To think the pope has a point??

[HiggleDyPigGeldy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65572153

I was in Italy recently and visited several large towns in the North. More dogs being walked than babies in buggies.

Maybe the Pope can come up with some concrete suggestions to remedy the woeful absence of childcare in Italy, and condemn the culture of workplace sexism which lingers on and sees a lot of workplace discrimination against pregnant women and mothers.

Yes more people in the over populated world, that is exactly what we need

The point of his speech was that there isn't enough support and that people can't afford to have families. The BBC headline is bizarre considering the Pope's point was that if the country wants to buck the falling birth rate then the government needs to do more. He wasn't blaming the birth rate on people having pets.

Completely agree! There are great reasons why women don’t want children in Italy - I think it also has the highest rate of divorce among EU5 and people who do have children tend to start much later in life.
I find it sad it’s gotten to this. How can it be that having a children has become an unaffordable luxury for so many?
And who do the people think will keep the country going in 30 years / care for them in their old age?

I’m guessing someone will come along shortly to tell me how AI is going to replace the need for carers etc

It's a big problem in the whole of the western world. Our own birthrate is 1.4 children per woman. Russia's is the lowest in the world even though Russian women get given a financial incentive equal to 3 years salary for a 2nd child.

I'm astonished that no-one seems to have clocked on to it. Politicians seem to be just ignoring it.

Maybe they could open a creche at the Vatican as their own small part in helping mothers get back to work. On a cross-country basis, the percentage of SAHPs tends to be inversely proportional to the birthrate. Or in others words, the easier it is for mothers to get back to work, the more children. Hence Japan dying out, or as good as. But of course Francis prefers to push his tired old complementarianism doctrines.

I just noticed he’s been pushing a similar narrative for some time - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/05/pope-couples-choose-pets-children-selfish

there was a thread on this here back in January 2022.

I think there may well have been a creche at the vatican - then there was a highly controversial case if a young girl growing up in vatican city who disappeared and was suspected to have been abducted for dodgy reasons the general public will probably never find out

Well the Pope doesn’t have kids himself. Chose his career (or “calling” if you prefer) over having a family. Not really in a position to criticise is he.

Anyway, as PP have said, the world needs fewer humans.

Bit rich given he has decided to have none?

In any case, there are over 8 billion humans, we're good for humans.

Having read the article, not really.

The Catholic church has a colossal amount of (ill-gotten) wealth. Perhaps they could redistribute some to make the lives of the Italian people easier?

They also possess considerable social and political influence. They could lobby the government to improve conditions as part of a sustained campaign.

The Vatican doesn't have the greatest history with children, specifically those from large, working class families 👀
Are they running out of victims?

Historically (not that long ago either) they've expressed zero concern for the welfare of women and children re. family planning, contraception, maternal health, medically ill-advised frequency of pregnancies and births, marital rape and coercion, domestic abuse, inability to financially and emotionally support so many unplanned children, malnutrition, parentification and so on. I've yet to see an apology.

Now I’m genuinely curious - to all of those who push the “the world needs fewer humans” line: do you actually live a green existence? Or are you part of that privileged minority of people (who typically live in North America or Europe) with a disproportionately large carbon footprint?
and is it because you are wealthy that you are unconcerned about the impact if shrinking population on your quality of life? Perhaps you think you will still be able to afford a decent old age despite labour and healthcare becoming increasingly expensive?
It just feels so hypocritical to me, all these people who expect everyone else to be deprived of family and comforts when they are living their best life driving cars, eating imported food, and flying around the world for fun - but hey, babies are bad for the planet.

I'm not sure a man who is head of an organisation, whose members are dedicated to celibacy, really has much to offer the debate on falling birth rates.

Spot on :)

I have a number of children that would make the pope happy, but I'm not going to take advice from a man who has no children, has his financial future assured and who isn't at all impacted by my child bearing (or not) choices. Maybe the Vatican could use some of the wealth to help families afford children?

Opening a crèche at the Vatican seems like the worst idea ever

He has a point.

Governments need to do more for women, children and families if they want to change the trend.

OP I agree with you and I do see where the pope is coming from. I know a lot of people like to repeat "the world is already overpopulated" line, but there isn't solid evidence for this. Indeed, there are a lot of researchers who think that we are actually headed for the opposite.

Asides from increased costs of living and lack of support, I think there is also a cultural element to this. Perhaps this is what the pope is also alluding to? I think there has been a huge shift in values for most Europeans and western nations. Individualism taken to an extreme level. And at the same time the role of motherhood has been denigrated and is portrayed so negatively. Even if someone does have the income, they would rather spend it on extra holidays or other luxuries, rather than bring another child into the world. That is where the preference of the average European lies. As it stands the birth rate is below replacement level in most European countries.

I have felt for some time that parenthood and having children just isn't aspirational anymore for most young people now.

I also think that once a culture adjusts to smaller family sizes, everyone gets used to it and its hard to imagine anything different. We often hear of our grandparents generation when it was normal to have 4-6 kids. That is pretty much unthinkable now. I think China is having a similar problem due to having previously implemented the one child policy. I mean if you and everyone you know has grown up without siblings in a one child family, it must feel strange to now think of having 2 or 3 children.

If I was being cynical I'd query how much of this stance was rooted in control. People are leaving religion in droves (in the West at least). Procreation is a great way of growing your flock (and tithes, if applicable), evidenced in modern day US fundamentalist and orthodox religions.

I wonder how many children would be considered acceptable to the Catholic church, 2-4? Or would it be a slippery slope pressuring women to have as many children as possible, dismantling rights and discouraging personal autonomy?

How many of these (allegedly) celibate, old, religious men rather enjoyed it when lesser men and women looked to the church for guidance and permission to live their lives? Incredible power trip.

The Catholic church has no business giving instructions on family life/anything to do with children. It puts babies in septic tanks ffs.

That said, the declining global birthrate and especially the cliff edge European birthrate is a concern. Plus, people who go on about pets being their children are unhinged and annoying.

So, I guess I can see both sides.

After everything we know about scandals and priests, I wouldn’t be leaving my child at the Vatican 😬😬

Yea I'm thinking Vatican creche won't have many takers.

I think there has been a huge shift in values for most Europeans and western nations.

There has, but the biggest shift in respect of falling birth rates has been the liberation of women. This hasn't been total and there is still a significant problem with sex-based oppression, violence against women, etc., but there have been massive gains. Women in most of Europe and the West can now largely control their fertility. Women can choose not to have children or to have fewer children.

The women having large families in the past often didn't want them; they just had no other option. They couldn't prevent themselves from falling pregnant through sex and they couldn't stop their husbands having sex with them. That's the other part of it: that when women spent so many of their reproductive years pregnant, it wasn't just that they had no access to contraception, but that their husbands too were placing having sex with their wives over their wives' health.

Sofia Bers, wife of Tolstoy, wrote about trying to make herself miscarry by jumping from furniture and taking scalding baths. She gave birth thirteen times.

What’s actually wrong with wanting to have a luxurious and indulgent life rather than children though? I’m not talking one with a high carbon footprint either before anyone jumps in. Just a life where you can please yourself and pursue your passions. That isn’t an inherently bad or amoral choice. Make things better so people who want kids can have them, but why the need to try and change the minds of people who don’t want kids?

I absolutely agree society needs to support mothers more - free childcare and a cultural shift to 50/50 parenting rather than women taking the brunt of the work for a start - but personally no amount of policy change would make me have a kid. You could offer me £1million in cash and I still wouldn’t because I simply don’t want to. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with choosing to prioritise yourself and your wants/needs over the sacrificial nature of parenthood.

This is a society, policy and infrastructure problem, not an individual one. The pope was so close when he talked about high cost of living, low wages etc…then he made it about pets.

That’s a really good point. The higher birth rate of the past probably didn’t have much, if any, element of choice in it.