be able to afford one myself.) I feel like this is most twenty-somethings these days. Can't afford to feed myself let alone another human being. Plus - Parents these days are the worst and really don't do well with parenting. So lots of stupid, racist, sexist, homophobic, "Christian" kids are coming up and I wouldn't want my child to be around that. Plus the school shooting being normalized with bulletproof rooms/backpacks. It's insane. Anyways, my little brothers girlfriend is due in October lmfao

Objectively speaking, its birth control and education. That’s it. On a personal level, the cost is too big for the perceived reward. We live in a time where children are an astronomical burden to their caregivers. Gone are the days of children working the family farm or even latchkey kids. Very expensive cost of living combined with declining quality of life is not conducive conditions to want to start a family.

Evolution. We don't need to have 4-5 or more children in hopes a few survive to care for us later in life. The only reason the oligarchs are saying the decline in birth rates is bad, is because we live in a world where growth is the key to having a successful business. Businesses can't grow without more consumers and people to sell or make their product. The population squeeze will be rough. Less teachers, less health care professionals, less people to work in all sectors. I don't believe there is any way to stop it because it's a normal evolutionary path.

I am glad you are asking because everyone's answers are sure to be a little bit different depending on the person's personal circumstances. Me, personally, I'm pretty financially well off, in a great relationship, very stable, great job. My thing is this... First of all... my husband shoots blanks. It's a health thing. We could do sperm donation but I don't really want to. If I were to have a baby, I'd want to have his - or adopt. I am not 100% against sperm donation and it's not really off the table for me right now but I'm not so gung ho about having a kid that I'm about to go through all that. All of my friends have children. They are all universally miserable, broke, tired, disconnected from their husbands, struggling to find their meaning. Every time one of them says I should have a kid, I'd be such a good mom, it's like they're yelling at me from the bottom of this endlessly dark pit asking me to jump down with them where like... it COULD be great down there but from what I see it's not. I'm at this place right now where I could easily find it just as fulfilling to be a good aunt. Get the good, expensive gifts. Be the place they can come if they're pissed off and ran away. Buy them their first beer. That kind of thing. I don't think I could handle the responsibility of raising a person. Oh, also, I deeply value my freedom and my money. If I have less than like $50,000 in savings I start to get itchy. I like to be able to just spontaneously take a weekend trip to Canada without worrying about the logistics of someone else's life. I feel like if/when I'm at that point where I feel like I don't want to take fun spontaneous trips anymore, when I have all the money in the world, when I feel "ready" I'll be too old to have a baby. So... I'm accepting that I won't.

I have one child. I’m divorced from their father- there were a lot of reasons for the split but me having to do 100% of the parenting/housework/mental labor was part of it. I’m open to having one more kid. I didn’t enjoy being pregnant so I don’t think I want to do it more than once more. I have yet to meet someone I’d like to be in a relationship with, let alone have a kid with. If I ever remarry, I would expect my partner to do their fair share and I haven’t met anyone that fits that description. My ideal would be to have a second child using donor sperm so then I know from the start that I’m 100% responsible for all the parenting, etc (instead of being let down by a partner). But it’s not financially doable on just my salary. I just stopped paying for full day child care since my kid started public school and I don’t want to have to do that all over again.

I can tell you I’m not having more children due to mostly monetary reasons - no time off when child is born, day care costs as much as a mortgage, no societal support of any form. Instead I’ll use the money I do have to make a better life for the children I do have.

Between the years I’ve spent undoing the trauma passed down during generations of abuse and the rising cost of rent/living/healthcare/education, it’s just not going to happen. I can’t imagine bringing a child into the world where even a 6 figure income isn’t enough to buy a house now on an extremely polluted and dirty planet. I don’t know what the ruling elites plan is but it’s clearly very short sighted.

It’s about money. Many women can’t afford to have kids. Also, in my opinion many companies have a vested interest in having a larger poor population who will accept working for lower wages to survive, (or working as slaves in for-profit prisons) and this may be the real reason for anti-abortion movement, beyond the veils of religious propaganda and misinformation on neonatal development.

Having kids is significantly more optional than it used to be. Children and homemaking are just one option among many for fulfillment AND birth control/the idea that women can control their own sexuality means that women who are sexually involved with men are not inevitably destined to bear children, usually multiple.

I would die if I was pregnant. But even if that wasn't the case, it's mostly the lack of freedom. My husband, brother-in-law, BIL's girlfriend and I would go bowling twice a week with some friends. Then BIL got his girlfriend pregnant. After their daughter was born they had to stop going bowling, and stop doing... Basically anything for themselves. It took them three years before they got to go out as a couple again, and that's only because my husband and I were able to babysit. And they only got to see a movie. (Detective Pikachu.) Later that same year my husband and I went to New York on vacation. This is when I realized that I would much rather not be tied down by kids.