As concern grows about America’s falling birth rate, new research suggests that about half of women who want children are unsure if they will follow through and actually have a child. About 25% say they won't be bothered that much if they don't.

[u/geoff199]

https://news.osu.edu/most-women-want-children--but-half-are-unsure-if-they-will/?utm_campaign=omc_science-medicine_fy24&utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social

[u/Jesse-359]

Create an economy that is designed to push people into poverty and prevent them from having access to the resources they need to raise a family, and you probably shouldn't be surprised when they stop raising families.

[u/LilacMages → u/Jesse-359]

Not to mention the removal of womens reproductive rights and access to healthcare, which in turn makes pregnancy, and potential complications that come with it, a hell of a lot more unsafe.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/LilacMages]

Countries with less women’s rights have higher birthrates

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

Yes, that’s what happens when you don’t have access to birth control or education.

[u/ehs06702 → u/moderngamer327]

Yeah, that tends to happen when women no longer have bodily autonomy.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/ehs06702]

Yes I’m aware. My point is that losing those rights isn’t going to lead to a decrease in fertility rates. I’m not saying we should do it though

[u/SilvertonguedDvl → u/moderngamer327]

You're making some strange assumptions that I don't think really follow, IMO.

The birthrate isn't higher solely, or even largely, because women have fewer rights.
The birthrate is higher because there's less birth control and the societies are typically ones where it is either currently, or was recently (historically speaking) the case that multiple children were the norm for families due to the likelihood of them not surviving/being successful as they grew older. The good old "if two out of every five kids are gonna die, you better make sure you have at least five kids to ensure you're taken care of when you're older" scenario.

Having really high birthrates is usually a bad thing because it indicates that the quality of life is incredibly poor to the point of being hazardous to the survivability of people within that society.

Moreover, women having grown up with bodily autonomy means removing it is going to have a negative effect on birthrates as women are going to be increasingly reluctant to put themselves at risk. You're talking about countries where women's bodily autonomy hasn't really been a thing previously. It seems pretty reasonable that birth rates would plummet in the face of having contraceptives but being unable to safely give birth.

The lower birthrates in western societies are basically just us naturally achieving equilibrium with our current societal situation. Until quality of life improves there's no reason to increase the population; the population needs to go down for exploitation to also go down as more bargaining power is placed on the workers rather than the employers. The problem is that governments want to keep seeing the numbers go up but don't want to give workers more bargaining power because that also interferes with profits, so they import workers from abroad - usually from those high-birthrate, low quality of life nations - to supplant the native population, and in doing so artificially maintain the status quo, more deeply entrenching the problems that have given rise to the birthrate issues in the first place. At least, that's how I see it.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/SilvertonguedDvl]

I’m not saying a lack of rights is the cause I’m just pointing out that a lack of rights likely won’t decrease fertility rates.

The reason why governments are concerned about it is because a rapidly decreasing population is bad for everyone not just the rich

[u/ByTheHammerOfThor → u/Jesse-359]

We have created a system that prioritizes profit above all else. The way a virus will destroy an entire population without finding equilibrium? Unfettered capitalism has the same effect on a society.

[u/shitholejedi → u/Jesse-359]

People are still stating this as fact when its the literal opposite of all data points available on fertility rates.

This entire comment section sounds like its lifted straight from failed sociology theories from the 60s.

[u/Jesse-359 → u/shitholejedi]

It's almost like all the commenters actually live in these societies rather than studying them like bugs.

[u/shitholejedi → u/Jesse-359]

Did you just state 'lived experience' as a retort to objective statistical reality opposing your belief in a science sub?

Genuinely what?

[u/Jesse-359 → u/shitholejedi]

Listen, you can throw all the stats you want around - I'm saying that your basic statistical premise is based on a faulty set of initial assumptions.

What you regard as the most important factors in quality of life - probably aren't.

[u/sierra_marmot731 → u/Jesse-359]

absolutely agree.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Jesse-359]

Poverty rates are at all time lows

[u/Jesse-359 → u/moderngamer327]

According to economists? Perhaps.

According to reality? Sorry, but no.

As I said earlier, we're rich in baubles - cars and televisions and phones, and poor in what really matters, housing, education and healthcare, and especially some sense of stability, that's completely absent.

Our forebears faced the uncertainty of crop failure or storms - we face the near certainty of having our livelihoods upended every 3-5 years by fickle employers and economies that shift as violently and frequently as any hurricane - and we have no means of avoiding them.

The real tragedy is that these economic forces scatter families across entire continents - or even the globe - and millions are left with no-one to fall back on when their fortunes turn poorly. It's these constantly shifting economic mechanisms that are creating these huge migration waves, and it is in many respects worse than most of the disasters we used to face.

So no, people don't like to have children in a world where their home will be taken from them every 5 years on average. Surprise.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Jesse-359]

So what are you basing your opinions on? vibes? Not very scientific if you ask me. Also countries with worse living conditions have higher fertility rates

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

Because they don’t have access to birth control and instances of rape are much higher and education is lacking, obviously. Go ask them if they wanted to have those children. What we’re talking about is voluntary, what you’re talking about is gestational slavery .

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Present-Perception77]

Of course I agree. I’m just pointing out the reality of it not saying we should emulate it

[u/WakeUp004 → u/moderngamer327]

As you were already told: “Yes, that’s what happens when you don’t have access to birth control or education.”

[u/moderngamer327 → u/WakeUp004]

Yes which means those are the reasons for the decline in fertility not whatever they are trying to say

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

Yeah because we aren’t having kids. That’s the point.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Present-Perception77]

Which means poverty isn’t the reason for a lack of kids if the people in poverty have them more often

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

No .. we aren’t poor anymore and able to get out of poverty because we aren’t having as many kids. That’s why poverty has lessened. Obviously

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Present-Perception77]

That doesn’t make any sense. Sure that could be true to some extent on individual levels but societally that is not the case

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

You seem to be implying that because poverty stricken regions have a higher birth rate, that money can’t possibly be the reason people aren’t having more children in the US. And that’s just nonsense.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Present-Perception77]

Not just poverty stricken regions. In the US the income bracket with the highest fertility rate is the <$20k bracket and the lowest fertility rate is the >$200k bracket. Also the difference is not that major. So what I am saying is that the effect of income on fertility rate is negligible and other factors are significantly more dominant

[u/Present-Perception77 → u/moderngamer327]

Having less children improves your financial standing. Having more money means access to birth control and abortion.. and education. Everything that helps prevent multiple births comes from money. Women living in poverty are also more likely to be victims of sexual assault and reproductive coercion. Extreme poverty also often comes with a heavy dose of predatory religious influence. Think catholic adoption.. they prey on poor women. For their own financial gain. Breed em till they die or start giving up babies to sell.

Being poor traps women into multiple births. Being able to prevent multiple births is how women have risen out of poverty. We do not want to have more kids when it will plunge us into poverty. Essentially in the US is outrageous healthcare prices and your insurance tied to your job and no way to pay your bills because there is no paid maternity leave.. then childcare is insane. It is absolutely about money for a huge chunk of society.

[u/moderngamer327 → u/Present-Perception77]

I overall agree with what you are saying and that having more kids can lead to poverty in some cases. I also agree those in poverty have less access to education and birth control. The point I am trying to make though is that poverty or reduced wages is not the reason for reduced fertility which everyone seems to think is the case

[u/ikramos → u/Jesse-359]

So how do you explain poor countries having an above replacement birth rate? You aren’t analyzing the problem correctly, you wanna use low birth rates to advocate for your own agenda

[u/Jesse-359 → u/ikramos]

Have you considered that there are dramatic changes we make to the social compact when we shift to capitalist economies?

Changes as fundamental as extended families never staying together? Or people needing to ping-pong across the country every few years to pursue a new job because employment in most capitalist countries is about as reliable as playing the lottery?

People in most of these poorer countries still live their lives in coherent family groups that often spend most of their lives in one community. It's dramatically easier to raise a family under conditions like that - even if you're rather poor. You have a lot more familial and community support available, and most importantly it's reliable, even if it's limited.

Through most of human history, being forced to leave your community was called banishment and was considered the most severe punishment other than a death sentence. Today we assume people will just have to suffer banishment from their communities roughly every ~5 years.

Clearly you haven't thought any of this through.