Could anything have incentivised you to have more children?

[Echobelly]

Following excerpts from this demented article about how the birth rate might be upped in the UK ('get a telegram from the Queen when you have a third child!'): twitter.com/rhiannonlucyc/status/1543475834769522688

along with the SCOTUS ruling the other week, it got me thinking about how all ideas about how to get birth rates higher seem to involve 'Demanding women give their whole lives to childbearing and giving them a pat on the back for being good breeders' and how it never seems to involve anything that would actually make it easier for women to have children and thrive as full human beings.

I have to say, if there were free or heavily subidised childcare available I would probably have had a third, but I couldn't face that long under the burden on childcare costs (although there is the 'needing a larger car and house' issue as well). Could any subsidy or offer from government have encouraged you to have more children than you are planning/have?

Better maternity and paternity pay. We had to save thousands for me to be able to afford 9 months off. Heavily subsidised childcare. Fertility treatment on the NHS actually being a realistic option.

Hard agree, 3 is a terrible dynamic, IME especially for the middle child.

Proper care for pregnancy sickness. Decent sick pay to cover all the time I might not be able to work whilst pregnant. Much cheaper child care for the older children. Right now it would be absolute madness for us to have a third. We would be seriously destabilising our family unit.

Three works for me and my sisters. Middle sister and I would have nothing to do with each other if it wasn't for number three, she brings us together.

I have one. Nothing on god’s green earth would convince me to have a second.

No because I was done, not harbouring a desire to have another baby aven though we could afford it. I couldn't put my body through it again, couldn't do the sleeplesss nights and snotty vomity toddler years again. For us the reasons to stop at two weren'/ financial it was because it is exhausting. I imagine there are lots of people who would have a third given some financial support.

Environmental issues would affect my decision too. The ecology is on the verge of collapse, and artificial human economies requiring the creation of more slaves and cannon fodder do not take precedence.

The world isn't short of young people, they are just unevenly distributed.

This country has never tried an effective immigration policy. All we have done is intermittently allow immigrants in, then dump them in areas of deprivation without proper services, which understandably creates resentment in the local population. It doesn't have to be like that. The US, Canada and Australia are all examples of successful economies founded on immigration (albeit with massive racism towards both their indigenous populations and when choosing who could immigrate).

I would not have wanted three. It was either two or four. House prices meant four was never a realistic possibility unless we lived in total poverty.

No.

I would have had another if I could have a night nanny for the first year. DS was an awful sleeper, couldn’t face that again.

Better maternity care including surgical repairs afterwards and physiotherapy etc. Increased child benefit available to everyone not just low earners. Free childcare virtually from birth.

I earn very little but DH earns just over the threshold so we don’t get a single penny to help us, while people who earn nearly double our joint salary get full child benefit. It’s shocking and unfair.

Not sure anything would have...
Maybe better maternal healthcare, lower housing costs, cheaper childcare and much much better support for SEN and better employment practices from DHs employer might have persuaded me to go for it. Thats quite a package though.

I earn very little but DH earns just over the threshold so we don’t get a single penny to help us, while people who earn nearly double our joint salary get full child benefit. It’s shocking and unfair.

It's not from the governments perspective though as it incentivises people to work so they collect more tax.

The ecology is on the verge of collapse, and artificial human economies requiring the creation of more slaves and cannon fodder do not take precedence.

How will everything be funded though? look at the state of the NHS & social care now, how will it improve with more people needing it?

It actually incentivises DH to ask for a slight pay cut to bring him under the threshold. It doesn’t incentivise me to work at all - my inability to work is related to the cost of childcare, and me working wouldn’t make us entitled to child benefit.

Importing unskilled young people who don’t share our values and behave inappropriately has been a nightmare for other countries eg Sweden and Germany.

Also lots of Western countries are facing this issue so the tables will turn. The young immigrants will be able to chose where they go & we will have to be more attractive to them.

@Suddha I'm talking about a statistical level though not individual....

@tirednessbecomesme we're not expected to contribute to university fees.

The student's living costs are a separate matter.

If the government paid for

Childcare
A bigger house
Paid maternity leave
Paid paternity leave
A bigger car
Better nhs services for pregnant women and for birth

As it is more likely pigs might fly I am sticking to two.

I think we have decided not to have any children and the main reasons are cost of childcare and lack of family support.

Hard agree, 3 is a terrible dynamic, IME especially for the middle child.

Most people I know are 1 of three including myself & DH. No issues.

Nothing. I had three and always wanted three - but that’s enough I think.

No, but then I don’t need any incentives. The only thing stopping me having more than 4 is car space and that all 4 have their own bedrooms.