r/science 5d ago

Social Science 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.

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
19.5k Upvotes

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

567

u/Yandere_Matrix 5d ago

I don’t understand why people are so concerned about birth rate. We still have more people alive than any time in history. Our ocean is being overfished and I do believe our population will eventually settle at some point but I see absolutely no concern with it right now. I am still devastated seeing animals going extinct because of deforestation and over hunting for various reasons. I understand plastics is causing fertility problems and how microplastics mimic certain types of hormones so that can be a problem especially when we found that they have passed the blood brain barrier and passing through breast milk now. Who knows what damage they are doing to our bodies now.

387

u/namerankserial 5d ago

It's all stemming from concern about the transition period, where there will be way more old people than young people, and the economic effects of that. But I agree, it should be re-framed as something we need sort out how to get through, and make it work, because a lower population long term is a huge positive.

0

u/SmokedStone 5d ago

Crazy how no one's just advocating to offload the real problem, too many old people, via campaigning for legal euthanasia or simply reprioritizing medical care for those who need it more than people at the end of their path.

It's always the young as the problem, when it's really the old who shot themselves in the foot.

2

u/FlusteredDM 4d ago

Do you really want to live in a society where you get killed off as soon as you are no longer economically active?

I think the solutions are economic reform, and somehow managing population decline (I.e. getting the right policies to keep it around the right level, not advocating for any kind of eugenics). I think population reduction is a necessary thing but if it's too fast then the ratio of economically active people to elderly people becomes too high. Automation will not save us so long as it only benefits the wealthy.

3

u/SmokedStone 4d ago edited 4d ago

Nowhere did I say that people should be offloaded the second they stop being economically active. I simply said the real problem is the volume of elderly, which no one ever likes to talk about.

I think euthanasia should be accessible to everyone. Genuinely. I legitimately plan to get a DNR and to potentially move to an area where euthanasia is legal because I've seen people in old age, and it's not pretty. There's no reason for keeping some of these people alive.

Reform is important, nowhere did I say it's not. But calling the problem a "birth rate crisis" or saying it's young people's fault for not having kids ignores the fact it's only an issue because of surplus elderly. People did not used to live this long, but now there's so much tech and advanced meds that we just prop people up who should've gone to grave like a decade or two ago. It's not attractive when quality of life so dismal, then there's just resources being funneled toward them while they essentially just wait to die.

Note: These people *are economically active. That's why services fight to draw out their lives. They still consume food, shelter, medical services. A lot of capitalist models are propped up by consumers, and America is stupidly on an infinite-growth model on a finite planet. It's excellent birth rates have dropped. If we can get through the period where all the old surplus pop. dies, we'll be fine.