Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think a declining birth rate is a good (and inevitable) thing

270 replies

OptimismvsRealism · 01/06/2024 11:09

Article in the times today about the "push for Britain to have more babies" on the basis that a declining population will cause economic shocks.

One of the proposals is "fertility checks in your 20s and education about declining fertility in biology classes".

I mean. Isn't it great that people only have babies if they really, truly want them? And isn't it good to have a smaller human burden on the planet (and fewer humans vying for declining jobs as tech replaces us at most of the things we used to do)?

I don't believe for a second that fertility checks would help anyone. Nobody is out there going "trala I'm 45 and really want five babies but just haven't felt like starting yet"!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Lookingoutside · 09/06/2024 22:30

I’m glad that fewer people are having children they don’t want in case they ‘regret it later’.

MarthaDunstable · 09/06/2024 22:24

JennieTheZebra · 09/06/2024 22:12

@MarthaDunstable 90% of childless women age 45 being involuntary childless comes from a 2010 Dutch meta analysis mentioned in this Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement There’s some evidence this is changing https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2024/01/survey-insights-on-childlessness-and-childcare-in-uk.page

Thanks. That 2% seems like such a surprisingly small number!

TerrysNeapolitan · 09/06/2024 22:14

AllIWantIsACuppa · 09/06/2024 17:01

The problem is that we do have an economic ticking time bomb. There simply won't be enough workers to pay for all the pensioners that there are going to be in the near future because we are no longer having babies at replacement rate.

And no, pensioners have not "paid into the system to cover their costs". That's not how it works. Today's workers pay for the pensions of today's pensioners, so tomorrow's workers will be paying for tomorrow's pensioners.

If we don't have enough workers to pay for all the pensioners, then we need to take some tough choices.

These are: accept more immigration, reduce pensioner benefits, austerity 2.0 which will be austerity on crack, or completely overhaul the tax system to include wealth taxes that will potentially deter the highest tax payers from settling here. None of these are particularly appealing but burying our heads in the sand and maintaining the status quo simply isn't an option.

So yes, we need more babies. But that takes time and frankly it's too late to avoid the forthcoming problems.

And no, I'm not getting at pensioners. It's not ageist to point out that there is an economic problem with an aging population who are financially dependent on the state. It's just maths.

There are too many young people who start life on the state and have no intention of working. Have children as a finance. Just saying.

StuckOnWhatToDo658 · 09/06/2024 22:12

I think if those are the government proposals it really shows how out of touch they are with the vast majority of the population. The reasons people are having fewer children are pretty obvious

-Wages vs actual cost of living

  • House prices (rent or mortgage)
  • Cost of child care
  • Cost of higher education
  • More people go into uni/recognise need to have a career to be able to afford children so have them later in life giving a smaller fertility window
  • Grandparents are often working age so the support of family is less available

None of that will be resolved by fertility tests. Great way to pour money down the drain 🙄

JennieTheZebra · 09/06/2024 22:12

@MarthaDunstable 90% of childless women age 45 being involuntary childless comes from a 2010 Dutch meta analysis mentioned in this Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement There’s some evidence this is changing https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2024/01/survey-insights-on-childlessness-and-childcare-in-uk.page

izimbra · 09/06/2024 22:08

Maplelady · 09/06/2024 20:57

I think that supporting our existing working age adults to be productive members of society would be a start. In my line of work I meet so many young people who have never worked/contributed in their lives and would be much happier and more fulfilled if staying at home without a job wasn’t seen as their only option. The country can’t feasibly support an aging population and countless unemployed young adults who will likely never get jobs. Generational unemployment is also contributing to this problem because (working) working age adults need to support both the young and the old

Historically, unemployment rates among under 25 year olds in the UK haven't been this low since the early 1970's.

Helar · 09/06/2024 22:03

40somethingme · 09/06/2024 21:01

Even if we die out, why would that be a bad thing? Species come and go, we are nothing special… in fact we’ve done more damage in our short span on this planet than any other species.

In my opinion, it would be a terrible thing. The Earth here in all its glory, but no one to be awestruck at it, to look out at the stars and the depths of the universe, to think and reason and wonder about it, to study its nature and philosophise about its creation and write poetry about it? That is a desperate prospect.

I think humanity is wonderful and amazing and I really want our species to continue beyond the next few generations . We are getting better in so many ways and if particularly if we stop wasting time and money and brainpower and blood on fighting each other, we can turn our ingenuity to finding new technologies that are gentler on the Earth.

Abitorangelooking · 09/06/2024 21:45

Livelovebehappy · 09/06/2024 20:36

This isn’t going to be an issue though long term. State retirement ages are increasing every few years. Probably those born now will be working til 80! Plus, I don’t think there will be an NHS a few decades from now. Everything will be private and paid for privately. Likewise the state pension - eventually most people will be funding their retirement on private pensions.

It doesn’t sound very appealing. My private pension is pretty shitty so I guess I will form part of the work to you die generation. Luckily it won’t take terribly long as no affordable healthcare.

Firawla · 09/06/2024 21:39

Aging population is a huge social issue that will have to be dealt with at some point, economically it is a disaster so no I don’t think declining birth rate is any kind of a positive

beergiggles · 09/06/2024 21:20

Gvts will have to pay women a proper salary for bearing & raising a child.
Wealthy people can only stay wealthy if there are enough of us in the lower ranks to work in the businesses & services and to buy the products

RomeoRivers · 09/06/2024 21:18

Don’t worry guys- I’m going to have loads! 😂

IgnoranceNotOk · 09/06/2024 21:15

The trouble is we’ve been sold the ‘you can have it all’ and it’s not actually true!

We have two and I’m trying to juggle my career and still see and be there for my children - workplaces are not supportive or flexible (teaching) and it’s hard.

If we could afford to I’d love 1 more (although we’d need IVF) but we can’t so that’s that. And also my career would probably take a even more of a dive.

I think now that women are used to working - people become used to a certain lifestyle and luxuries. Having children affects that.
Having children is so hard anyway and if you’re trying to juggle jobs and the cost of childcare then I’m not surprised people don’t want to try and ‘have it all’ anymore!

I do not have it all - I think I’m just left with the crumbs 😂

MarthaDunstable · 09/06/2024 21:10

Neurodiversitydoctor · 09/06/2024 20:22

However 1 in 5 women aged 45 remain childless, in only 10% is that by choice. So that is 18 women in every hundred who would have liked to have a child but didn't. This is not largely an active and positive choice.

Citation needed I think. If you're asserting that only 2% of women remain childfree by choice, then I'm not going to believe that without evidence, because it seems far too low.

I'd readily believe that a meaningful minority of women are childfree not by choice, but not the 2% statistic.

Maddy70 · 09/06/2024 21:09

The problem is lots cant afford to start families. The country needs young workers to provide doe an ageing population.

Immigration despite what farage says isnt high enough to bridge gaps.

Long tern we need more young people in the workforve

KimberleyClark · 09/06/2024 21:06

Neurodiversitydoctor · 09/06/2024 20:22

However 1 in 5 women aged 45 remain childless, in only 10% is that by choice. So that is 18 women in every hundred who would have liked to have a child but didn't. This is not largely an active and positive choice.

Not all women who wanted a child and couldn’t have one are sitting around thinking about what could have been and wallowing in regret. They are getting on with full and rewarding lives - not the lives they would originally have chosen but rewarding lives nevertheless.

Kitkat1523 · 09/06/2024 21:06

Pollipops1 · 09/06/2024 20:52

It will be fine because state pension age will be 85 and lots of people won’t even make it to that age

Arent loads of public sector pensions linked to state pension age?

Many aren’t….I’m NHS…59 now …..I took mine at 57 tho was eligible from 55….my DP is from 65 ….so 2 years before state pension age of 67….

my friend will get her LA pension at 60

40somethingme · 09/06/2024 21:01

Helar · 09/06/2024 17:48

No, it will never even out unless the birth rate goes back to 2.1. There will always be relatively more old people as there will be fewer and fewer babies in each generation . It is population collapse.

Until humans go extinct. The last South Korean is predicted to die in 2750. The rest of the world won’t be far behind.

unless we do something to get the birth rate back up to replacement.

Even if we die out, why would that be a bad thing? Species come and go, we are nothing special… in fact we’ve done more damage in our short span on this planet than any other species.

40somethingme · 09/06/2024 20:58

Wethairwendy · 09/06/2024 17:06

Who do you think will look after the elderly 🤦‍♀️

The last thing I want for my daughters is to become breeding machines to produce future carers for “the elderly”.
One or two generations might suffer in future but eventually it will balance itself out. We need to stop treating our young people as if they owe us anything and let them live their lives.

Maplelady · 09/06/2024 20:57

I think that supporting our existing working age adults to be productive members of society would be a start. In my line of work I meet so many young people who have never worked/contributed in their lives and would be much happier and more fulfilled if staying at home without a job wasn’t seen as their only option. The country can’t feasibly support an aging population and countless unemployed young adults who will likely never get jobs. Generational unemployment is also contributing to this problem because (working) working age adults need to support both the young and the old

Pollipops1 · 09/06/2024 20:52

It will be fine because state pension age will be 85 and lots of people won’t even make it to that age

Arent loads of public sector pensions linked to state pension age?

Luio · 09/06/2024 20:49

ByCupidStunt · 09/06/2024 19:55

Who told you you could have it all?

It was a phrase originating from the 1970s that has been much satirised.

Kitkat1523 · 09/06/2024 20:42

CrispieCake · 09/06/2024 20:35

But isn't that the point?

You and other workers were paying for other people's pensions. Which was fine as there were lots of workers.

But there soon won't be because people aren't having babies and so, for a couple of generations, those who have paid into the system won't be paid out. And it doesn't matter how deserving they are, the money just won't be there.

It will be fine because state pension age will be 85 and lots of people won’t even make it to that age

Cattenberg · 09/06/2024 20:41

I don’t think I have anything to add, except that I’ve never seen an AIBU poll before that was a perfect 50:50 split!

Livelovebehappy · 09/06/2024 20:36

Abitorangelooking · 09/06/2024 16:34

I’d agree too. I suppose the problem comes when you have an increasingly elderly population with expensive care needs being supported by a smaller number of workers/ taxpayers.

This isn’t going to be an issue though long term. State retirement ages are increasing every few years. Probably those born now will be working til 80! Plus, I don’t think there will be an NHS a few decades from now. Everything will be private and paid for privately. Likewise the state pension - eventually most people will be funding their retirement on private pensions.

CrispieCake · 09/06/2024 20:35

marigold1593 · 09/06/2024 18:28

Pensioner here. I get the grand sum of £159 a week ( paid for by todays workers)
I started work when I was 14 at weekends. Got a proper job at 17 and apart from a short break to have one child, worked full time until I was 66. Presumably during that time I was paying for other retired people to have their pensions?
But oh my, don't people seem to resent the fact that people like me are getting money that they pay for! All these elderly people expecting to be looked after, whatever is the world coming to?
Btw I have voted Labour all my life.

But isn't that the point?

You and other workers were paying for other people's pensions. Which was fine as there were lots of workers.

But there soon won't be because people aren't having babies and so, for a couple of generations, those who have paid into the system won't be paid out. And it doesn't matter how deserving they are, the money just won't be there.

Swipe left for the next trending thread