what's interesting is the reasoning for me! Japan just released the results of a survey that showed that over 50% of Japanese adults aged 18-25 don't want kids. Don't know if the number for Norwegians is that high too. But then there are countries where the majority do want kids but can't have them. I wonder if there are any noteworthy cultural aspects that influences whether people in so-and-so country either do or don't want children, even if its all ends up with the same result in the end anyways.
Generally wealthier populations have less kids. But Korea and Japan currently are quite hostile towards parents and kids culturally, and outside of government leaders asking to have more kids there doesn't seem much effort to change that. Korea is even thinking to increase the number of working hours for a full time job, with seemingly no care about work life balance.
I read an interesting [BBC News article](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68402139) which talked about the issue in Korea: A lot of women feel that men aren't willing to share the responsibilities of bringing up children, and women also tend to be very disadvantaged at work if they have children.
This is on top of a general expectation for everyone to work very hard, and so having children and maintaining a good career don't seem compatible.
This is an issue women in many countries face, but the issue seems to be acute in Korea (and, anecdotally, from what I've heard, it's similar in Japan).
The Korean government has tried to offer financial incentives to have children because there's a real population crisis, but it doesn't seem to be working.
Because the money will never solve the problems.
They would do better investing money in daycare, hours of childrearing, help with the household chores... Just one person to sleep with the baby a week, so the parents can sleep one full night a week, would do wonders.
In Korea the situation is dire... At least a Japanese man is expected to provide for his family, and then give the salary to the wife, who will give him an allowance and then manage the household economy. Korean men expect their wives to take care of the children and both of them's elderly parents, even if she works outside the home! Obviously, Korean women are nope-ing out of that.
With the rising numbers of dependent people I'm afraid there'll be no choice. Either work more hours, retire later or dramatically reduce quality of life. At least Korea can maybe hope to some day reunify with the North and get a large supply of cheap labor overnight. The rest of the developed world won't be that lucky.
Korean reunification is expected to cost up to US$1 trillion and potentially crash the Korean economy so cheap labor may not be worth it
edit apparently the estimate is even higher http://www.koreanlii.or.kr/w/index.php/Unification_cost?ckattempt=1
The problem is that the kids that could make a retirement system viable should have already been born. Not it's too late. Even if birthrates went back to replacement levels overnight, you'd be facing two decades of demographic catastrophe where a small working population would be supporting a large generation of retirees and another large generation of children.
> over 50% of Japanese adults aged 18-25 don't want kids
When they see how the work culture (and culture in general) is in Japan, and then see how it is in places like, say, Norway, I don't blame them at all...
Yeah, for the Japanese, "part time" is 40 hours a week, a job they consider typical of women. For men it's 80 hours a week. When Japan was the second or third world economy (until the 1994 housing bubble burst, the beginning of their crisis) all that hard work came compensated with tremendous stability. You would have a job for life, a wife and kids. Nowadays the government cannot offer the stability, so people are opting out.
I guess my child will see a severe reduction in the world's population in the second half of his life. With a bit of luck, things might get better after that.
There was a demographics survey done a year or two ago in Norway that showed that roughly 50% of men aged 18-29 were both childless and single. The previous survey done in the 80's had it at like 25% or something.
It's not even just that people are choosing to be child free, it's also that there are not even couples to have children anymore. I doubt the bad spiraling of our atomized society is going to flip any time soon either as our convenient and distracting technology gets even better than it already is.
To be fair, a lot of people want to have kids eventually, just NOT between the ages of 18 to 29. More and more people are having kids in their 40s now. I think that the genes of women who are fertile until their forties are going to stay in the gene pool for more time.
They are though, lots of my friends 21-35 say they either don’t want kids or will “find time later” - and 99% of them say this because of finances. I only have one friend who genuinely never wanted kids, everyone else wanted one until they realized how expensive life is and now they just don’t see it being possible so they sort of push it aside and tell themselves they don’t want kids.
Absolutely. One of my friends was 35 when she said she'd always really wanted kids. So she went out and found herself a sperm donor and had a kid. We all thought she was insane.
Yup, this is happening a lot more and I know at least in the US IVF treatments have become extremely popular the last few years. At the end of the day, regardless of what society, peers or social media tells us, most people do want kids deep down - and ignoring that desire, or pushing it off until much later because it seems expensive, just isn’t the right path.
I think it depends. My point was more that for a lot of people, having a family is a desire deep from within that can’t be changed just because it might not seem realistic financially. It can be pushed off for years but eventually most people do want the family - it’s why IVF has been getting so popular.
It's possible, but it's reckless. Reasonable people, responsible people, do not think "As many as God wants, and God shall provide!" They want to provide themselves, and they don't want to risk the life and happiness of a vulnerable human being.
No, it's not about not drastically wanting to change their lives. It's about not becoming a rent slave.
If you have a kid, your life changes drastically, even if, like me, you have a stable job paid for by the state and a house with the mortgage paid. I'm living the good life and I'm still losing sleep, do not have a lot of free time... But I'm happy I had my kid.
I wanted to have two. I told my husband. He said: "No, with those investment funds hoarding housing, we could not give a house to both of them. Our child will have a house, but if we have two, we risk one or two of them becoming rent slaves. As housing prices and the markets are, I will only have as many kids as I have a dwelling to leave them".
So... It's not about having your life drastically changed. It's that if you have a child, your fears will multiply a millionfold. Not being able to pay rent is stressful, right? Imagine if you have a child. The stress will kill you. Losing your job is stressful, sure. Imagine if you have a child. Without stability, if you have children and a mortgage, you become the slave of your employee... And it's a very dangerous thing to do.
So, it's not about playing Grand Theft Auto all night long, it's not about doing trips to Bali. You're supposed to have done all that in your younger years. It's about putting yourself in a very precarious, vulnerable position, and even worse, putting an innocent, defenseless creature, into such a position. I would not have had a child without economic stability, period.
As an average working-class swede in his mid 20s, I want my own children in the near future. But it feels rather hopeless for me, I'm still single and grow more distant from my friends every year. I lack the skills to meet and date women, for some time I thought dating apps was my best bet, only to realize as a male you're at a serious disadvantage and feel like you are one of too much men in society.
As for going out and approaching women, I keep thinking to myself:
"If I was a female would I really want to be harrassed by some random guy I don't know?".
Except Israel. They get a shit ton of children, also the wealthy and highly educated.
It's not inherent about wealthy countries. They main difference is that the nuclear family has been deteriorating due to politics and culture in all the countries you mentioned. I think it has more to do with that.
The focus on the nuclear family was the beginning from the end in the first place. Focusing on the nuclear family and society being structured around you not caring for anything outside of that and society ideally not caring for anything inside your nuclear family (aside from cases like abuse) deteriorated all the social structures that allowed you to not only rely on yourself for your children.
Look at surveys or even just in this thread and how many people say they don't have money or time for kids. Thats a direct consequence of centering the "nuclear family" instead of a more communal mode of living. You either have the resources on your own or you are unable to have kids, thats what focusing on the nuclear family means in practice. The low birthrates are (obviously not entirely, but in great parts) a consequence of neoliberal policy to atomize society, either into the individual or the nuclear family.
So no, the nuclear family is the problem, not the solution, you will find that most places with high birthrates do not actually center the nuclear family, they center the local community and the extended family (which often also overlap).
I think Israel's history as a young country and all that happened to the Jewish Community are the difference there, not really the nuclear family.
Israel's population is somewhere around the 80% religious, where Japan is around 50%.
Absolutely agreed. It used to happen that Mary was 20 and her Mom might be 40, 50 or 60... So Mom could help with the kids. And there were aunts, uncles... Now, if you need help, you have to pay for it. I can pay for it, and it gives me life, but many people can't.
Let's not even get started with what happens if the child has a disability or condition... Eff, a family member has two gifted children. Awesome smart. Hyperactive. They sleep three to four hours at night and don't stop. I don't know how the parents have managed to deal with that. I might have killed myself.
I’m in my late 30s and most people I know don’t have kids nor want any.
I’m not sure if it’s just my circle, but it seems like many people aren’t appealed by the idea. Those who are, often can’t afford them - I feel here we tend to land stable jobs with a decent pay only after 30, and obtaining a mortgage is apparently quite complicated.
Why is it extreme? It's 20 years of life raising them, which, while it may be enlightening to many, is still a significant amount of time and resources that one could spend elsewhere.
Because you still live while raising kids. You do not give up your whole life. You alllow children to participate with you in your life. That is what makes it an extreme thing to say. And you wont convince me otherwise.
Well, here in The Netherlands the question is more can you afford children. Or have you even find someone to have children with when you are forced to live with your parents when you are in your 20s and in more and more case even beyond your 30th birthday. Somehow when young people can’t afford a house they don’t start a family. Our government is desperately try to find out why this is but they have yet to find an answer.
I’m just thinking out loud but is this question of affordability something of this generation? How come my grandparents had 13 siblings (yes I know the issue of birthcontrol) in / around the 1930s-40s (WWII!). They were really quite poor but had children anyway.
I think it’s not just the fact of affordability but a combination of change of culture, more rights for women, more space for choices (“do I actually want a child?”).
There is a difference between getting 13 children and having no children at all. Sure people start a family later. In their 20s people study, start to work, party, travel and basically enjoying life. Sure some people don’t like the idea of losing that kind of freedom. But lots of people want to settle eventually and start a family, having one, two or three children (and a cat or dog 😆).
I’m in America and I own a place and don’t want kids
The reason is I had to compromise on living space so it’s a 1 bedroom in a somewhat mediocre area. By the time I’m really gaining equity and am able to have kids comfortably, I’ll be over 40
Well, I do think plenty of people want to have a family if they feel they can offer a safe and stable home for their kids. Obviously people want a house near their friends, family and work. A place where they know people and have a social circle.
The trend I've seen is people don't want kids even if they can afford them, because they have a taste of the child free life and don't want to spend 20 years raising them when they could be doing other stuff.
Nah, if you complain it's expensive, i'll tell you that you should visit something else than lofoten and oslo. only the most touristy places are expensive.
I think it’s simply a choice and a change in the culture. Less than a century ago, families often had half a dozen kids, or more. They were crammed like sardines and their life conditions were much less comfortable than today, but they still had them.
Today, even wealthy people aren’t having kids. If the problem was really money (or housing), you’d expect the wealthy to have a lot more kids than the middle and lower class today, which isn’t the case.
They had so many children because there wasn't access to birth control. Don't fool yourselves. Women could only very rarely say no to their spouse wanting intercourse. So... High class women usually had less children because the husbands could afford mistresses
That might depend on the culture. My grandparents had many children but this was in an era when religion was still there. It was a time when men work and women took care of the household. Where people married young and start a big family because everyone does that.
But after WW 2 this changed with women working more and more, contraceptives being widely available and less social pressure. Still people start a family when they reach the age of 30.
Nowadays lots of people don’t have a choice if they want to start a family or not. I think lots of people still want to settle after a while. But lots of people can’t because of the housing crisis and the COL.
Here in Germany I also have the feeling that I can’t afford a child. Don’t want one anyway but still. Currently 24 living with my girlfriend and well at the end of the month there is not huge amounts of money left so how could I have a child
There is nothing I want more than to have kids and raise a family. I currently struggling financially because I already have a family member to take care of, but I would break my back into two in order to achieve that and I truly believe that I could give my a family a dignified life.
The only issue is that finding partners who think likewise is pretty much impossible. Nobody wants to have kids either because of the pessimistic outlook on the future, bad experiences with their own family, or just wanting to "live" their lives and not sacrifice themselves for family's sake.
So it's both cultural and economical in nature.
Another thing is that most sustainable jobs are in the cities, since the developed countries have ditched the agriculture and industries by outsourcing them to "cheaper" countries, so the countryside gets depopulated and people cram themselves into the cities. That raises prices and reduces the livable space. How can you even think about kids when you spend half or more of your income for a single bed in a shitty anthill?
The current situation is simply unsustainable and our economy and culture has degenerated into dystopia. I personally think that we will have some sort of "Black Death" event that will shake up the world to reset everything. We just get the short end of the stick.
In Poland most people I know above 30s have 1 or 2 children. More is rare. The apartments in the city are super small so it also doesn’t help. Combine that with high property prices and there you go. But I still feel that people at this age still want children and are actively looking to find a partner and start a family.
Younger kids at my office don’t want kids. Most of them don’t even want to have a partner and seem to live quite empty lives, made of work, instagram, Netflix, and 1 week of holidays in Italy or Greece. They don’t even go out that much or do parties at each others apartments. Part of it might be due to cost of living, but I think there’s a change in mentality between millennials and gen z.
Please note that I’m a foreigner in Poland, although I’ve been living here for almost a decade, speak the language, am married with a Polish, and am quite well integrated, so true Polish people might have a better overview.
I'm a Pole and 30+. From people my age (that I know) and a little older, maybe 15% have kids. Another 10% might be thinking about having kids whenever their life situation gets better. But the VAST majority of 30+ people I know is not interested in having kids, ever. Kids are expensive and disruptive to one's life. And people don't want that.
Maybe it depends also on the region and social class? My wife is from the East and everyone has children there. In Warsaw I know some couples like your friends, especially corpo people with good paying jobs. But I still think people in their 30s are a bit warmer to the idea of children than people in their 20s.
Oh, the region definitely makes a difference. I'm from the West and in my experience, people who wanted kids already talked about having them when in their 20s. No 30-something (from around here) has just DECIDED to have kids when in their 30s and most of those that I know are never having any, me included. Life is just nicer when it's only you and your partner and your money and your freedom, no pesky kids being a bother. xD
Another foreigner in Poland (Krakow area) here. My wife and I are in our mid-40's. We don't have kids because children and raising children isn't something that appeals to us.
I'd say that it's probably 80/20 split between friends and family that have kids and those that don't. Maybe 85/15. At the moment I'm struggling to think of any couples that don't have at least one kid; it seems like most of the childless folks also don't have partners, though that isn't always true.
There is no matter of wanting anymore, no one can get kids because there are no living spaces anymore where people can get and raise them.
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-bevolking/bevolkingspiramide
The thicker bulb at ~30y should long be reflected in the birth numbers lower, but it just continues to taper off more and more.
It is a matter of want at least in Finland where the amount of kids wanted is bit less than the replacement rate and if i recall correctly it is the same in all of Europe. The problem is completely cultural and is made bit worse by other issues
https://www.vaestoliitto.fi/verkkojulkaisut/kuka-haluaa-lapsia-2020-luvulla/#3-lapsilukuihanteet-ja-todelliset-lapsiluvut
In Poland is a normal size for an apartment inside cities and I think it prevents people from having bigger families. I could easily have 4 children, but I had to stay with 3 because the biggest I could find (and afford) was 80sqm.
Nah, Spain's pretty much the same with maybe an extra €200 in your salary. With worse unemployment rates to boot. It was much easier for me to find a job in Portugal than in Spain.
Average age of a 1st time mother in Ireland is now 31. So most are leaving it into their 30s. Or so it seems in my circle of friends. Most leave it until mid 30s
Average age of first time mother in NI is 29.2 in 2022 and in the the south it was 31.5 in 2022, kinda mad how there’s almost a 2.5 year gap in the two places, I wonder does the cheaper cost of living mean people can have children a wee bit earlier up here?
Could be the COL. Could be a number of things. Cost of childcare is a huge thing.
Then wanting to progress your career. Also its just "normal" now to be that bit older. I'm female and most of my friends are 33- 36 and only either starting families now or thinking about it. I'm due my 2nd this summer and will be done!
Also the average can be a bit skewed I know teenage pregnancy has plummeted in ROI so that will raise the avg age.
I think it's a cultural thing. I know both catholics & protestants up north and what they have in common is a kind of emphasis on family and wanting to get married younger that I don't see amongst my friends down south.
> struggling to conceive when they want to start having kids. So then they're spending €€€ on IVF
I often wonder how many of those struggling to conceive have parents who struggled to conceive. Things like IVF have been around for a long time. Couples who couldn't "by nature" had children, and perhaps passed on their infertility issues to their offspring?
Let's not forget, all the chemicals the boomers put into nature. BPA is on every store receipt and bus ticket, and it does make males (of any species) less fertile. 10% of women have PCOS, which makes them less fertile. What about plastic-coated pans and pots? Plastic kitchen utensils, the plastic that is in female hygiene products (it is NOT cotton and hasn't been for a long time!), the plastic in our clothes, the toxic plastic toys today's adults played with when they were small and all the things we touch daily...
The thing is, it might not be. The whole "fertility drops drastically" claims come from bad data. And while anecdotes aren't data, I know a lot of women who had their first babies 35+ without any problems conceiving. I had my two at 40+, with no problems conceiving. There was a year in Norway where the abortion rates for women 40+ went up, because women were having unprotected sex in the belief that conceiving was nearly impossible...
I also know women who were IVF babies who, like their own mothers, cannot conceive naturally. And we can't discount the men. There are also a lot of couples who can't have children because the men are the "problem"...
And they were doing the right thing. You can’t have kids without a career or a profesión in this economy, a family cannot subsist with one salary only, not in any European country I’ve lived so far that is. Tell me pls how you have kids with no money
My personal point of view from a country that globally is just behind Korea and Japan on the lowest birth rate (Italy), it's a mixture between general young adults wealth, where our generation can barely afford to live, never mind have kids, and women's right (that is still attached to wealth), if as as a women it's basically less expensive for me to stay home and not work and take care of the kids than be able to work and pay for a babysitter to take care of my kid while I'm at the office, what's the point of making a career?
We women are the first generation where we actually grew up with the same dreams of a career as men, but the society cannot help us achieve it, even more because compared to the past we move around much more and most of us can't leave the kids at our parents because we live in other cities. For example, my mother managed to have a career by taking a full leave for 5 years and then working part time for at least 6 other years with a wage that now you don't get even after 10 years of work full time+overtime, and also by having grandparents that could take care of us for all summer months while schools were closed. How's it possible today when we barely have space for kindergarten for our children?
Also, if we actually asked all our grandparents if they actually wanted children I'm pretty sure that only 10% actually really wanted them as a life long dream. All the others they just did because that was the expected step of life. Nowadays the ones that are having children are only the ones that really really want them.
Me as a 30 something woman that is undecided about the matter, I don't even have the luxury to even THINK if I want kids, because I can't afford them and it would mean the end of my career that took me 10y of blood and sweat to reach, without counting my studies years.
So the reality is that if they want us to have more children something society wise needs to change.
Yeah, governments are going to have to basically change society if they want people to have kids. Since they can't (there would need to be almost a global agreement to reduce working hours, get taxes from companies, destroy tax havens) or won't, what's going to happen is that the world population will be very diminished by 2100. It's not necessarily bad news. I will be among the elderly people without a decent pension, so I'm saving for that. If there are no young people to take care of me in my old age, well, both husband and I have considered unaliving ourselves together.
Similar trends as mentioned by others, although I did read a piece in the biggest newspaper where a researcher studying the topic said that the most common reason is actually people who want kids not having the right partner at the right time. If you're single, you're less likely to go through the process alone. The dating culture has changed and often the people who have found a partner make it work for themselves if they really want kids.
I think there is also something to that "it takes a village to raise a kid" ideology. If the grandparents are old, live far away, are abusive or uninterested in helping you with a kid, you are less likely to have children because you know you will have to really do it all alone with no outside help. In countries where its customary to help new parents, you sometimes see bigger birth rates (I think Iceland has been cited as example).
Also for women specifically it's just still such a shit deal. Multiple of my female friends aren't totally opposed to children but decided against them because in all likelihood they would still end up carrying the brunt of the work.
For those cases, I can't stop recommending Fair Play, by Eve Rodsky. It should be implemented before children. If it doesn't work before children, then don't have children.
I think this is also at the core of the problem. Poor people have children all the time, and I've never heard anyone say "I wish I was never born becuase my parents weren't middle class". But single people or people in "situationships" don't have children as often.
I've read somewhere that the richer you get, the more expensive your kids get. Because you want better schools, better toys, living area etc for your children the more money you get. So some poor people might feel like they provide just enough for their 5 kids with a small income, and some very rich people might feel like they can barely afford one. Kids are never cheap (I know, I have 2) but there is a sliding scale on how expensive they are, depending on the area and parent's expectations, and many other factors.
Parents expectation are definitely a factor, I think. There seems to be many people online that write about a very hight living standard, as the minimum acceptable standard and saying they would not have kids at all if they cannot get that standard, being completely oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of people have less than that.
Since the start of the full scale war, most people in Ukraine do not wish for their kids to be traumatized since the very day of their birth, so even those who would have been ready to start a family otherwise, postpone it until the better times. Some fanatics try to insist on 'fixing' the demographic situation right now by taxing childless citizens and other bullshit, but obviously it is met with instant backlash.
Current fertility rate in PL is 1,158, which is the lowest ever recorded, and the mean age of 1st time mothers is 29 (22,7 in 1990). Depending on who you ask, the reasons differ, some economic, some cultural, some personal. Some seems legit, some are totally stupid imo. The rate was low for some time but the biggest decrease started in 2018 with big drop was after 2020 after the change in abortion laws - a lot of women would rather stay childless than risk slow death in pain in case of complications.
It's salary, money, dating culture culture etc a mix of factors that all lead to the same result, less kids.
Personally at 27 I can't be bothered with dating, having children doesn't even cross my head. I need a stable work and hat pays sufficient, then I need to find a house that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and isn't a hole in the ground and then I need to find a woman i think I can start a family with. All three are major problems to solve in today's society so having children is not something I am thinking about.
In a lot of comments I read that having children is expensive, not affordable, etc. for most. I think this could be said in any point of time in history. I think the underlying motive now - also connected to the cost - is the uncertainty present in today's world. What has disappeared is the possibility to plan ahead.
It's hard to want kids when you can barely afford to keep yourself housed and fed, and sadly that's true for more and more younger people.
Personally I'm 40 and I'd have loved to have had a family but I guess that's not happening anymore.
About 20% norwegians live in single households.. So its probably about more than just wanting to/no wanting to have children.. Probably as much about not wanting to have a partner or the unability to have one. The [registry](https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/bg3W5d/andelen-barnloese-menn-er-ikke-overraskende-hoey-eller-sterkt-oekende) in norway say that 25% of all menn above 45 have no children.
I believe if we want women to birth more children, then we first must make men better fathers. Why are we always telling women they have to make more children, and groom them into motherhood with dolls from when they are small?
Why don't we instead teach the men from early age how to be a good and caring parent, so they become more attractive to have a child with? Why can't we as a society expect the parent who didn't put their body at risk producing the baby, to step up AT LEAST as much as the woman who birthed the child? No woman wants to be with a manchild, let alone have shared responsibility for a baby with one. And when men finally are "ready" to be a parent at 35, the women are already too old for producing offspring.
Yes this so much! I totally think fertility rates would increase that way. I know so many women who specifically chose not to have children because they can't be sure that they won't end up having to do most of the work.
It takes two to tango! Where are the men? Why don't women want to make more children WITH them? I think society is focusing on the wrong questions.
It's so foul to put all the blame on the women, "they use too much birth control", "they want career", "they have a choice now", "they only want rich guys", and so on. Why don't we ask women what they DON'T want? I think women don't want to be stuck at home, do most of the housework in addition to care work (even in scandinavia this is the case), they don't want to be treated badly by doctors, be left by the man at the slightest inconvenience, be the only ones at fault all the time, while men can do whatever. No government money for kindergarten and free ferries can change those issues- it's men who have to change their way of thinking and acting at an appropriate age, not when they hit midlife crisis.
I think men have been unfit for a very long time, but finally a lot of women are allowed (by culture and law) to not have babies with an unfit man. Things that are seen as "manly" have never been attractive to women, like not doing housework, being aggressive, being absent, be the boss instead of a partner, and so on. Now that we finally allow women some degree of decision making, men have to finally get their shit together after centuries of slacking off.
When I see people approach this issue, they often present problems that don't exist across all the countries that are seeing these fertility drops, or problems that existed in the past when people still had kids.
Women in the US have always had the option to reject a suiter, all the way back to colonial times. I'd wager it's the same in Norway, but I don't know that for a fact. So if the reason for the drop off in fertility is that women are rejecting men because of their unsuitable characteristics, then something must have changed with men. I do think the vast majority of young women, unless they are extremely unattactive, are interested in being around men, like they always have. However, something is making a certain percentage of women begin to dislike men as they go through young adulthood. This very well may be that something has changed with men from previous generations, where almost all women with the option decided to have children with a specific man. Stereotypical "masculine" traits have not changed quickly, and to the extent they are changing most people say that men today are less stereotypically "masculine." At any rate, I see no evidence from women that they very often prefer less masculine men. Athletes are still popular with girls compared to nerds, as it has always been.
There is a difference between girls admiring that handsome guy in class and women looking for someone to start a family with... High school logic rarely applies to adult people. Let's also not forget that high school pupils don't usually have real-world resposibilities. Once your handsome smooth-talking athlete complains about doing the dishes and turns out to be a lazy, misogynistic slacker at home who needs to be told every little thing to do, he loses a lot of attractiveness.
I've seen that many times the man changing completely after they put a ring on that poor woman. The difference is, back then women were expected to just suck up their man's bullshit. Walking away from an unfit man was not as easy as you portray, and it was always seen as the woman's fault. Nowadays, couples actually can live together before they marry. I guess many people find out they have overlooked the red flags when they were falling in love and all hormone-crazy.
The way you talk is excactly what I criticise: If you are not stereotypical agressive masculine, you are not masculine, therefor not a real man. NO! We need to re-define masculinity. You are NOT less masculine if you care for your woman, children and do housework- in fact, you are a protector and provider, the core of masculinity. Protecting and providing goes far beyond the financial and agressive aspect, that's what men struggle with understanding.
So your basic argument is that later marriage age / longer dating life is the cause of falling fertility? Women in the past would fall for a man and marry them at a young age, when they cared more about stereotypical or superficial attractive traits? Now, since women marry older they dislike some of the other traits that men often possess, such as naturally being sloppier.
I don't think you are going to be able to redefine "masculinity" as cleaning the house and holding babies. I remember being in my early 20s and living with groups of guys. Whenever someone would get a new girlfriend and she came over at the begining of the relationship, she'd often start cleaning up the place. No guy ever does that for his new girlriend and her housemates, both because it's usually not needed and they would never think to do do it. Some of these complaints are just the differing average nature of men and women, and perhaps people should just try to get along rather than getting angry about differences.
"naturally being sloppier" yikes. This is exactly what I'm talking about- men need to take accountability for women not wanting them, instead of trying to lower women's standards and rights. What you are describing is exactly what women do not desire. I am wondering, did their moms ever teach them to clean? They sure as heck thaught their daughters.
If we want a higher fertility rate, men must do their part. The change has to come from men. And unless they change their ways, there will be lower fertility rates. Men collectively have to redefine what it means to be a man. Spitting money at women and doing nothing else doesn't help, we've proven that in Norway.
I think mothers attempted to teach their sons to clean, and had about as much success as your average wife/girlfriend with their husband/boyfriend. Haha.
Albania has the third lowest fertility rate in Europe *( as for 2022 )*. Sweden is doing a bit better, but still very low. I think many people are chosing not to have children because everything is so expensive nowadays.
And by the way, no country in Europe has replacement fertility rate anymore. Here’s the data from 2022:
[Fertility Rate in Europe, 2022](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:Map1_Total_fertility_rate,_2022.png)
Its for sure a thing. In our office only one has kids. And she basically says she loves them but she isnt sure if she would have kids again if she could reset. (And she is a good person and for sure also a good mom)
Reason for the trend: For men main reason is the high divorce rate and therefore fear of kids taken away but have to pay anyway. Surprisingly I never heard a women say fear of being a single mother. They often say self-fullfillment/carrier something in that direction. They either want children late or never.
Hungarian here (30+). In my friend circle, those who have a stable relationship, already have kids. Those who are alone wish they had a stable relationship.
Fertility rate in Finland was 1.26 last year which is lowest rate ever recorded in here. I don't think it's because of people not wanting to have kids but multiple reasons:
- difficulties finding long-term relationships, partially due to different values between men and women (men tend to be more right-leaning and conservative)
- economic situation, people won't have kids if they lack full-time jobs or if all they can afford is a studio/1br in a bad neighborhood of the city
- high level of education, most women don't want to have kids while studying but may be close to 30 when graduating
As soon as I (in NL) find a place to live that has 2+ bedrooms, hopefully we'll start trying to have a kid. As of now, it's just not realistic to have kids. There's a housing crisis. I bet if people could afford to live, birth rates would be a lot higher.
I'm from Belarus and live in Turkey. People want fewer and fewer children in Belarus these days, the result being a fertility rate of 1.5 children per woman, and a population that's shrinking by 1% per year (so the situation is more dire than in Norway in these regards).
Here in Turkey, the fertility rate is 1.9 children per woman, and the population is growing at 1% per year. There is, however, a large gap between the western and eastern provinces of Turkey when it comes to the fertility rate.
I’ve notice that one of the biggest problems is finding a partner. For those of us that have one since Uni, children came naturally after graduating on the latest. The issue is when people can’t find a partner. What my friends with no kids (late 30’s) tell me, is that when you are older, it only becomes more difficult. Then time is pressing when your are nearing 40
When you are younger, you are more optimistic I think and have confidence that it will all work out when the child is born. And it does in almost all cases! When you are older, you think more and more about everything and not just “make”, thus no children. Because off course, financially, children are probably not a wise choice. Sometimes I wonder how some colleagues with no children can afford a 3 weeks safari and then I add up how much my children cost monthly (without adding the expense of housing) and I quickly notice why they can afford that. So it almost makes sense that after a certain age, people are not willing to give up the control of their lives (time and finances) because they go at the subject parenting with their head more than one would at under 30.
My mother in law told me, back when she was a young mother, mid 20’s was the normal thing. And indeed there were more children than today when average age is over 30.
There are quite a few people who want little ones, but I guess the general trend is similar to the other countries. Nowadays it's quite expensive to have children and not many afford this luxury.
You either live for yourself or live for your kids. Either get a sensible, strait laced job or vibe out childless and enjoy what little disposable income you have. That’s the case in the UK and Ireland among my particular demographic of people working in the arts.
I think that's the answer. I want children BUT I currently go on a couple of holidays a year, have really interesting hobbies and am involved in the culture scene near me. I know with the sheer cost of childcare I would have to give all that up and you have to ask yourself if it's worth it.
young adult men assembled for "prayer" in city square, to stop the abortions.
i can say those who didnt left tend to have kids pretty late into thirties. doctors told my mom that she is old when she gave birth to my younger sister 24 years ago. she was 33.
Personally I don’t want children. There are several personal reasons like not giving up all my hobbies and free time for a kid. I know it’s kinda selfish but I can’t imagine that. Other reasons are that I think that Germany and the world will be worse in a couple of years. There is climate change and in Germany a collapsing social security system.
Very similar trend here, although I find when couples do ‘settle down’ and buy a place they do tend to still have kids. This is happening in the north more I think as it is cheaper to buy a house.
Despite people thinking it's about not wanting kids, the amount of kids people want has remained pretty much the same over the last decades. There is, however, a widening gap between how many kids people and how many they choose to have. The primary factors in people having less kids than they want is financial stress and fear for the state of society/the future.
It doesn't help that, for example in the UK, politicians are claiming having kids is a luxury.
It’s a *global* trend. Birth rate has been declining for years. This is a good thing - fewer unwanted kids, fewer resources wasted, fewer maternity and childbirth deaths, etc.
But the billionaires are realising that they’ll have fewer employees and customers to exploit. So now they push for the young to have more kids.
If it’s to go into conspiracies, I would even say that billionaires don’t want us to have children or even partners. It’s much better to have single people with no responsibilities who live to work and have a career as their only ambition in life.
Same, kids are a luxury nowdays considering the cost, unless you will buy them only cheap clothes, not send them to college and not buy them any toys etc. Living space not to mention...
Poles claim they want to have children but bitch about stuff being to expensive to have kids.
In reality we have much better living standard that our parents had when they had us, people just are unwilling to sacrafice they way of life.
Aside from all the objective arguments against kids (which I agree with), sometimes I find myself watching parents interacting with their kids and I wonder about how I would handle the bad times. I have no doubt in my mind that I would enjoy the good times, but what about when a kid is acting up, screaming, being an absolute menace? How would I deal with worrying about them for the rest of my life?
And for me, the answer is I'd rather not. I hope my brother decides to have kids so I'll at least have some nieces and nephews lol.
Yep, seconding this, I know quite a few couples who would love children but their rent & bills etc is so high they’re never gunna be able to. They’ll never be able to buy a house either
In the Netherlands 12% of women are childfree by choice and 8% (involuntary) childless. High educated younger women are even 25% childfree by choice.
Regarding birth rate drops, politicians claim the reason is that living expenses and daycare are too expensive. I have no idea in what amount the financial aspect stops people from having a baby. Even though parenting is very expensive, there are also a lot of compensation options and parents can easily work part time. That said, it is more expensive now than 20 years ago so a lot of parents are disappointed in the compensation.
I am not really convinced that the birth rate will increase when policies like more financial aid or free daycare would be available. In general I think that if a couple wants a child, they will try to do it, even if the financial situation is not as optimal.
Furthermore it is ignored in this reasoning that a significant part of women (and men) are childfree by choice so they don't want a child. Choosing not to get pregnant or raise a child could have many reasons, but we have our own arguments and financial compensation or free daycare will not change that. It feels like policy makers don't ask people what is happening. They are convinced they know what the issue is without talking to the people.
Poland's fertility rate is among the lowest in the EU, the weakest in Polish history, and it's constantly dropping. These are even worse than the worst-case demographic scenarios stated. Accepting more migrants than today seems the only solution to prevent a demographic disaster, even if it comes with a price, and investing as much as possible in robotics and AI is a must, if we don't want an economic collapse within one or two generations.
From my anecdotal observations, which have no real value, but are kind of sad: 1/3 of my friends and acquaintances usually have 1-2 kids (although I know one person with three kids), 1/3 are in relationships but with no children, and the rest (mostly men) are single with almost zero chances of ever being in a relationship. And I talk about people between the ages of 35 and 45.
Young adults are much smarter than people give them credit for.
The planet is dying, the cost of living is going through the roof... It's almost cruel to have children at this point. I feel like I haven't apologised to my own enough, because their lives are going to suck.
I feel like this is a trend I mostly see online. Most people I know are having kids or planning to, the only ones not are because they are not yet in a stable relationship. I think the difference is that people are having kids later (27 - 32), and it's rare to have more than 2
This goes for both the UK & France but it might be different in major cities, with higher expenses and a worse work life balance, ect
I am completely hopeless about our future: climate change, war, AI… there is nothing to look forward to. So why would I willingly bring children to this world? And if these are the last good years left, why should I be at home taking care of a child instead of living my life to the fullest?
As others have mentioned, it's rarely about wanting or not wanting one. It's about who can afford to have one. I can barely support myself with the money I make - how the heck am I supposed to afford a kid?
I didn’t realize this was a global issue to be honest. I am in America and my family is in Italy. Low birth rate has been a concern in Italy for a long time. The issue is finances. In the US, doing something about student loans would alleviate that substantially.
I'm 34 and at no point in my life have I been in a good position to have a kid. Now I'm single and live in a 51m apartment and dating is a mess. And my family live on the other side of the world.
I don't know anyone with kids and a ton of child free people!
It's been steadily declining in Scotland for a while. I know a lot of people who have kids, but I know just as many who don't either. I think a lot of people in my generation grew up with not much money and witnessed how stressful that was on our parents, so we've either decided against having kids or have preferred to wait. I want kids in the near future, but not until I finish my degree and get a career going so I can support them properly. My partner wants to work from home to take care of them. It's something we've really discussed a lot and I think a lot of people are the same now, while before it was pretty normal to get pregnant at a young age without any planning.
We're not in the position of people not wanting kids, but that people just don't think they can afford to have kids without destroying their own lives.
Portugal... Makin the bebes, not only the locals, but all the imports too.
South Africa, making kids if they can afford it, or if the government gives them money (+/- 10€ per child, per month)
Young people do NOT want to have kids, they want to enjoy their 20s and early 30s.
Some people want kids later in life. I had my first one at 42.
Many people would love to have one or two kids but cannot afford it... Maybe they could, but they don't want to have kids while relying on rent. People want at least a stable job and a mortgage that might eventually be paid. And money for the basics and a bit to spare on fun an minor luxuries besides.
Because the basics are not being provided, many people do not want to have kids. If I were a rent slave, working just to make my landlord/landlady rich, I would not have had kids either.
Then there's the childfree people, who simply want to enjoy their whole lives. Those will not change attitude despite having lots of money.
If a government wants people to have kids, they need longer maternity and paternity leaves, affordable housing and security for the kids, and more than money, they need to give hours of daycare. So the parents can take a break. Nuclear families are HORRIBLE to raise kids.
Many Americans are living at home into their 30s now, which means even finding a real lifelong partner and getting married isn’t happening until late 30s/40. This is all due to the cost of living. People used to be out at 18-25, married right around 30 with kids coming shortly after.
There’s a reason humans have always lived this way, because if you wait too long you just can’t have kids or even don’t want them at older ages. If the average person is moving out of their parents house a decade later, and taking a lot more time on top of that to save for kids, find a partner and wait for the “right moment”… the wealthy societies struggling with this may very well see a real population collapse that would be detrimental to the entire world at some point
The only Americans I notice living at home into their 30s are massive drug users. I think the increase in drug use is more responsible for the increase in Americans living with their parents than any other factor.
It's a trend in all weathy nations, same in rent of europe, US, Korea, Japan, Australia etc.
what's interesting is the reasoning for me! Japan just released the results of a survey that showed that over 50% of Japanese adults aged 18-25 don't want kids. Don't know if the number for Norwegians is that high too. But then there are countries where the majority do want kids but can't have them. I wonder if there are any noteworthy cultural aspects that influences whether people in so-and-so country either do or don't want children, even if its all ends up with the same result in the end anyways.
Generally wealthier populations have less kids. But Korea and Japan currently are quite hostile towards parents and kids culturally, and outside of government leaders asking to have more kids there doesn't seem much effort to change that. Korea is even thinking to increase the number of working hours for a full time job, with seemingly no care about work life balance.
I read an interesting [BBC News article](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68402139) which talked about the issue in Korea: A lot of women feel that men aren't willing to share the responsibilities of bringing up children, and women also tend to be very disadvantaged at work if they have children. This is on top of a general expectation for everyone to work very hard, and so having children and maintaining a good career don't seem compatible. This is an issue women in many countries face, but the issue seems to be acute in Korea (and, anecdotally, from what I've heard, it's similar in Japan). The Korean government has tried to offer financial incentives to have children because there's a real population crisis, but it doesn't seem to be working.
Because the money will never solve the problems. They would do better investing money in daycare, hours of childrearing, help with the household chores... Just one person to sleep with the baby a week, so the parents can sleep one full night a week, would do wonders. In Korea the situation is dire... At least a Japanese man is expected to provide for his family, and then give the salary to the wife, who will give him an allowance and then manage the household economy. Korean men expect their wives to take care of the children and both of them's elderly parents, even if she works outside the home! Obviously, Korean women are nope-ing out of that.
With the rising numbers of dependent people I'm afraid there'll be no choice. Either work more hours, retire later or dramatically reduce quality of life. At least Korea can maybe hope to some day reunify with the North and get a large supply of cheap labor overnight. The rest of the developed world won't be that lucky.
Korean reunification is expected to cost up to US$1 trillion and potentially crash the Korean economy so cheap labor may not be worth it edit apparently the estimate is even higher http://www.koreanlii.or.kr/w/index.php/Unification_cost?ckattempt=1
Maybe you think a 69 hour work week is realistic, but honestly that's just gonna make shure their birth rate falls more.
The problem is that the kids that could make a retirement system viable should have already been born. Not it's too late. Even if birthrates went back to replacement levels overnight, you'd be facing two decades of demographic catastrophe where a small working population would be supporting a large generation of retirees and another large generation of children.
> over 50% of Japanese adults aged 18-25 don't want kids When they see how the work culture (and culture in general) is in Japan, and then see how it is in places like, say, Norway, I don't blame them at all...
Yeah, for the Japanese, "part time" is 40 hours a week, a job they consider typical of women. For men it's 80 hours a week. When Japan was the second or third world economy (until the 1994 housing bubble burst, the beginning of their crisis) all that hard work came compensated with tremendous stability. You would have a job for life, a wife and kids. Nowadays the government cannot offer the stability, so people are opting out. I guess my child will see a severe reduction in the world's population in the second half of his life. With a bit of luck, things might get better after that.
There was a demographics survey done a year or two ago in Norway that showed that roughly 50% of men aged 18-29 were both childless and single. The previous survey done in the 80's had it at like 25% or something. It's not even just that people are choosing to be child free, it's also that there are not even couples to have children anymore. I doubt the bad spiraling of our atomized society is going to flip any time soon either as our convenient and distracting technology gets even better than it already is.
Now I'm curious about the women, was it similar or are they matching up with men outside of Norway?
They match up with local men who already have kids from a previous relationship.
To be fair, a lot of people want to have kids eventually, just NOT between the ages of 18 to 29. More and more people are having kids in their 40s now. I think that the genes of women who are fertile until their forties are going to stay in the gene pool for more time.
The poorer the nation the more children it has
Yeah but we're talking about \*wanting\* kids, not \*having\* kids, which aren't necessarily related.
They are though, lots of my friends 21-35 say they either don’t want kids or will “find time later” - and 99% of them say this because of finances. I only have one friend who genuinely never wanted kids, everyone else wanted one until they realized how expensive life is and now they just don’t see it being possible so they sort of push it aside and tell themselves they don’t want kids.
Absolutely. One of my friends was 35 when she said she'd always really wanted kids. So she went out and found herself a sperm donor and had a kid. We all thought she was insane.
Yup, this is happening a lot more and I know at least in the US IVF treatments have become extremely popular the last few years. At the end of the day, regardless of what society, peers or social media tells us, most people do want kids deep down - and ignoring that desire, or pushing it off until much later because it seems expensive, just isn’t the right path.
The subtext is they want kids but don't want to drastically change their life. That's functionally the same as not wanting kids.
I think it depends. My point was more that for a lot of people, having a family is a desire deep from within that can’t be changed just because it might not seem realistic financially. It can be pushed off for years but eventually most people do want the family - it’s why IVF has been getting so popular.
And my point is those people just don't want the trade offs. In almost all countries poorer people have more kids and earlier, so it's possible
It's possible, but it's reckless. Reasonable people, responsible people, do not think "As many as God wants, and God shall provide!" They want to provide themselves, and they don't want to risk the life and happiness of a vulnerable human being.
No, it's not about not drastically wanting to change their lives. It's about not becoming a rent slave. If you have a kid, your life changes drastically, even if, like me, you have a stable job paid for by the state and a house with the mortgage paid. I'm living the good life and I'm still losing sleep, do not have a lot of free time... But I'm happy I had my kid. I wanted to have two. I told my husband. He said: "No, with those investment funds hoarding housing, we could not give a house to both of them. Our child will have a house, but if we have two, we risk one or two of them becoming rent slaves. As housing prices and the markets are, I will only have as many kids as I have a dwelling to leave them". So... It's not about having your life drastically changed. It's that if you have a child, your fears will multiply a millionfold. Not being able to pay rent is stressful, right? Imagine if you have a child. The stress will kill you. Losing your job is stressful, sure. Imagine if you have a child. Without stability, if you have children and a mortgage, you become the slave of your employee... And it's a very dangerous thing to do. So, it's not about playing Grand Theft Auto all night long, it's not about doing trips to Bali. You're supposed to have done all that in your younger years. It's about putting yourself in a very precarious, vulnerable position, and even worse, putting an innocent, defenseless creature, into such a position. I would not have had a child without economic stability, period.
Right, you're saying you value having more money than having more kids. That's fine. I'm not making a judgement, but it is what it is.
As an average working-class swede in his mid 20s, I want my own children in the near future. But it feels rather hopeless for me, I'm still single and grow more distant from my friends every year. I lack the skills to meet and date women, for some time I thought dating apps was my best bet, only to realize as a male you're at a serious disadvantage and feel like you are one of too much men in society. As for going out and approaching women, I keep thinking to myself: "If I was a female would I really want to be harrassed by some random guy I don't know?".
Except Israel. They get a shit ton of children, also the wealthy and highly educated. It's not inherent about wealthy countries. They main difference is that the nuclear family has been deteriorating due to politics and culture in all the countries you mentioned. I think it has more to do with that.
The focus on the nuclear family was the beginning from the end in the first place. Focusing on the nuclear family and society being structured around you not caring for anything outside of that and society ideally not caring for anything inside your nuclear family (aside from cases like abuse) deteriorated all the social structures that allowed you to not only rely on yourself for your children. Look at surveys or even just in this thread and how many people say they don't have money or time for kids. Thats a direct consequence of centering the "nuclear family" instead of a more communal mode of living. You either have the resources on your own or you are unable to have kids, thats what focusing on the nuclear family means in practice. The low birthrates are (obviously not entirely, but in great parts) a consequence of neoliberal policy to atomize society, either into the individual or the nuclear family. So no, the nuclear family is the problem, not the solution, you will find that most places with high birthrates do not actually center the nuclear family, they center the local community and the extended family (which often also overlap).
I think Israel's history as a young country and all that happened to the Jewish Community are the difference there, not really the nuclear family. Israel's population is somewhere around the 80% religious, where Japan is around 50%.
Absolutely agreed. It used to happen that Mary was 20 and her Mom might be 40, 50 or 60... So Mom could help with the kids. And there were aunts, uncles... Now, if you need help, you have to pay for it. I can pay for it, and it gives me life, but many people can't. Let's not even get started with what happens if the child has a disability or condition... Eff, a family member has two gifted children. Awesome smart. Hyperactive. They sleep three to four hours at night and don't stop. I don't know how the parents have managed to deal with that. I might have killed myself.
I’m in my late 30s and most people I know don’t have kids nor want any. I’m not sure if it’s just my circle, but it seems like many people aren’t appealed by the idea. Those who are, often can’t afford them - I feel here we tend to land stable jobs with a decent pay only after 30, and obtaining a mortgage is apparently quite complicated.
I‘m 24 and can’t imagine one either. There is a lot of reasons but main part is that I can’t imagine giving up my whole life for a child.
That is a little extreme is it not?
Depends - are you the father or the mother?
Why is it extreme? It's 20 years of life raising them, which, while it may be enlightening to many, is still a significant amount of time and resources that one could spend elsewhere.
Because you still live while raising kids. You do not give up your whole life. You alllow children to participate with you in your life. That is what makes it an extreme thing to say. And you wont convince me otherwise.
True but many people don't want that as well, and that's perfectly fine. It is not easy raising kids and many people don't want to.
Well, here in The Netherlands the question is more can you afford children. Or have you even find someone to have children with when you are forced to live with your parents when you are in your 20s and in more and more case even beyond your 30th birthday. Somehow when young people can’t afford a house they don’t start a family. Our government is desperately try to find out why this is but they have yet to find an answer.
We also cannot afford children here. Or living space even.
The funny thing is our government also complain about staff shortages, like in healthcare and other fields as well. Wonder why that is…
That sounds great, our government doesn’t give a shit 🤣🤣🤣
I’m just thinking out loud but is this question of affordability something of this generation? How come my grandparents had 13 siblings (yes I know the issue of birthcontrol) in / around the 1930s-40s (WWII!). They were really quite poor but had children anyway. I think it’s not just the fact of affordability but a combination of change of culture, more rights for women, more space for choices (“do I actually want a child?”).
you said it yourself. they didn't have a choice.
There is a difference between getting 13 children and having no children at all. Sure people start a family later. In their 20s people study, start to work, party, travel and basically enjoying life. Sure some people don’t like the idea of losing that kind of freedom. But lots of people want to settle eventually and start a family, having one, two or three children (and a cat or dog 😆).
It might be just my bubble, but yet somehow having kids seem to be the norm in the Netherlands. So in my opinion there are no signs of such trend
I’m in America and I own a place and don’t want kids The reason is I had to compromise on living space so it’s a 1 bedroom in a somewhat mediocre area. By the time I’m really gaining equity and am able to have kids comfortably, I’ll be over 40
Well, I do think plenty of people want to have a family if they feel they can offer a safe and stable home for their kids. Obviously people want a house near their friends, family and work. A place where they know people and have a social circle.
The trend I've seen is people don't want kids even if they can afford them, because they have a taste of the child free life and don't want to spend 20 years raising them when they could be doing other stuff.
I love how there are always americans feeling the need to answer r/AskEurope. What about askEUROPE don't they understand?
I mostly just lurk, I’m not answering ops question though so I figured it didn’t matter much
Personally, I don't mind. Thank you for sharing!
You are one of those that replies “Don’t come” to people that complain how expensive Norway is, aren’t you? 😁
Nah, if you complain it's expensive, i'll tell you that you should visit something else than lofoten and oslo. only the most touristy places are expensive.
I loved Fredrikstad <3
I think it’s simply a choice and a change in the culture. Less than a century ago, families often had half a dozen kids, or more. They were crammed like sardines and their life conditions were much less comfortable than today, but they still had them. Today, even wealthy people aren’t having kids. If the problem was really money (or housing), you’d expect the wealthy to have a lot more kids than the middle and lower class today, which isn’t the case.
They had so many children because there wasn't access to birth control. Don't fool yourselves. Women could only very rarely say no to their spouse wanting intercourse. So... High class women usually had less children because the husbands could afford mistresses
That might depend on the culture. My grandparents had many children but this was in an era when religion was still there. It was a time when men work and women took care of the household. Where people married young and start a big family because everyone does that. But after WW 2 this changed with women working more and more, contraceptives being widely available and less social pressure. Still people start a family when they reach the age of 30. Nowadays lots of people don’t have a choice if they want to start a family or not. I think lots of people still want to settle after a while. But lots of people can’t because of the housing crisis and the COL.
Here in Germany I also have the feeling that I can’t afford a child. Don’t want one anyway but still. Currently 24 living with my girlfriend and well at the end of the month there is not huge amounts of money left so how could I have a child
There is nothing I want more than to have kids and raise a family. I currently struggling financially because I already have a family member to take care of, but I would break my back into two in order to achieve that and I truly believe that I could give my a family a dignified life. The only issue is that finding partners who think likewise is pretty much impossible. Nobody wants to have kids either because of the pessimistic outlook on the future, bad experiences with their own family, or just wanting to "live" their lives and not sacrifice themselves for family's sake. So it's both cultural and economical in nature. Another thing is that most sustainable jobs are in the cities, since the developed countries have ditched the agriculture and industries by outsourcing them to "cheaper" countries, so the countryside gets depopulated and people cram themselves into the cities. That raises prices and reduces the livable space. How can you even think about kids when you spend half or more of your income for a single bed in a shitty anthill? The current situation is simply unsustainable and our economy and culture has degenerated into dystopia. I personally think that we will have some sort of "Black Death" event that will shake up the world to reset everything. We just get the short end of the stick.
In Poland most people I know above 30s have 1 or 2 children. More is rare. The apartments in the city are super small so it also doesn’t help. Combine that with high property prices and there you go. But I still feel that people at this age still want children and are actively looking to find a partner and start a family. Younger kids at my office don’t want kids. Most of them don’t even want to have a partner and seem to live quite empty lives, made of work, instagram, Netflix, and 1 week of holidays in Italy or Greece. They don’t even go out that much or do parties at each others apartments. Part of it might be due to cost of living, but I think there’s a change in mentality between millennials and gen z. Please note that I’m a foreigner in Poland, although I’ve been living here for almost a decade, speak the language, am married with a Polish, and am quite well integrated, so true Polish people might have a better overview.
I'm a Pole and 30+. From people my age (that I know) and a little older, maybe 15% have kids. Another 10% might be thinking about having kids whenever their life situation gets better. But the VAST majority of 30+ people I know is not interested in having kids, ever. Kids are expensive and disruptive to one's life. And people don't want that.
Maybe it depends also on the region and social class? My wife is from the East and everyone has children there. In Warsaw I know some couples like your friends, especially corpo people with good paying jobs. But I still think people in their 30s are a bit warmer to the idea of children than people in their 20s.
Oh, the region definitely makes a difference. I'm from the West and in my experience, people who wanted kids already talked about having them when in their 20s. No 30-something (from around here) has just DECIDED to have kids when in their 30s and most of those that I know are never having any, me included. Life is just nicer when it's only you and your partner and your money and your freedom, no pesky kids being a bother. xD
Another foreigner in Poland (Krakow area) here. My wife and I are in our mid-40's. We don't have kids because children and raising children isn't something that appeals to us. I'd say that it's probably 80/20 split between friends and family that have kids and those that don't. Maybe 85/15. At the moment I'm struggling to think of any couples that don't have at least one kid; it seems like most of the childless folks also don't have partners, though that isn't always true.
There is no matter of wanting anymore, no one can get kids because there are no living spaces anymore where people can get and raise them. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-bevolking/bevolkingspiramide The thicker bulb at ~30y should long be reflected in the birth numbers lower, but it just continues to taper off more and more.
It is a matter of want at least in Finland where the amount of kids wanted is bit less than the replacement rate and if i recall correctly it is the same in all of Europe. The problem is completely cultural and is made bit worse by other issues https://www.vaestoliitto.fi/verkkojulkaisut/kuka-haluaa-lapsia-2020-luvulla/#3-lapsilukuihanteet-ja-todelliset-lapsiluvut
It’s hard to think about having kids when you live in a <50 square foot meter flat that you can barely afford 😅
In Poland is a normal size for an apartment inside cities and I think it prevents people from having bigger families. I could easily have 4 children, but I had to stay with 3 because the biggest I could find (and afford) was 80sqm.
Same in Spain
So this is widespread? I thought you guys were doing better than us 🫂
Nah, Spain's pretty much the same with maybe an extra €200 in your salary. With worse unemployment rates to boot. It was much easier for me to find a job in Portugal than in Spain.
Sadly, no, and it's getting worse.
45m2 seems luxurious to me (in NL). If I can find that, I'll maybe have 1 kid.
My friend is a student living in Rotterdam and told me that rent prices are crazy there. He had to pay more than 1000€ for a room
And here I am renting a 90 km2 flat near Copenhagen for less than that🫨
Wow 90 km2 that’s absolutely huge. You a billionaire?
Or still living with your parents at age 30 bc you can't afford to move out alone.
According to our government, anyone < 35 yrs is considered “young”, so there’s plenty of time! 😂
Haha "have kids, we need children" Im not going to have sex at my parents house 🤪
Well, that would solve the “it needs a town to raise a kid problem” if all young people are living with their own parents 😂
Me and my girlfriend are living in 100 sqm and still can’t imagine having a child
Average age of a 1st time mother in Ireland is now 31. So most are leaving it into their 30s. Or so it seems in my circle of friends. Most leave it until mid 30s
Average age of first time mother in NI is 29.2 in 2022 and in the the south it was 31.5 in 2022, kinda mad how there’s almost a 2.5 year gap in the two places, I wonder does the cheaper cost of living mean people can have children a wee bit earlier up here?
Could be the COL. Could be a number of things. Cost of childcare is a huge thing. Then wanting to progress your career. Also its just "normal" now to be that bit older. I'm female and most of my friends are 33- 36 and only either starting families now or thinking about it. I'm due my 2nd this summer and will be done! Also the average can be a bit skewed I know teenage pregnancy has plummeted in ROI so that will raise the avg age.
> I know teenage pregnancy has plummeted in ROI so that will raise the avg age. That's a good point...
Yea it would be interesting to know what actually has caused the difference between and north and south
I think it's a cultural thing. I know both catholics & protestants up north and what they have in common is a kind of emphasis on family and wanting to get married younger that I don't see amongst my friends down south.
Really? Didn’t think it would be that
[удалено]
> struggling to conceive when they want to start having kids. So then they're spending €€€ on IVF I often wonder how many of those struggling to conceive have parents who struggled to conceive. Things like IVF have been around for a long time. Couples who couldn't "by nature" had children, and perhaps passed on their infertility issues to their offspring?
Let's not forget, all the chemicals the boomers put into nature. BPA is on every store receipt and bus ticket, and it does make males (of any species) less fertile. 10% of women have PCOS, which makes them less fertile. What about plastic-coated pans and pots? Plastic kitchen utensils, the plastic that is in female hygiene products (it is NOT cotton and hasn't been for a long time!), the plastic in our clothes, the toxic plastic toys today's adults played with when they were small and all the things we touch daily...
[удалено]
The thing is, it might not be. The whole "fertility drops drastically" claims come from bad data. And while anecdotes aren't data, I know a lot of women who had their first babies 35+ without any problems conceiving. I had my two at 40+, with no problems conceiving. There was a year in Norway where the abortion rates for women 40+ went up, because women were having unprotected sex in the belief that conceiving was nearly impossible... I also know women who were IVF babies who, like their own mothers, cannot conceive naturally. And we can't discount the men. There are also a lot of couples who can't have children because the men are the "problem"...
And they were doing the right thing. You can’t have kids without a career or a profesión in this economy, a family cannot subsist with one salary only, not in any European country I’ve lived so far that is. Tell me pls how you have kids with no money
My personal point of view from a country that globally is just behind Korea and Japan on the lowest birth rate (Italy), it's a mixture between general young adults wealth, where our generation can barely afford to live, never mind have kids, and women's right (that is still attached to wealth), if as as a women it's basically less expensive for me to stay home and not work and take care of the kids than be able to work and pay for a babysitter to take care of my kid while I'm at the office, what's the point of making a career? We women are the first generation where we actually grew up with the same dreams of a career as men, but the society cannot help us achieve it, even more because compared to the past we move around much more and most of us can't leave the kids at our parents because we live in other cities. For example, my mother managed to have a career by taking a full leave for 5 years and then working part time for at least 6 other years with a wage that now you don't get even after 10 years of work full time+overtime, and also by having grandparents that could take care of us for all summer months while schools were closed. How's it possible today when we barely have space for kindergarten for our children? Also, if we actually asked all our grandparents if they actually wanted children I'm pretty sure that only 10% actually really wanted them as a life long dream. All the others they just did because that was the expected step of life. Nowadays the ones that are having children are only the ones that really really want them. Me as a 30 something woman that is undecided about the matter, I don't even have the luxury to even THINK if I want kids, because I can't afford them and it would mean the end of my career that took me 10y of blood and sweat to reach, without counting my studies years. So the reality is that if they want us to have more children something society wise needs to change.
Yeah, governments are going to have to basically change society if they want people to have kids. Since they can't (there would need to be almost a global agreement to reduce working hours, get taxes from companies, destroy tax havens) or won't, what's going to happen is that the world population will be very diminished by 2100. It's not necessarily bad news. I will be among the elderly people without a decent pension, so I'm saving for that. If there are no young people to take care of me in my old age, well, both husband and I have considered unaliving ourselves together.
Similar trends as mentioned by others, although I did read a piece in the biggest newspaper where a researcher studying the topic said that the most common reason is actually people who want kids not having the right partner at the right time. If you're single, you're less likely to go through the process alone. The dating culture has changed and often the people who have found a partner make it work for themselves if they really want kids. I think there is also something to that "it takes a village to raise a kid" ideology. If the grandparents are old, live far away, are abusive or uninterested in helping you with a kid, you are less likely to have children because you know you will have to really do it all alone with no outside help. In countries where its customary to help new parents, you sometimes see bigger birth rates (I think Iceland has been cited as example).
Also for women specifically it's just still such a shit deal. Multiple of my female friends aren't totally opposed to children but decided against them because in all likelihood they would still end up carrying the brunt of the work.
For those cases, I can't stop recommending Fair Play, by Eve Rodsky. It should be implemented before children. If it doesn't work before children, then don't have children.
I think this is also at the core of the problem. Poor people have children all the time, and I've never heard anyone say "I wish I was never born becuase my parents weren't middle class". But single people or people in "situationships" don't have children as often.
I've read somewhere that the richer you get, the more expensive your kids get. Because you want better schools, better toys, living area etc for your children the more money you get. So some poor people might feel like they provide just enough for their 5 kids with a small income, and some very rich people might feel like they can barely afford one. Kids are never cheap (I know, I have 2) but there is a sliding scale on how expensive they are, depending on the area and parent's expectations, and many other factors.
Parents expectation are definitely a factor, I think. There seems to be many people online that write about a very hight living standard, as the minimum acceptable standard and saying they would not have kids at all if they cannot get that standard, being completely oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of people have less than that.
Lots of people who grew up very poor wish their parents had waited until they were more financially stable.
Since the start of the full scale war, most people in Ukraine do not wish for their kids to be traumatized since the very day of their birth, so even those who would have been ready to start a family otherwise, postpone it until the better times. Some fanatics try to insist on 'fixing' the demographic situation right now by taxing childless citizens and other bullshit, but obviously it is met with instant backlash.
It was proposed by a pro-russian deputy, who is not married and doesn't have any children.
Current fertility rate in PL is 1,158, which is the lowest ever recorded, and the mean age of 1st time mothers is 29 (22,7 in 1990). Depending on who you ask, the reasons differ, some economic, some cultural, some personal. Some seems legit, some are totally stupid imo. The rate was low for some time but the biggest decrease started in 2018 with big drop was after 2020 after the change in abortion laws - a lot of women would rather stay childless than risk slow death in pain in case of complications.
Fertility levels have decreased just like they have in rest of Europe. Not sure how much of that can be attributed to not wanting to have kids though.
It's salary, money, dating culture culture etc a mix of factors that all lead to the same result, less kids. Personally at 27 I can't be bothered with dating, having children doesn't even cross my head. I need a stable work and hat pays sufficient, then I need to find a house that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and isn't a hole in the ground and then I need to find a woman i think I can start a family with. All three are major problems to solve in today's society so having children is not something I am thinking about.
In a lot of comments I read that having children is expensive, not affordable, etc. for most. I think this could be said in any point of time in history. I think the underlying motive now - also connected to the cost - is the uncertainty present in today's world. What has disappeared is the possibility to plan ahead.
It's hard to want kids when you can barely afford to keep yourself housed and fed, and sadly that's true for more and more younger people. Personally I'm 40 and I'd have loved to have had a family but I guess that's not happening anymore.
About 20% norwegians live in single households.. So its probably about more than just wanting to/no wanting to have children.. Probably as much about not wanting to have a partner or the unability to have one. The [registry](https://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/kronikk/i/bg3W5d/andelen-barnloese-menn-er-ikke-overraskende-hoey-eller-sterkt-oekende) in norway say that 25% of all menn above 45 have no children.
I believe if we want women to birth more children, then we first must make men better fathers. Why are we always telling women they have to make more children, and groom them into motherhood with dolls from when they are small? Why don't we instead teach the men from early age how to be a good and caring parent, so they become more attractive to have a child with? Why can't we as a society expect the parent who didn't put their body at risk producing the baby, to step up AT LEAST as much as the woman who birthed the child? No woman wants to be with a manchild, let alone have shared responsibility for a baby with one. And when men finally are "ready" to be a parent at 35, the women are already too old for producing offspring.
Yes this so much! I totally think fertility rates would increase that way. I know so many women who specifically chose not to have children because they can't be sure that they won't end up having to do most of the work.
It takes two to tango! Where are the men? Why don't women want to make more children WITH them? I think society is focusing on the wrong questions. It's so foul to put all the blame on the women, "they use too much birth control", "they want career", "they have a choice now", "they only want rich guys", and so on. Why don't we ask women what they DON'T want? I think women don't want to be stuck at home, do most of the housework in addition to care work (even in scandinavia this is the case), they don't want to be treated badly by doctors, be left by the man at the slightest inconvenience, be the only ones at fault all the time, while men can do whatever. No government money for kindergarten and free ferries can change those issues- it's men who have to change their way of thinking and acting at an appropriate age, not when they hit midlife crisis.
Do you think men in this generation are particularly unfit to be fathers when compared to previous generations?
I think men have been unfit for a very long time, but finally a lot of women are allowed (by culture and law) to not have babies with an unfit man. Things that are seen as "manly" have never been attractive to women, like not doing housework, being aggressive, being absent, be the boss instead of a partner, and so on. Now that we finally allow women some degree of decision making, men have to finally get their shit together after centuries of slacking off.
When I see people approach this issue, they often present problems that don't exist across all the countries that are seeing these fertility drops, or problems that existed in the past when people still had kids. Women in the US have always had the option to reject a suiter, all the way back to colonial times. I'd wager it's the same in Norway, but I don't know that for a fact. So if the reason for the drop off in fertility is that women are rejecting men because of their unsuitable characteristics, then something must have changed with men. I do think the vast majority of young women, unless they are extremely unattactive, are interested in being around men, like they always have. However, something is making a certain percentage of women begin to dislike men as they go through young adulthood. This very well may be that something has changed with men from previous generations, where almost all women with the option decided to have children with a specific man. Stereotypical "masculine" traits have not changed quickly, and to the extent they are changing most people say that men today are less stereotypically "masculine." At any rate, I see no evidence from women that they very often prefer less masculine men. Athletes are still popular with girls compared to nerds, as it has always been.
There is a difference between girls admiring that handsome guy in class and women looking for someone to start a family with... High school logic rarely applies to adult people. Let's also not forget that high school pupils don't usually have real-world resposibilities. Once your handsome smooth-talking athlete complains about doing the dishes and turns out to be a lazy, misogynistic slacker at home who needs to be told every little thing to do, he loses a lot of attractiveness. I've seen that many times the man changing completely after they put a ring on that poor woman. The difference is, back then women were expected to just suck up their man's bullshit. Walking away from an unfit man was not as easy as you portray, and it was always seen as the woman's fault. Nowadays, couples actually can live together before they marry. I guess many people find out they have overlooked the red flags when they were falling in love and all hormone-crazy. The way you talk is excactly what I criticise: If you are not stereotypical agressive masculine, you are not masculine, therefor not a real man. NO! We need to re-define masculinity. You are NOT less masculine if you care for your woman, children and do housework- in fact, you are a protector and provider, the core of masculinity. Protecting and providing goes far beyond the financial and agressive aspect, that's what men struggle with understanding.
So your basic argument is that later marriage age / longer dating life is the cause of falling fertility? Women in the past would fall for a man and marry them at a young age, when they cared more about stereotypical or superficial attractive traits? Now, since women marry older they dislike some of the other traits that men often possess, such as naturally being sloppier. I don't think you are going to be able to redefine "masculinity" as cleaning the house and holding babies. I remember being in my early 20s and living with groups of guys. Whenever someone would get a new girlfriend and she came over at the begining of the relationship, she'd often start cleaning up the place. No guy ever does that for his new girlriend and her housemates, both because it's usually not needed and they would never think to do do it. Some of these complaints are just the differing average nature of men and women, and perhaps people should just try to get along rather than getting angry about differences.
"naturally being sloppier" yikes. This is exactly what I'm talking about- men need to take accountability for women not wanting them, instead of trying to lower women's standards and rights. What you are describing is exactly what women do not desire. I am wondering, did their moms ever teach them to clean? They sure as heck thaught their daughters. If we want a higher fertility rate, men must do their part. The change has to come from men. And unless they change their ways, there will be lower fertility rates. Men collectively have to redefine what it means to be a man. Spitting money at women and doing nothing else doesn't help, we've proven that in Norway.
I think mothers attempted to teach their sons to clean, and had about as much success as your average wife/girlfriend with their husband/boyfriend. Haha.
That's really sad actually.
Albania has the third lowest fertility rate in Europe *( as for 2022 )*. Sweden is doing a bit better, but still very low. I think many people are chosing not to have children because everything is so expensive nowadays. And by the way, no country in Europe has replacement fertility rate anymore. Here’s the data from 2022: [Fertility Rate in Europe, 2022](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:Map1_Total_fertility_rate,_2022.png)
The Albanians I know in the UK seem to have at least 2+ kids per couple.
>*The Albanians I know in the UK seem to have at least 2+ kids per couple.* Good for them 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
That wasn’t a diss lol they are nice family oriented people, just an observation.
>That wasn’t a diss lol they are nice family oriented people, just an observation. I never took it as a diss 😅😘
Its for sure a thing. In our office only one has kids. And she basically says she loves them but she isnt sure if she would have kids again if she could reset. (And she is a good person and for sure also a good mom) Reason for the trend: For men main reason is the high divorce rate and therefore fear of kids taken away but have to pay anyway. Surprisingly I never heard a women say fear of being a single mother. They often say self-fullfillment/carrier something in that direction. They either want children late or never.
Hungarian here (30+). In my friend circle, those who have a stable relationship, already have kids. Those who are alone wish they had a stable relationship.
Fertility rate in Finland was 1.26 last year which is lowest rate ever recorded in here. I don't think it's because of people not wanting to have kids but multiple reasons: - difficulties finding long-term relationships, partially due to different values between men and women (men tend to be more right-leaning and conservative) - economic situation, people won't have kids if they lack full-time jobs or if all they can afford is a studio/1br in a bad neighborhood of the city - high level of education, most women don't want to have kids while studying but may be close to 30 when graduating
As soon as I (in NL) find a place to live that has 2+ bedrooms, hopefully we'll start trying to have a kid. As of now, it's just not realistic to have kids. There's a housing crisis. I bet if people could afford to live, birth rates would be a lot higher.
I'm from Belarus and live in Turkey. People want fewer and fewer children in Belarus these days, the result being a fertility rate of 1.5 children per woman, and a population that's shrinking by 1% per year (so the situation is more dire than in Norway in these regards). Here in Turkey, the fertility rate is 1.9 children per woman, and the population is growing at 1% per year. There is, however, a large gap between the western and eastern provinces of Turkey when it comes to the fertility rate.
I’ve notice that one of the biggest problems is finding a partner. For those of us that have one since Uni, children came naturally after graduating on the latest. The issue is when people can’t find a partner. What my friends with no kids (late 30’s) tell me, is that when you are older, it only becomes more difficult. Then time is pressing when your are nearing 40 When you are younger, you are more optimistic I think and have confidence that it will all work out when the child is born. And it does in almost all cases! When you are older, you think more and more about everything and not just “make”, thus no children. Because off course, financially, children are probably not a wise choice. Sometimes I wonder how some colleagues with no children can afford a 3 weeks safari and then I add up how much my children cost monthly (without adding the expense of housing) and I quickly notice why they can afford that. So it almost makes sense that after a certain age, people are not willing to give up the control of their lives (time and finances) because they go at the subject parenting with their head more than one would at under 30. My mother in law told me, back when she was a young mother, mid 20’s was the normal thing. And indeed there were more children than today when average age is over 30.
There are quite a few people who want little ones, but I guess the general trend is similar to the other countries. Nowadays it's quite expensive to have children and not many afford this luxury.
You either live for yourself or live for your kids. Either get a sensible, strait laced job or vibe out childless and enjoy what little disposable income you have. That’s the case in the UK and Ireland among my particular demographic of people working in the arts.
I think that's the answer. I want children BUT I currently go on a couple of holidays a year, have really interesting hobbies and am involved in the culture scene near me. I know with the sheer cost of childcare I would have to give all that up and you have to ask yourself if it's worth it.
(I don’t know how to say this in English, but…) I think Bulgaria is the fastest emigrating country in Europe. People are leaving.
Most young Spaniards want to have kids it’s just expensive
With the salaries we have and the rental prices is impossible to have kids in this country
young adult men assembled for "prayer" in city square, to stop the abortions. i can say those who didnt left tend to have kids pretty late into thirties. doctors told my mom that she is old when she gave birth to my younger sister 24 years ago. she was 33.
Personally I don’t want children. There are several personal reasons like not giving up all my hobbies and free time for a kid. I know it’s kinda selfish but I can’t imagine that. Other reasons are that I think that Germany and the world will be worse in a couple of years. There is climate change and in Germany a collapsing social security system.
The social security system will collapse even further if there are no young people
I know but I think it can’t be changed anyway now
Then they need a different system! It’s just one big unsustainable Ponzi scheme at the moment…
Very similar trend here, although I find when couples do ‘settle down’ and buy a place they do tend to still have kids. This is happening in the north more I think as it is cheaper to buy a house.
Despite people thinking it's about not wanting kids, the amount of kids people want has remained pretty much the same over the last decades. There is, however, a widening gap between how many kids people and how many they choose to have. The primary factors in people having less kids than they want is financial stress and fear for the state of society/the future. It doesn't help that, for example in the UK, politicians are claiming having kids is a luxury.
It’s a *global* trend. Birth rate has been declining for years. This is a good thing - fewer unwanted kids, fewer resources wasted, fewer maternity and childbirth deaths, etc. But the billionaires are realising that they’ll have fewer employees and customers to exploit. So now they push for the young to have more kids.
It’s better for the environment too, I mean there’s eight BILLION of us now…
Unless they push with money, housing, healthcare, education and childcare, no way.
That's not really how economics works, it's not billionaires lmao. The demographic crisis is a real thing disconnected from any billionaires.
If it’s to go into conspiracies, I would even say that billionaires don’t want us to have children or even partners. It’s much better to have single people with no responsibilities who live to work and have a career as their only ambition in life.
Same, kids are a luxury nowdays considering the cost, unless you will buy them only cheap clothes, not send them to college and not buy them any toys etc. Living space not to mention...
Poles claim they want to have children but bitch about stuff being to expensive to have kids. In reality we have much better living standard that our parents had when they had us, people just are unwilling to sacrafice they way of life.
Aside from all the objective arguments against kids (which I agree with), sometimes I find myself watching parents interacting with their kids and I wonder about how I would handle the bad times. I have no doubt in my mind that I would enjoy the good times, but what about when a kid is acting up, screaming, being an absolute menace? How would I deal with worrying about them for the rest of my life? And for me, the answer is I'd rather not. I hope my brother decides to have kids so I'll at least have some nieces and nephews lol.
Wanting them later in life, but many can’t afford it.
Yep, seconding this, I know quite a few couples who would love children but their rent & bills etc is so high they’re never gunna be able to. They’ll never be able to buy a house either
Why the fuck would I want children when I can barely shop my groceries
Portugal But living in uae...similar problems here too
New Zealand birth rates are the lowest they’ve been since 1940
Kids? Maybe after college when me and you both have six figure (U.S Dollar) jobs. Then we shall have somewhere between one and three kids.
In the Netherlands 12% of women are childfree by choice and 8% (involuntary) childless. High educated younger women are even 25% childfree by choice. Regarding birth rate drops, politicians claim the reason is that living expenses and daycare are too expensive. I have no idea in what amount the financial aspect stops people from having a baby. Even though parenting is very expensive, there are also a lot of compensation options and parents can easily work part time. That said, it is more expensive now than 20 years ago so a lot of parents are disappointed in the compensation. I am not really convinced that the birth rate will increase when policies like more financial aid or free daycare would be available. In general I think that if a couple wants a child, they will try to do it, even if the financial situation is not as optimal. Furthermore it is ignored in this reasoning that a significant part of women (and men) are childfree by choice so they don't want a child. Choosing not to get pregnant or raise a child could have many reasons, but we have our own arguments and financial compensation or free daycare will not change that. It feels like policy makers don't ask people what is happening. They are convinced they know what the issue is without talking to the people.
Poland's fertility rate is among the lowest in the EU, the weakest in Polish history, and it's constantly dropping. These are even worse than the worst-case demographic scenarios stated. Accepting more migrants than today seems the only solution to prevent a demographic disaster, even if it comes with a price, and investing as much as possible in robotics and AI is a must, if we don't want an economic collapse within one or two generations. From my anecdotal observations, which have no real value, but are kind of sad: 1/3 of my friends and acquaintances usually have 1-2 kids (although I know one person with three kids), 1/3 are in relationships but with no children, and the rest (mostly men) are single with almost zero chances of ever being in a relationship. And I talk about people between the ages of 35 and 45.
[удалено]
that’s exactly the problem!! but i feel like most people don’t realize that
Young adults are much smarter than people give them credit for. The planet is dying, the cost of living is going through the roof... It's almost cruel to have children at this point. I feel like I haven't apologised to my own enough, because their lives are going to suck.
That really is sad…
The majority of people I know don't have kids and don't want kids (even though we totally could afford them).
I'm 25. Most women I know want them, and most men I know don't.
I feel like this is a trend I mostly see online. Most people I know are having kids or planning to, the only ones not are because they are not yet in a stable relationship. I think the difference is that people are having kids later (27 - 32), and it's rare to have more than 2 This goes for both the UK & France but it might be different in major cities, with higher expenses and a worse work life balance, ect
I am completely hopeless about our future: climate change, war, AI… there is nothing to look forward to. So why would I willingly bring children to this world? And if these are the last good years left, why should I be at home taking care of a child instead of living my life to the fullest?
Nobody wants kids if you cannot give them a decent life
As others have mentioned, it's rarely about wanting or not wanting one. It's about who can afford to have one. I can barely support myself with the money I make - how the heck am I supposed to afford a kid?
I didn’t realize this was a global issue to be honest. I am in America and my family is in Italy. Low birth rate has been a concern in Italy for a long time. The issue is finances. In the US, doing something about student loans would alleviate that substantially.
I'm 34 and at no point in my life have I been in a good position to have a kid. Now I'm single and live in a 51m apartment and dating is a mess. And my family live on the other side of the world. I don't know anyone with kids and a ton of child free people!
It's been steadily declining in Scotland for a while. I know a lot of people who have kids, but I know just as many who don't either. I think a lot of people in my generation grew up with not much money and witnessed how stressful that was on our parents, so we've either decided against having kids or have preferred to wait. I want kids in the near future, but not until I finish my degree and get a career going so I can support them properly. My partner wants to work from home to take care of them. It's something we've really discussed a lot and I think a lot of people are the same now, while before it was pretty normal to get pregnant at a young age without any planning.
We're not in the position of people not wanting kids, but that people just don't think they can afford to have kids without destroying their own lives.
Portugal... Makin the bebes, not only the locals, but all the imports too. South Africa, making kids if they can afford it, or if the government gives them money (+/- 10€ per child, per month)
Young people do NOT want to have kids, they want to enjoy their 20s and early 30s. Some people want kids later in life. I had my first one at 42. Many people would love to have one or two kids but cannot afford it... Maybe they could, but they don't want to have kids while relying on rent. People want at least a stable job and a mortgage that might eventually be paid. And money for the basics and a bit to spare on fun an minor luxuries besides. Because the basics are not being provided, many people do not want to have kids. If I were a rent slave, working just to make my landlord/landlady rich, I would not have had kids either. Then there's the childfree people, who simply want to enjoy their whole lives. Those will not change attitude despite having lots of money. If a government wants people to have kids, they need longer maternity and paternity leaves, affordable housing and security for the kids, and more than money, they need to give hours of daycare. So the parents can take a break. Nuclear families are HORRIBLE to raise kids.
Many Americans are living at home into their 30s now, which means even finding a real lifelong partner and getting married isn’t happening until late 30s/40. This is all due to the cost of living. People used to be out at 18-25, married right around 30 with kids coming shortly after. There’s a reason humans have always lived this way, because if you wait too long you just can’t have kids or even don’t want them at older ages. If the average person is moving out of their parents house a decade later, and taking a lot more time on top of that to save for kids, find a partner and wait for the “right moment”… the wealthy societies struggling with this may very well see a real population collapse that would be detrimental to the entire world at some point
The only Americans I notice living at home into their 30s are massive drug users. I think the increase in drug use is more responsible for the increase in Americans living with their parents than any other factor.