Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Apparently in 2030, 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single and childfree. Do you think this will happen?

216 replies

YouAreNotBatman · 23/05/2023 11:56

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

Came across this article.
And as much as I (single/childfree woman) would like this to be true, just so there would be more like-minded people and the stigma of being single and childfree woman would lessen.

I really don’t think this is going to happen.
Most people are still higgly conventional and traditions seem to stick in strong.

And also: putting young age 25 is jist silly, by the next 5-10 years most of those women will be married/have kids.
And what I’ve seen happening in dating life is that labels have changed, but it’s still the same old, same old.
Many insist they are ’casual’ or have areagment or new word for dating, but they are basically just plain old dating/in a relationship.

Study Predicts 45% of Women Will Be Single By 2030

Single men are “lonely” but single women are “empowered.“

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

OP posts:
ChopperC110P · 23/05/2023 21:43

SparklyLeprechaun · 23/05/2023 20:35

The study is fine, it's about the economic influence of women, and 25-44 is selected because it's prime employment age, not because it's prime childbearing age. But then some random on Medium decides to link it to childlessness and here we are...

? I don’t agree that is prime employment age as most women work from 16 to 67? But 25 to 44 is actually the prime marriage + childbearing ages?
-ONS assumes women’s childbearing go from 15 to 45
-35yrs old is average age of first marriage

So I think author has used 25-45 to cover for prime childbearing and also cover the range +/- 10yrs of when women first get married

Oopsiedaisyy · 23/05/2023 21:55

Met a woman the other day who declared her only goal in life had been to get married and have children.

That smacks of lacking ambition or imagination. Especially since I'm now dating her ex husband 😳

JenniferBooth · 23/05/2023 21:59

Why did they split up @Oopsiedaisyy

ChopperC110P · 23/05/2023 22:04

Oopsiedaisyy · 23/05/2023 21:55

Met a woman the other day who declared her only goal in life had been to get married and have children.

That smacks of lacking ambition or imagination. Especially since I'm now dating her ex husband 😳

Yes because any role that is traditionally a woman’s life goal is not worthy of any respect at all. Only roles that were traditionally for men are the ambitious and imaginative life goals. 🤨

I do not like this sort of dark judgemental streak in some feminist thought.

YouAreNotBatman · 23/05/2023 22:05

Wait, does ’single’ mean ’just not married’ somewhere in the world?

Around here it means not dating, not having a partner, alone.
That’s single to me.

OP posts:
YouAreNotBatman · 23/05/2023 22:09

Met a woman the other day who declared her only goal in life had been to get married and have children.

Did she grew up in a very backwards family, religious maybe?
I mean this kind of desperation didn’t come from nowhere.
As judgemental as our society is and pushes women to be wives and mothers, this woman is really extra, I know there are families who really raise daughters to believe that this is their only worth in life.
Very sad.

OP posts:
ChopperC110P · 23/05/2023 22:20

YouAreNotBatman · 23/05/2023 22:05

Wait, does ’single’ mean ’just not married’ somewhere in the world?

Around here it means not dating, not having a partner, alone.
That’s single to me.

That’s how the article is defining single. I think it’s a silly definition.

kitsuneghost · 23/05/2023 22:28

JenniferBooth · 23/05/2023 16:25

@lieselotte Im 50 next month and im child free by choice. It was seen as so unusual when i was younger that i was on three seperate TV chat shows talking about this choice

Amazing what a difference a couple of years make. I am 48 and no one thought it was weird at all.

FellPuck · 23/05/2023 23:14

MaterDei · 23/05/2023 15:57

I never said my personal circumstances means that your statement is wrong. I said I didn't think it to be true, but not based on my circumstances. Also stated I am happy to be proven wrong when provided with evidence which you have yet to do.

I mean, you asked for a link, I gave you a link, you dismissed the link because it disagrees with you.

Now you're asking for sources so that you can dismiss those too lol. I won't bother wasting my time with that, weirdly enough 😂

SparklyLeprechaun · 23/05/2023 23:54

ChopperC110P · 23/05/2023 21:43

? I don’t agree that is prime employment age as most women work from 16 to 67? But 25 to 44 is actually the prime marriage + childbearing ages?
-ONS assumes women’s childbearing go from 15 to 45
-35yrs old is average age of first marriage

So I think author has used 25-45 to cover for prime childbearing and also cover the range +/- 10yrs of when women first get married

It's not a matter of personal opinion, whether you or I agree that it's prime employment age or not. It's literally what the study is aimed at, written down in black and white: "Based on Census Bureau historical data and Morgan Stanley forecasts, 45% of prime working age women (ages 25-44) will be single by 2030—the largest share in history—up from 41% in 2018." The fact that it's employment they are interested in makes sense if you actually read the article.

What the author of the Medium article believes is conjecture, just an opinion piece. I can take the stats and offer my opinion that 45% of women between 25-44 will own a pet, scientifically it's equally not backed by any data.

ChopperC110P · 24/05/2023 00:31

SparklyLeprechaun · 23/05/2023 23:54

It's not a matter of personal opinion, whether you or I agree that it's prime employment age or not. It's literally what the study is aimed at, written down in black and white: "Based on Census Bureau historical data and Morgan Stanley forecasts, 45% of prime working age women (ages 25-44) will be single by 2030—the largest share in history—up from 41% in 2018." The fact that it's employment they are interested in makes sense if you actually read the article.

What the author of the Medium article believes is conjecture, just an opinion piece. I can take the stats and offer my opinion that 45% of women between 25-44 will own a pet, scientifically it's equally not backed by any data.

Yes, I did see that and wondered how they’d come up with it because prime working age is defined as 25-54 according to the IFS? Do you think that the author has done a typo?

QueefQueen80s · 24/05/2023 02:07

Not childfree, but yes to that many being single. We are seeing the light..

MaterDei · 24/05/2023 06:20

FellPuck · 23/05/2023 23:14

I mean, you asked for a link, I gave you a link, you dismissed the link because it disagrees with you.

Now you're asking for sources so that you can dismiss those too lol. I won't bother wasting my time with that, weirdly enough 😂

The link you sent didn't contain ANYTHING in it that supported your claim!!!

You could easily win this debate by providing just one of the apparently many sources that are well known and readily available. Despite me frequently requesting this you have failed to provide a link that even mentions the words 'women's education' and 'number of children'

I suspect that's because your claim is unfounded. A quick google this end reveals:-

not only are highly educated women more likely to have children these days, they are also having bigger families than in the past. Among women with at least a master's degree, six-in-ten have had two or more children, up from 51% in 1994.

It was really underwhelming 'chatting' with you fell. I'm out.

wheresmymojo · 24/05/2023 06:30

Not sure about single but child free is possible I think.

I'm early 40s and in my close friendship group of ten women 50% of us don't have (and won't have) DC.

Some by choice, some not by choice, some a kind of mix of both (me).

Daffodilwoman · 24/05/2023 06:34

Well if it means not married then yes I don’t think it’s wrong. However ‘single’ in 2030 should mean not in a relationship surely.
There is a huge difference. Many, many women are not exactly single but they are not married.
I also think the age range is a bit odd. Women do have children at 45 and older. This figure is on the increase. Also women do have children before they are 25.
As for being child free- no I disagree. Only approximately 18% of 45 year old women are child free ( have never had a child). This figure is not going to rocket to 45% in a couple of years that’s ludicrous.
There is correlation between how educated and how good a career a woman has and the age when she has her first child. It tends to be the less well educated women who have children at a young age. They are also more likely to be in less well paid jobs.
More children from broken homes for want of a better word and relationship breakdowns- these will rise.

wheresmymojo · 24/05/2023 06:35

Maebh9 · 23/05/2023 12:57

Having children involves a lot of hard slog that doesn't otherwise exist for most people these days. It looks really jarring to go from nice career, time with friends, digital entertainment on demand and automation of most drudgey tasks (hello robot hoover) to the unavoidable labour of keeping helpless small people alive.

I think now that people have choice and see how many different ways you can live a full life, only those who feel the proper urge will have kids (and I think only a minority feel that urge).

Ultimately this is why I haven't had DC.

Daffodilwoman · 24/05/2023 06:43

To be fair I know women who still struggle to get sterilised even now. There is often huge pressure to have children. Off the top of my head I know 3 close friends who were refused sterilisation. None of them have regretted not having a child/more children.
Actually another friend springs to mind. She has children and it took her years to get a doctor to agree to her being sterilised.

ChopperC110P · 24/05/2023 07:06

Daffodilwoman · 24/05/2023 06:34

Well if it means not married then yes I don’t think it’s wrong. However ‘single’ in 2030 should mean not in a relationship surely.
There is a huge difference. Many, many women are not exactly single but they are not married.
I also think the age range is a bit odd. Women do have children at 45 and older. This figure is on the increase. Also women do have children before they are 25.
As for being child free- no I disagree. Only approximately 18% of 45 year old women are child free ( have never had a child). This figure is not going to rocket to 45% in a couple of years that’s ludicrous.
There is correlation between how educated and how good a career a woman has and the age when she has her first child. It tends to be the less well educated women who have children at a young age. They are also more likely to be in less well paid jobs.
More children from broken homes for want of a better word and relationship breakdowns- these will rise.

The whole article is a bit odd, I agree the age ranges used do not match the official definitions of prime working age or total childbearing age that they claim they do. There’s no real detail on how they calculated the % although presumably it is an average across the entire age range but honestly so many women would have been married and divorced between 25 and 45 so how is that reflected?

It feels like their objective was to have a click bait headline and they manipulated age ranges and filters to get to one.

JamSandle · 24/05/2023 07:10

All lifestyle choices have pros and cons. It's not a competition.

Thesharkradar · 24/05/2023 12:58

I think that marriage is genuinely assumed to be a situation where there is a financial partnership/you are a financial unit. So if you're not married you are single in the sense that you're not pooling your resources with a partner- even if you do have a partner with whom you are in a romantic relationship.

Obviously many people live together and pool resources without being married but that doesn't have the legal protections of a marriage.

fitzwilliamdarcy · 24/05/2023 13:58

Catspyjamas17 · 23/05/2023 15:16

Really? I'd be fucking minted if my salary was just for me on my own, rather than being the highest earner in a five person household.

Nobody's salary is just for them "on their own" - we all have to pay for housing and to stay alive, with all the bills associated with that. Housing and bills and the need to eat still exist when you don't have kids - I just don't have the second income to help me cover them all.

I accept that I don't have to feed and clothe 3 children as well as myself, but no, I'm not "fucking minted", and the weird myth that all childless people are is really annoying, frankly.

User135644 · 24/05/2023 14:06

Women in this age cohort (at least 18-30 sort of range) are out-earning men now, so it's difficult to find a suitable partner.

Maddy70 · 24/05/2023 14:17

My daughter in her mid 30s and 100% of her friends are child free and single through choice

They have lots of fun together why should that be Compromised?

sheldonia · 24/05/2023 14:19

Maddy70 · 24/05/2023 14:17

My daughter in her mid 30s and 100% of her friends are child free and single through choice

They have lots of fun together why should that be Compromised?

Doesn't say much, since they aren't even the expected age to have kids in some areas, and alike people group together anyway.

Hbh17 · 24/05/2023 14:20

It is also possible to be married/ in a relationship and (happily) childfree. It's not all or nothing. We should be celebrating the fact that women now have real choices in their lives, and hoping that we can move towards a time when nobody is judged for whatever choice they make.