To think a declining birth rate is a good (and inevitable) thing

[OptimismvsRealism]

Article in the times today about the "push for Britain to have more babies" on the basis that a declining population will cause economic shocks.

One of the proposals is "fertility checks in your 20s and education about declining fertility in biology classes".

I mean. Isn't it great that people only have babies if they really, truly want them? And isn't it good to have a smaller human burden on the planet (and fewer humans vying for declining jobs as tech replaces us at most of the things we used to do)?

I don't believe for a second that fertility checks would help anyone. Nobody is out there going "trala I'm 45 and really want five babies but just haven't felt like starting yet"!

They are. There is such a thing as secondary infertility, a couple might already have two kids and want a third and perhaps a fourth. Maybe they want to have as many kids as possible because they want to have a big brood. But if you personally were allowed to dictate to them what you'd rather they do, you'd prefer it they stopped at two and had no more.

I already explained how I made a mistake in conveying something you said and you do care because you're still fizzing mad about it. I will not apologise to you, I repeat, I WILL NOT apologise to you for you getting angry at the way I interpreted a very clear post.

I think a problem is that the people least able/willing to be good and responsible parents will continue to have multiple children despite a generally declining birth rate.
By this I mean situations where children grow up pretty much feral left to their own devices leading to a life at risk of crime, abuse, addiction and very bad choices.
I worry both for these individuals but also for society in general as regards balance of functioning adults vs pretty much destructive/self destructive adults.
Children from such inadequate parents can of course change and lead better lives but in many cases won’t unless help is available from the state or other sources.
I had a very traumatic childhood myself with zero support but was saved by the fact that my first seven years had been nurturing and safe and also because I was lucky enough to find academic work easy so climbed my way out of the horror of the rest of my life. Otherwise I think I could have easily taken a very different path.

As explained here in a satirical movie two decades ago:

I could’ve written this myself! I probably could technically afford another child but it would be to the detriment of my DD. We live in a small house in a nice area and I have money to pay for her sports and tutor. I often think ‘thank god I’ve only got one’ when I see the price of childcare costs, housing and life in general

It is not a contradictory opinion to say a middle ground is ideal rather than two ends of either extreme.

But if you personally were allowed to dictate to them what you'd rather they do, you'd prefer it they stopped at two and had no more.

The world is overpopulated so I think it’s entirely reasonable to stop at 2 kids. No idea where you get the idea I want to ‘dictate’ to anyone. I shared an opinion on a thread asking opinions.

I already explained how I made a mistake in conveying something you said and you do care because you're still fizzing mad about it. I will not apologise to you, I repeat, I WILL NOT apologise to you for you getting angry at the way I interpreted a very clear post.

oh no, I’m gonna go cry into my pillow.

If you don’t wanna apologise because you projected your anger onto a poster whose post you didn’t read properly (and then made an AWFUL inaccurate accusation) then I won’t lose any sleep, I will instead be happy that I’m not the kind of person who does weird shit like rather than getting help for my irrational anger.

Absolutely pathetic TBH to twist someone’s words like you have. How embarrassing

The world is overpopulated, yes. I agree. But you categorically do not have the right to tell people how many kids they should have to mitigate what you believe to be a problem.

I didn’t say I did. It’s an opinion on a thread asking for opinions.

Ate you this melodramatic IRL?

So you can be angry at me for accidentally misspeaking through a moment of anger and you can ignore me addressing it to show you that I noticed, but I'm not allowed to have any sort of feelings or emotion? Is that how this forum works?

I'll call a truce; I agree that I'm an awful person who makes awful accusations, and you agree that you're correct. Okay? Okay. I'll try to avoid certain topics in the AIBU? forums from now on.

<Shakes hands>

Fair enough.

Im sorry for whatever you’re going through - and I think it’s a good idea to avoid certain topics. I certainly have learnt to for things that are close to home. I can’t always post rationally and we all makes mistakes

Absolutely.

I would also add this the younger half of the baby-boomer generation have, generally speaking, invested much less time in helping raise their grandchildren and invest in the younger generation. They are the retirement cruise generation, known for self-indulgence. A million threads I’ve read on MN over the years have taught me that this has been noted and resented by the offspring of these boomers and they can expect less care from family than previous generations have counted on, as a result. It frequently gets mentioned on here how other cultures do a lot of the care for the elderly themselves within individual families, but rarely is it mentioned that those being cared for never stopped rolling their sleeves up and doing the caring themselves until they were no longer able to do so. Most of my social circle rarely see their parents as they are always busy with their social lives, hobbies, cruises and holiday homes abroad. My grandmother was a second mother to me and was cared for faithfully until her end by a good number of doting and grateful family members. My children have a good relationship with my mother (father deceased) but it’s quite distant and polite compared to the intimate warmth I had with my granny. I’ve had to manage without help because she’s mostly not been around, she’s always busy, and while that is ok - I just don’t know if I feel that leveI of devotion to her care when she’s older. And I’m sure my children won’t as the bond isn’t there. So it is concerning for this next batch of elderly if we have neither the workforce, the nhs services or the family willing to roll their sleeves up.

I don't necessarily think a declining birth rate is a good thing. Family planning on the other hand IS a good thing.

Blimey.

I do think there is less family investment in the younger generations when it comes to sharing resources.

I think we can look more easily at the atomisation of wider families and the increasing retirement age of women, rather than point the finger at the boomers as an inherently selfish generation.

It's also less common to live near extended family these days. I don't have children, but if I did I wouldn't be able to use my or DH's parents for childcare because they all live too far away.

Also - the age at which people have children is relevant. 50 years ago, it was fairly normal to have you first children in your early 20s. Which meant a grandmother (who back then often didn't need to work full time to live) might be age 50-60 when childcare was needed, and would have the energy and stamina to provide that care.

Nowadays the average age of a first time mum is 30.9yrs. So a grandmother (who is also more likely to need to work more hours these days), is both older and more likely to have their time and energy taken up by work, so they are less likely to have the energy to provide care for small children.

(I've referred to grandmothers because somehow it almost always is the grandmothers who actually provide the childcare support.)

There are lots of factors at play, and I don't think calling boomers selfish is the answer.

I think lifestyle standards are so different now.

MIL is 1 of 8 kids!! They never had family holidays except maybe a night in an aunty’s caravan, because they couldn’t afford it. People now stave off having lots of kids so they can give them the materially nicer things in life. I don’t think that’s actually a bad thing. MIL says she loved being part of a big family but she was one of the youngest and didn’t experience what the elder ones did which was a lot of childcare before they hit their teens.

Couldn’t agree more.

Agree, yet these threads pop up every month or two, and it’s the same comments again and again: “But our planet is overpopulated!, “Surely a declining birth rate is great?” and so on.
No matter how often people explain why a declining birth rate is worrying and what negative consequences it would have.

No one is telling anyone to become a “breeding machine”.
People can live their lives, but they’re also part of the society, where we all depend on each other to a certain extent.
Nothing wrong with realising that big societal changes like a declining birth rate will have consequences.

Hopefully when we all get old there’ll be an AI machine to wipe out bums for us

Agree.
Some people on here seem shocked and disgusted by the idea that children might be needed to keep the (future) economy running, but what alternatives do they envision I wonder?

Hopefully. Less humiliating and hopefully not 2k a week!

If current trends continue, I wouldn't assume that no-one will be telling women to become breeding machines...

Look through history - governments of all stripes have a habit of imposing whatever rules they need to achieve their aims.

The Handmaid's Tale might be sci-fi, but it gives an example of the direction a society in desperate need of young people might go in. The world is entering a time of increasing conflict and instability, nothing is certain.

People have a bloody cheek telling women that they're "part of a wider society" and need to do their bit by having more children, when maternity care is an underfunded shit shows, mothers are left to pick up the pieces when fathers walk out with derisory CM, under-5 childcare is extortionate, wraparound and holiday care expensive and unreliable, mothers are frequently in the shit at work because of their caring responsibilities, care, education and respite for SN children is crap or non-existent, grandparents aren't expected to help because "they've done their time", children are largely unwelcome in public places, and if any woman has the temerity to complain or struggle, she's told " they're your kids, you chose to have them, you need to deal with them".

Where is this "society" when mothers need it?

My parents are boomers, I am eternally grateful for the help and support they provided when I had young children (DCs are now 17 &20) my parents will have not 1 but 2 generations below them to help out when and if needed (they are 73 & 75), don't tar all boomers with the same brush. I also work with women in their 50's and 60's providing weekly grandparental care.