General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUS birth rates drop to lowest since 1987
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44151642"Births in the US have dropped to their lowest rate in 30 years, marking a cultural shift as women delay motherhood, experts say.
Some 3.85 million babies were born in the US in 2017, the fewest since 1987, as births among women in their teens and 20s decreased.
Both the birth rate - the number of births per thousand - and fertility - a lifetime average forecast - fell."
Snip
"The US is the only developed nation in the world that does not provide some type of national paid family leave plan to new parents.
Other possible explanations could include changing societal expectations, increased access to contraception, limited provision for parental leave from work, and increased expectations of romantic love."
------------------------------------------
At 1.76, the fertility rate is well below the replacement rate of 2.1, which means that the US population is in structural decline without immigration, although that may take some time to materialize as the population ages. There is no breakdown by ethnicity or race in the article.
Civic Justice
(870 posts)....it has no respect for young people and certainly has less for young people who want to build and make a family.
Everything is telling too many people to chase degree titles as being more important than a family, and they base that on the money chase, because everything is set up to gouge the people, by deceptive marketing and crazy advertising, until people have no more sense of respect for humanity.
It has no moral basis of integrity for life, as it went from enslaving people, indenturing people and fleecing people by every game from apprentices ( as in programmed slavery) to working people for as less as possible. So a few people can die rich...
Evil will always pursue what makes Evilness.... We should be a society that embraces childbirth... without measuring the mother and the father by our money equations.
People were far better off in the world, when it was important to live off the land and raise a family... innovation should have made life better, but it has made it unbearable for many.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts).
I took a global economy course, and this was one topic covered.
Productivity will decline, more people will be on assistance and retirement funds.
The countries with the most work-abled populations are now becoming Africa and Middle Eastern nations.
Japan is already suffering from this problem and are shipping off elderly to live in Central America in low-cost retirement facilities.
.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)on the environment by these high-consumption economies.
Consumption will decline, and the chances of a catastrophic ecological collapse will thus go down.
Japan is leading the way in lowering the ecological footprint of developed nations.
TheBlackAdder
(28,076 posts)The old hegemonies will make way for the new nations. Japan, EU and the US are slowly on their way out.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,154 posts)loyalsister
(13,390 posts)and foresighted by considering the near 3rd world living conditions and growing economic inequalities we are seeing along with the expected shrinking living space and food shortages due to climate change.
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,483 posts)In my youth (50s thru 70s), people had kids with the expectation that life would be at least a little better for them - more likely than the parents to get a good education and better jobs. And the cost of living was reasonable. You felt like your kids would be looking into a brighter future and carry on your legacy.
These days, those expectations are no longer valid. There's a damn good chance now that a child will be much worse off than the parents, and in many ways. Today is a sad, trying time for many young couples.
hatrack
(59,442 posts)"Yes, by all means, I've got $100K in student loans, and have a part-time job at Lowe's making $12/hour, so what better time than now to pop out a kid or three? Great idea!"
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)would be able to provide for any children they had. The American Dream is all but dead. I don't think many people believe in upward mobility like they used to. For generations it used to be the norm and now we are seeing the downwardly mobile young who are being subsidized by their parents. Who would want to bring a child into the world when that is their reality?
KY_EnviroGuy
(14,483 posts)is the stress induced in people to be increasingly productive at work, and many have to be constantly available to the company. There has to be subconscious stress that says "I don't have the time to have children".
That's representative of a very sick society enthralled entirely to business interests, and it appears to be getting worse.
.....
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)world of today and the immediate future. I would not have children today with the current state of the world.
Chipper Chat
(9,635 posts)WilmywoodNCparalegal
(2,654 posts)it's the radical idea that women don't have to have children to feel like they're equal parts of the society, that we can be just as complete as professionals or volunteers and contribute to society without having kids.
I can't have children not by choice; I would love to have a child. I would have the financial resources and emotional stability to be a good parent. But I cannot. I'd have to say the biggest struggle for me has been society's indirect messaging that you're not worthwhile as a woman unless and until you have children. That messaging is everywhere. A woman can be a complete human being by being a mother - or not.
northremembers
(63 posts)Since they started tracking this back in the 18th century replacement rates correlate to education, social mobility, crime, and religious conservatism. The higher the degree of education and social mobility the lower the replacement rate. The more power religious conservatism has (which is usually the opposite of education and affluence) the higher the replacement rate. It is no accident that places with tremendous poverty has poor education, strong religious influence, and lots of babies. As far back at the 19th century outreach workers in Asian and African communities and in poor neighborhoods in North America and Europe all noticed that there were too many kids. They were the ones who linked contraception to women's social mobility.
Our replacement rate was much higher when Bush was president and high school kids were taught abstinence instead of contraception. Trump hasn't made that a priority yet so young people are still focusing on career first instead of family. A declining replacement rate means the people who are born here will have better resources for their development and more opportunities when they finish school.
Do we really want to see more poverty, abuse, and divorce that go along with higher replacement rates?
phylny
(8,353 posts)she said she'd see about adopting an LGBTQ older child or teen who might have been abandoned by his or her parents.
Our middle child and her husband do want children, but can't yet afford a house right now. His college loans are substantial.
Our youngest and her boyfriend have talked about children, but they would like to be married first and that's not yet happening.
And I wait to be a grandma.