Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Is our society heading towards the point where having children is an unaffordable luxury for the average couple?

307 replies

MamaLlama123 · 15/01/2024 21:45

Is our society heading to the point where having/ raising children is becoming a luxury?

Thinking about my family as an example - My grandmother had 5 children - she was working class and a SAHM. Despite not having much, my grandparents were able to house, feed and raise their children well. They were not in poverty. They had small treats like fish & chips every Friday and a few days at the seaside every year etc. I don't think family size for this generation was any kind of luxury but children was just an inevitable outcome of life

Comparing this with today, I read so many threads on mumsnet about women who are in a much stronger position than my Grandma. They are not SAHM but actually have extensive qualifications/ careers and resulting in 2 incomes within the household. Despite being so much better off, women seem unable to confidently go forward in planning even a small family 1-2 children (comments from a recent thread about delaying 2nd child due to nursery fees comes to mind)

Are children becoming disproportionately more expensive compared to previous generations? and do you think that having children will be an unaffordable luxury/ unrealistic goal for todays children?

OP posts:
theduchessofspork · 15/01/2024 21:50

I think it’s happened already

Denmark had a campaign to raise the birthrate a while ago (Do it For Denmark!) - they did some research first which apparently said that most people who wanted kids wanted 2 or 3, but in reality ended up having 0 to 2.

I think it had a bit of success but it wasn’t sustained, so considering Denmark has good nursery and welfare provision probably means you’d have to do an awful lot to raise it in the UK..

thenightsky · 15/01/2024 21:54

Luckily I had my 2 in the late 80s/early 90s. We'd have loved a 3rd, but finances would have been fucked.

Reading that recent thread about the £2,200 a month nursery fees has really shook me. If that had been me, I don't think I'd have even one.

Ponderingwindow · 15/01/2024 21:55

Absolutely. Children are already a luxury.

if governments need people to have children, then policies need to change massively.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

AnneLovesGilbert · 15/01/2024 21:56

There’s plenty of evidence that the more education women have the fewer children they want. That’s happening all over the world and has been for a while.

Expectations of family life as an experience rather than an inevitability are also different now. As you say, fish, chips, day at the seaside, were the treats. They had no childcare costs because she didn’t work because his income was enough to house, feed and clothe everyone, however modestly perhaps. People often post on here that they’re sticking with one so they can continue to enjoy holidays, hobbies, career development, time away from parenting. That choice wasn’t available when your gran was having her babies.

biedrona · 15/01/2024 21:58

yes. not only because of financial reasons. women do not want to be constrained and follow what used to be thought of a typical role (mother/wife).

KissMyArt · 15/01/2024 21:59

My grandparents

Grew their own fruit and veg (like their neighbours).

Darned socks, took up hems, took in waists etc and passed those clothes down and down.

They slept their kids top to toe - 3 or 4 in a bed.

Chopped their own wood for the fire and only had a fire in the living room.

Not a single scrap of food was wasted and any treats like biscuits or cakes were rare, and all homemade.

They had one car for the whole family.

Had a radio but no TV until their much older years.

We have much higher standards nowadays and they come at a price.

stayathomer · 15/01/2024 22:02

I think there may be a difference now when people say they can’t afford children- there’s a chance they mean they can’t afford to keep a certain/their current standard of living. You get rid of luxuries and cut your cloth all over the place but then you see people saying it’s cruel to have a child and a not so high standard of living too! Saying that it’s so impossible to get a house/flat either rental or to buy- I can see how this could be the thing that stops them.

Pickles2023 · 15/01/2024 22:05

I always wonder how it would pan out though...when people say the you shouldnt have a family unless you have a great career and money..if no care workers, nurses, or low paid workers have or can afford to have children and only extremely wealthy can..what happens in the next couple generations? There will be no nursery workers, no people for the minimum paid jobs, no carers.

I figure they will be go along with the opinion that children are a privelidge and your entitled to want a family until there is no one to provide any services then suddenly do a u-turn, incentives and better childcare..(or turn into a backwards state with no human rights and work houses 😂😂)

(Yes dramatic been watching those dysotopion and apocolyptic movies/dramas on netflix)

parietal · 15/01/2024 22:07

this tweet from john burn-murdoch really shows how things have changed - houses are unaffordable so young people have to live with parents and not have their own family

https://x.com/amolrajan/status/1746834882846699820?s=20

https://x.com/amolrajan/status/1746834882846699820?s=20

parietal · 15/01/2024 22:09

here is the tweet for quick reference - the data is clear that buying a house and having children is unaffordable.

the question is - what are the politicians going to do about it?

Is our society heading towards the point where having children is an unaffordable luxury for the average couple?
FarleyHatcherEsq · 15/01/2024 22:13

So I work with women who have very little financial security. Often not working prior to pregnancy. I think they will continue to have children. They will get the 30 free hours at 2.5 and may get part time work once their children start school. The communities I work in often don't like putting their kids breakfast clubs and afterschool clubs. They see them as cruel, as the kids don't get picked up at the school gates with many others but have to stay behind. In a few generations time it will be more normal.

Women who are very well off will continue to have children and just see nursery fees as an investment in their future career.
The women who won't have children will be the squeezed middle. I was an older child and I was one of two in class of 30, whilst about half of my kids class are only children now.

MotherOfRatios · 15/01/2024 22:15

I said this on the other thread and got flamed, I'm mid 20s and children don't seem attractive.

We have low wages, and wages that don't match house prices and private rents are a joke. We don't have the space to have kids. Then when you do have kids our maternity leave isn't that good, and childcare is astronomical.

We have low birth rates all western states are struggling in Japan adult nappies outsell children's.

we either make it more attractive or we accept immigration.

Superduper02 · 15/01/2024 22:17

I think that's exactly it. The biggest one is wanting to live in a nice house/ safe area and have children. So it's a battle of SAHM living in a not so nice house/area or paying nursery fees and getting a 2-person income. Poorness isn't socially acceptable anymore. A family has 'got' to have all the bells and whistles.

FarleyHatcherEsq · 15/01/2024 22:25

@Superduper02 you're right. I know a lot of these types, they want to be SAHM's but their partners don't earn enough for that life. So they either resentfully return to work or try to live a Jools Oliver lifestyle on credit cards.

Yellowwellies1 · 15/01/2024 22:28

We have one child; the cost is the main thing putting me off a second.

pikkumyy77 · 15/01/2024 22:35

Superduper02 · 15/01/2024 22:17

I think that's exactly it. The biggest one is wanting to live in a nice house/ safe area and have children. So it's a battle of SAHM living in a not so nice house/area or paying nursery fees and getting a 2-person income. Poorness isn't socially acceptable anymore. A family has 'got' to have all the bells and whistles.

My god why won’t these bitches lie back and think of England?

GHxx · 15/01/2024 22:40

I’m not sure about the general population but having a baby has completely blown my mind when it comes to the financial side of things. I worked full time in a professional job, made a semi-decent wage, as does my husband. I used to see people waltzing off into the sunset to go on mat leave thinking it looked great. They’d come back a year later, some would have gone holidays etc while they were off and the money side of things just didn’t seem to be a concern (im guessing it was but I couldn’t tell at the time). So when I got pregnant I couldn’t wait for all this maternity pay when I didn’t even have to go to my work for it! I was so shocked when I discovered you only get 3 months pay at my work, followed by the government’s SMP for 26 weeks. I couldn’t believe people were actually living off of that. I know you could be prepared and save for years in advance but having bought a house a couple of years before, saving really wasn’t happening at all. The alternative was obviously to return to work full time when my baby was 3 months old. I know lots of people do this (some maybe want to) but to me it just seemed inhuman almost to consider handing my baby over to a childminder or nursery at that age, when he needed his mum the most.

My actual bills weren’t even covered by the SMP, let alone adding in clothes, milk, nappies, baby classes, a new car seat when they outgrow the infant one, a new buggy etc etc. The numbers just physically don’t add up, unless your partner is rolling in it anyway! I ended up starting up a printing business while I was off and working during every nap time and very late into the evening. I just couldn’t afford to have no money, we were struggling to even pay the mortgage and the main bills. My husband was taking on more overtime so I was often not getting any help all day with the baby (hats off to single parents who do that every day anyway). I feel like the first year, and every year since really, of my son’s life was just a frantic struggle for money, while also not wanting to miss a moment of everything he did but not being able to give him my 100% attention because I was always desperately trying to work or multitask, to avoid having to leave him completely and go back to my day job. It’s sad looking back that those are my main memories of what should have been a really happy time.

Maternity leave/pay in this country is a token gesture. In reality it is completely impossible to do unless you have a whole lot of savings to burn through. Especially now with the increased cost of everything and SMP has gone up by I think £20 per week since when I got it at first. Our mortgage is over double what it was then, even formula is 1.5x the price it was, but thank god for that £20!

EasterIssland · 15/01/2024 22:41

Maybe but I guess also depends on the type of lifestyle you want

myself team lead. 1 child. Both parents working. Love traveling so spend a good chunk of salary in it every year. We like going out sometimes for meals etc. house on mortgage in expensive town tho not an expensive mortgage (£600)
one of my colleagues who reports to me. 3 girls under 6. Only him working for a while. Gaming as a hobbie but not expensive hobbies. Renting.

I think you’ve priorities and whilst in the past it was “compulsory” to have 2 chilsren to have your family completed nowadays more families decide to have 1 child and done. Also many have spent a fortune on fertility treatments.

having a child is luxurious but also depends on the lifestyle you want to have.

LuluBlakey1 · 15/01/2024 22:54

MamaLlama123 · 15/01/2024 21:45

Is our society heading to the point where having/ raising children is becoming a luxury?

Thinking about my family as an example - My grandmother had 5 children - she was working class and a SAHM. Despite not having much, my grandparents were able to house, feed and raise their children well. They were not in poverty. They had small treats like fish & chips every Friday and a few days at the seaside every year etc. I don't think family size for this generation was any kind of luxury but children was just an inevitable outcome of life

Comparing this with today, I read so many threads on mumsnet about women who are in a much stronger position than my Grandma. They are not SAHM but actually have extensive qualifications/ careers and resulting in 2 incomes within the household. Despite being so much better off, women seem unable to confidently go forward in planning even a small family 1-2 children (comments from a recent thread about delaying 2nd child due to nursery fees comes to mind)

Are children becoming disproportionately more expensive compared to previous generations? and do you think that having children will be an unaffordable luxury/ unrealistic goal for todays children?

The expectations of working class people were much lower then. Most lived in poorer rented accommodation or in council houses, it was unusual for them to own property, holidays were much less common and never abroad, far fewer people had cars, no mobile phones, far fewer electrical items, far less clothing, no named brands, much lower fuel and food bills- processed food was rarely bought. People did not have gym memberships, visits to hairdressers were for a cut and set at most, usually hair was cut at home. Make-up was very cheap and very little was used- my gran and her sisters had a powder compact and lipstick and perfume would be a luxury for most people. There were no computers, gaming stuff, ipads. Life was much simpler and cheaper. People made stuff- knitted, crocheted, sewed. They had one coat for cold weather and it lasted years. Furniture was passed down and re-used, not changed on whims. Very few children attended nursery and those who did probably went to a free nursery.
None of my grandmothers, my mam or aunts worked while their children were young. They stayed at home. No cleaners. They kept the house, shopped (no cars), lived near each other, visited each other 3 or 4 x a week and helped each other, cooked, baked, knitted, sewed, managed the money. Eating out was very unusual other than tea and a bun in a cafe. Takeaways were unusual and a rare treat. They worked later when the children were older. We all had holidays in the UK- at seaside places or in Scotland or Wales or (to relatives ) in Ireland.
I think if you add up what we all spend on the 'extras' now that we expect, you can see why it's so much more expensive now and harder to manage without two decent salaries. Most people don't have that kind of family support around them- me and my friends all went to our gran's once our mum's started work again when we were around 8 or 9. My grans looked after all their grandchildren regularly (eg every day after school, or every day at lunchtime or took us for the whole of half-term to a caravan) at some point. Most people have far more clothes than they need or wear and so do their children. We expect centrally heated homes, we expect to own our homes (and as there is now very little council housing, the alternative is expensive private rental), we expect to have one or two cars, mobile phones, computers, games stuff, most people expect holidays abroad, to eat out, have takeaways. I'm not saying we shouldn't want those things but they have to be paid for. Add in the costs of property, fuel rates, nursery fees (which are quite staggering) and you can see how much of incoming money is going out very quickly.

We have 3 DC between 4 and 9. I was a SAHM, from choice but also I couldn't do my job they way I had to and look after DC and stay well. We had saved hard but if DH didn't earn a good salary we would really have had to reduce how we lived. We'd have had to stay in the smaller house we had, we couldn't have had 2 cars (and we don't have new cars ever), had holidays abroad , spent money on clothing the way we did, ate out, ever saved. I became a really good money manager- our DC had almost all of their clothes as secondhand or handme downs, DH and I buy hardly anything new now for us (occasional treat), lots of our housestuff is secondhand. I am a careful shopper and rarely buy ready meals and always buy offers and freeze stuff or store it until I need it. I'm not really much of a make-up buyer or wearer, and my hair is cut at home once every 2 months and costs £8. I dye it myself. She also does DH and the DC and total cost is £40. 10 years ago I paid £120.00 every 6 weeks just for me.

We're lucky, PIL live 5 minutes away and are a godsend. I am back at work full-time and they give us so much help and support. It would cost us a fortune if we didn't have them.

Kendodd · 15/01/2024 23:07

I have a theory about this, and it's all about the money, but perhaps not how you might expect. People in parts of the world living in terrible conditions often have lots of children, Gaza, Sudan for example. And people in richer parts of the world often have few children often because they can't afford them. In the parts of the world where people have lots of children, as soon as they grow up, the expectation is that they will work and give money to the parents, so more children = more money. Young people from these societies often feel great pressure to provide financially for their parents. Amongst working class families in the UK , giving your mum a bit of your wages (whether you lived with her or not) was also common until recently, and families had more children then. In the UK, and lots of other 'rich' countries, money now flows down the generations, not up. So having kids costs you an absolute bloody fortune and is no longer an investment in the future that delivers financial returns.

Just my theory anyway 😊

Lavender14 · 15/01/2024 23:18

We've already arrived.

Dh and I both work full time in good jobs that we worked hard to get to senior levels in. Neither is a super well paid sector but we earn reasonable wages.

We have 1 son and we are in an area of the UK where we don't get help with childcare. Just the 20% tax free allowance and £96 4 weekly child benefit.

We can't afford a bigger house or a second child because of how expensive childcare costs are. Previously we could have offset that by doing away with non essential spends but now our essential spends are so costly that we can't cut down any more than we already have. So we're stuck in what was supposed to be a starter home that we've outgrown and it's highly unlikely we'll be able to have a very much wanted second child. It's our choice because we want to be able to save and provide a good quality of life for the son we do have but really it doesn't actually feel like a choice at all.

Lavender14 · 15/01/2024 23:21

Lavender14 · 15/01/2024 23:18

We've already arrived.

Dh and I both work full time in good jobs that we worked hard to get to senior levels in. Neither is a super well paid sector but we earn reasonable wages.

We have 1 son and we are in an area of the UK where we don't get help with childcare. Just the 20% tax free allowance and £96 4 weekly child benefit.

We can't afford a bigger house or a second child because of how expensive childcare costs are. Previously we could have offset that by doing away with non essential spends but now our essential spends are so costly that we can't cut down any more than we already have. So we're stuck in what was supposed to be a starter home that we've outgrown and it's highly unlikely we'll be able to have a very much wanted second child. It's our choice because we want to be able to save and provide a good quality of life for the son we do have but really it doesn't actually feel like a choice at all.

And the other side to this is that the alternative is that one parent comes out of work to provide childcare so they can have more children. Which is usually the mother. Which further widens the gender pay gap and makes it even harder for women to sustain a role and progress in the workplace due to caring responsibilities. Women are once again being forced to choose between career or family when that's not a choice they should be forced to make.

AndThatWasNY · 15/01/2024 23:29

Lavender14 · 15/01/2024 23:18

We've already arrived.

Dh and I both work full time in good jobs that we worked hard to get to senior levels in. Neither is a super well paid sector but we earn reasonable wages.

We have 1 son and we are in an area of the UK where we don't get help with childcare. Just the 20% tax free allowance and £96 4 weekly child benefit.

We can't afford a bigger house or a second child because of how expensive childcare costs are. Previously we could have offset that by doing away with non essential spends but now our essential spends are so costly that we can't cut down any more than we already have. So we're stuck in what was supposed to be a starter home that we've outgrown and it's highly unlikely we'll be able to have a very much wanted second child. It's our choice because we want to be able to save and provide a good quality of life for the son we do have but really it doesn't actually feel like a choice at all.

When we sold our first home (a small 2 up 2 down in a terrace) we met the women we had bought it off. She asked why we were moving and we explained we were expecting our second and wanted more space. She laughed and said that she had been brought up in the house in the 70s with 6 siblings, her parents slept in the kitchen. Was a bit embarrassing 😁

Superduper02 · 16/01/2024 00:56

pikkumyy77 · 15/01/2024 22:35

My god why won’t these bitches lie back and think of England?

Oh dear. I think you've misunderstood my sentiment. I am saying that it truly is a battle. Who wouldn't want to live in a nice house in a safe neighbourhood? Who doesn't deserve that? Lots of people who were either raised in or become accustomed to a certain standard of living would begrudge giving it up and those that are already unable to achieve it might see children as putting them further behind society and punishing their unborn children. Normal families that existed when I grew up would now be considered poor or mean. The goalpost for family life has moved and its unsustainable.

TiredCatLady · 16/01/2024 01:11

Yep we’re already there. The cost of childcare/limited availability of childcare/penalisation of women for taking time out/lack of real wage growth/lack of affordable (or any) housing are all taking their toll.

Myself and OH have good jobs, don’t have new cars or phones but the area of the country we have to live in for those jobs has mind bendingly expensive property and council tax so it’s just not possible to own anything even modest without two wages coming in. If we have a child then it’ll be a case of back to work asap and hope to qualify for any help with childcare fees as even one child would be a struggle. Being a SAHM simply would not be an option.

Swipe left for the next trending thread