AIBU The global fertility crisis is the biggest crisis humanity has ever faced?

It's not out of control at all. Many countries are already in population decline (this is hidden by immigration figures in the UK) and the increase in global population is slowing, expected to peak and start falling within the next 50-60 years.

A bit off topic, but planet earth will be in a new ice age in around 100,000 years, regardless of whether humans exist or not, and eventually will be overcome by the expansion of the sun.
I do believe humans should exist for as long as they possibly can, we are the only ones who can figure out what is coming, through science, and help ourselves and other species survive for as long as possible.

Although in the end none of it will really matter, and the solar system as we know it will be gone, and there will be no one to know we ever existed, but let's not wish for our extinction sooner than it need be.

I feel the same. I try not to think about it too much or I dive into deep despair, but I am horrified at the state of the world (climate and society) my children are growing up in.

Even as a childless person myself, if we're going to tie state benefits to the number of kids you have, its having children that should rewarded (and being childless should be penalized).

Although I'm entirely for increasing the tax burden on the rich, the demographic crisis is just as pronounced in countries with fairer distribution of wealth (like the Scandinavian ones). I'm for it, but it doesn't sole the problem.

So, if population decline continues, we're still left with a choice - do the current and next generation of older people make significant sacrifices, or do we prioritize them and cause far greater suffering to the subsequent generations of elderly people?

Is your personal level of comfort really that much more important than that of your kids or grandkids? Is there nothing to be said for sharing the burden?

What drugs are you taking @plantsdieinmyhouse ? Human population globally is out of control. The earth will breathe a sigh of relief when ai kills us all.

It's not clear to me why you think this is such a problem.

It means we're all going to have to adjust to a lower material standard of living, but that's obvious for other reasons anyway. Not least the contribution of rampant overconsumption to climate change.

All the time I was growing up, the biggest bogeyman facing humanity was supposed to be overpopulation. Now it's finally sorting itself out, and people like the OP are in a blind panic about it. Nowt so queer as folk, as they say.

Yeah I get that. And personally, I don't expect to get much (if anything) in the way of help by the time I reach retirement age and am preparing financially to be entirely self-sufficient (although I acknowledge that lots and lots of people aren't lucky enough to be in the position I am, either through health or earning capacity, and I absolutely acknowledge that there's a need to support the retired population - so yes, in that sense I get that it's selfish of me to be less concerned about the material facts of a declining population. And obviously there are no guarantees I won't end up unable to work in the coming decades and then have to eat my words and hope all the offspring my peers have are contibuting to a social care system, I know that!)

When I say I don't see a need for humanity to continue I mean more in the sense that I don't think we're some uniquely special species who 'deserves' to survive - and as a species we've globally made decisions which are directly impacting our ability to do so. I obviously do care about the things that are impacting birth rates on a personal and political level - I'd like to see governments improve quality of life in ways that would probably result in more people having children, I'd like a world with proper social care systems, proper healthcare, affordable housing and good education available to everyone, and I'd like a world where there's not tons of political uncertainty and where global warming is taken seriously.

Humanity is going to be fighting for the little bits of land that aren't flooded and are still inhabitable, due to climate change, in the not so distant future. So having a smaller population would make that much easier.

What about the elderly who didn't have children?

Used fewer resources, took less out of the state, filled less bins...can we have more pension and a bit of state healthcare instead?
Perhaps there could be a sliding scale - two kids no pension and you have to take your own teeth out with pliers. One kid half a pension and one free set of dentures on the state, no kids - £12k a year and an option on a hip replacement every three years.

Or perhaps businesses could pay less to shareholders and more in tax and the 1% who own more wealth than 70% of Britons could pay more tax and share it around more fairly.

We're well below 2.1 and have been for some time. Ask anyone with kids in primary school outside a major city - classes are having to be collapsed, village primaries are really struggling.

But I don't believe it's a crisis for humanity - it's quite specifically a crisis for our generation, who won't have anyone to pay our pensions or staff our care homes. Within two generations we might well have evened back out to a manageable global population.

Side note: I can't believe so many people are still so heavily invested in stopping economic migration. Within 30 years we will desperately need immigrants to try and stabilise our population.

You and your husband own a four bedroom house. You have two children and a spare room. One of your children gets married and their spouse moves in to your house. Your other child later marries too and their spouse joins your family. There are now six of you in a four bedroom house. You still have the ability to have guests to stay.

A few years later one of your children has twins. Your grandchildren move into the spare room. There are now eight of you in a four bedroom house. All the bedrooms are occupied.

A guest comes to stay. You manage to squeeze them into the sitting room, sleeping on the sofa. It’s inconvenient, but do-able.

Your other child gives birth to your third grandchild. All four bedrooms can each only accommodate a maximum of two people. Someone has to move into the sitting room full time.

You all grumble but accept that there is no other option. You throw out the sofa and move the tv into the kitchen. You all accept that’s just how it is now. Luckily there is still room at the table so you can all sit down to a meal.

One of your grandchildren gets married and their spouse moves into your home. You have to change the sleeping arrangements and your married grandchild and spouse move into the sitting room and the grandchild who was previously there moves into the bedroom with your other grandchild. There is much grumbling from the grandchild who previously had the whole sitting room to themselves, but you tell them they’ll have to put up with sharing now.

Your husband hurts his back and needs to live on the ground floor. He has mobility equipment that fits into the sitting room so you both move in there, giving up your bedroom for your grandchild and their spouse who move out of the sitting room. You cannot fit two wardrobes in the sitting room with your husband’s mobility equipment, so both you and your husband throw out half of your hanging clothes each and accept that that’s just how it is now.

Unfortunately your husband’s mobility equipment means you cannot all fit round the table for dinner together, so you agree to stand at the side to eat so all the couples and children can sit together.

Your married grandchild announces that you will soon be a great-grandmother.

You are both overjoyed and terrified.

You are currently a family of 10 in a four bedroomed house, soon to be a family of 11.

You love your family and you wish them all to have a good life. But where will the great-grandchild sleep? And who has to eat in the hallway because there is no more room in the kitchen, not even standing room?

Your realise that although it is your house you have given up your bedroom, your wardrobe and half of your storage space already. There is no sitting room and you have nowhere to relax and be quiet, to breathe calmly and to be alone. You wonder if this is really what you dreamed of when younger. You feel guilty thinking this, after all, your grandchildren will have it far worse when they all live here with their siblings, cousins and their own great-grandchildren and this four bedroom house has to accommodate a family of 30. Perhaps they will extend the house into the garden. There will be more rooms but no outside space or greenery, no homegrown food and no visiting wildlife.

You wonder if you can tell your family what you have realised. Should you explain what will happen and destroy their dreams? Or should you keep quiet and hope that by then they have worked out how to underpin the foundations so your four-bedroomed house can grow upwards, into a 12 story block of flats, without falling down?

But even so, you know eventually that there will be too many descendants to all fit at your table. Who will be the ones to miss out? You worry, but you cannot change things.

Your house is a microcosm of our world.

I wouldn't kill myself just because I believe humans are a parasite on Earth, because I don't think we are on an individual level (although, some massive twats are 👋 Trump, Musk, Netanyahu,...). But our species as a whole, as many pp have said above, have destroyed so much that I don't believe we are any good for this planet at all.

There’s plenty of babies being born, just not here, the population needs to shrink.

Fair enough - if proponents of human extinction are willing to put their money where their mouth is, particularly before expecting state support, I wont quibble that.

If I'm being really honest, the best thing that could happen to this planet is mankind dying out.

The UN predicts 9 billion people by 2037 and 10 billion by 2060. Hardly a crisis.

I'm pleased the human population is declining. We already take up far too much of the earth and leave little room for other species.

This is the response that has made the most sense to me. I'm the same age with a 9 year old and I totally agree. What devastates me is how we've left the planet for the younger generation. I hate to the think of the world my daughter and grandkids may have to survive in.

It does actually. It's precisely what it means.

Well I would if/when I feel the time is right. I come from a country where euthanasia has been legal for a long time, and it is something that I will state very clearly I want in certain circumstances. I have no desire to be living as long as possible, and/or with zero independence (physical and intellectual), zero pleasures in life, and being a burden to those I love the most and to society. I see no point at all in living this way myself (I would never dictate or judge anyone for doing so or for having elderly family members who do).

Elon? Is that you?

Well, what do you suggest?

The aging population crisis is getting exponentially worse, and will continue to do so.

Failing a radical solution - its either hard decisions now, or even harder decisions for the next generation.

People have been told for years that having children was destroying the planet, how selfish it is to have children and that they should be ashamed of their climate footprint, that natural habits are being destroyed to make way for housing and agriculture for the increasing population, not to fly, the horrors of overconsumption by an ever growing population etc. No wonder fertility has dropped. Yet now there is a pivot to an apparent crisis of not enough people being born. Seems like there are conflicting messages being put out. Which is it?

There is another way. If successive governments had encouraged better investment in systems, business, training, facilities and education then workers could actually be much more efficient, productive and lucrative and less workers needn't mean less economic growth.

Its hard to phrase this right, without making it sound like a hostile suggestion, but honestly - a genuine question.

Based on your above comment, why not kill yourself?

This is awful.
Would you say the same about children or adults who are unable to contribute to the economy due because they have disabilities?

Where do you draw the line?
How do you say to someone who has worked and contributed all their life, perhaps had children who contribute, 'Sorry nan, you're FUBAR and like costing us quite a bit. We're going to put you to sleep now so we can pour the money in to more regular bin collections.'