UK fertility rate drops by 18.8% in 12 years

[MidnightPatrol]

The UK has the fastest falling fertility rate in the G7.

2022 saw the lowest number of births for 20 years.

The current TFR is 1.49 births per woman.

What do you think the reason for this is, and what could be done to reverse the trend?

news.sky.com/story/amp/britains-fertility-rate-falling-faster-than-any-other-g7-country-with-austerity-thought-to-be-a-principal-factor-13232314

Cost of living, both parents having to work (vast majority anyway) etc.

Last time I looked at ONS figures - was a while ago - there was a very small % increased in number of women not having any children and a much bigger decrease in family size - though 2 kids was still most common.

Most of the commentary on this big UK drop point out nearly all the world bar sub-Saharan Africa is having lowering of fertility - but we seem to have gone faster than other G7 countries and they are blaming austerity - and note it's happening fastest in poorer areas of UK.

So I suspect the extra decline in the UK it's people who want kids but stopping due to financial constraints.

If I was starting now we wouldn't have had as many as it was hard enough when they were young and it's just got worse with cost of living going up not to mention declines in maternity services - we'd have maybe had another but our experience with last one and maternity services was just horrific and by time we move we felt too old.

This is all on top of the large background decline happening everywhere for many reasons - longer education for women and men rising housing cost as we urbanize even more etc.

@rainfallpurevividcat

I would challenge some of your points:

• Capitalism requires constant economic growth.
Not necessarily- if you have a constant level of GDP value and a declining population then the GDP per head goes up (assuming zero inflation).

• Economic growth requires the right kind of skills and labour.
True but this is a function of education, training and salaries. If bricklayers became in greater short supply and let's say the average salary rose to £100k then an awful lot of people would seek to retrain and move jobs to become bricklayers.

• We don't have enough people to carry out the labour required for growth.
22% of the workforce are economically inactive (including 4% unemployed). Either education/ training/ salaries or a reduction in benefits would encourage more back into the workplace.

• More people means more homes and services need to be built, whether it's from immigration or babies being born.
True which has both an economic and environmental impact.

• More homes and infrastructure means more carbon use and severe impact on the environment and climate.
Definitely true.

For me it was the fact my other half didn't want to get married and have kids until I was 30. Then time was limited. I had two and the last pregnancy in my mid 30's was so exhausting. I don't know how women do it in their 40's. I really wanted to start a family from my mid 20's. Had I started earlier I would have had another. This was in the days when you could get a mortgage with your first job and no deposit though. I suspect these days in addition to the problem of men wanting to wait couples will also have to choose between renting and starting a family earlier or waiting until they can get on the housing ladder and that won't be possible for everyone.

My adult children, in their 30's, just don't want any, and are happy without being tied down. I think a lot of young people are making this choice, they have more options open to them these days, which is a good thing.

Yes I think so my friends that rent are forever having to move because the landlord is selling, or putting rent up, or wants to move back in. It's very hard to plan school, childcare etc if you keep moving. Wheras the social housing of old was a secure tenancy. And rents were vaguely sensible.

Yep. And I think it’s a good thing.

Partly it's the fact that women are expecting more from men now and not settling.

In South Korea the birth rate has dropped intentionally as a means of protest by women.

@SmileyHappyPeopleInTheSun

"Most of the commentary on this big UK drop point out nearly all the world bar sub-Saharan Africa is having lowering of fertility - but we seem to have gone faster than other G7 countries and they are blaming austerity - and note it's happening fastest in poorer areas of UK."

The fertility rate in the UK is 1.6 which is about mid table compared to other European countries (Germany 1.5, Spain 1.3, Italy 1.3) or (France 1.8, Ireland 1.8).

In Africa there are still very high rates (Niger 6.6, Somalia 6, Nigeria 5).

At the other extreme is South Korea at 0.9.

Being new to the job market in 2008. Various pat/ recruitment freezes making it harder to forge a career/ be happy to have proper relationships until I hit 30. First child early/ mid-30s, but complications affecting gallbladder. Operation delayed because of COVID. COVID implications on job market/ career progression. New job, do wait for mat leave rights to kick in before trying. Then in late 30s. Two miscarriages and kid 2 arrives. If I wanted a third (always did) I'll be early 40s.. which may/ may not happen. DH thinks money/ our health means it is unwise to try for third. Had various economic factors not been in play, DH and I would have dated, married, and started TTC in late 20s rather than early 30s. Would almost certainly have had a third child.

We really only need to be encouraging middle earners and higher earners to have more children.

The £100k tax trap needs upping considerably to £150k, and childcare needs to be subsidised for all, but especially higher earners.

Our childcare bill for 2 children is £4k a month!!!

@UsernameHistoryBook

I agree that a smaller population is beneficial from an economic and environmental perspective.

Reducing the local population can be achieved through lower fertility rates and or greatly reducing immigration.

Lower fertility rates can be seen to be a matter of women's right to choose, although given the costs of raising children and also women's rights in countries of high fertility it is questionable whether this is true.
Greatly reducing immigration although equally beneficial tends to get caught up in right / left politics and accusations of racism.

Not sure what you are trying to say here.

We've had the biggest drop in fertility rates in G7 - more than Italy - and Italy like Japan in a downwards spiral of fertility - and that what the thread was about I thought.

We are still better than many countries in Europe - true - but we are suddenly having faster dropping rate - that's what experts are attributing to austerity and cuts - as we were only ones who did this.

If we continue to have huge drop in fertility rates we will stop being in the middle of the fertility tables and start to move up - as our fertility rates start to catch up with countries with lower fertility.

I'm well aware of the higher fertility in Sub-Saharan Africa - most growth in population is going to be coming from I think 2-3 countries in that region - I mentioned that. I'm also aware of South Korea rates ( and some reasons why) and well as rest of Asia. I'm also aware the global fertility rate is 2.3 where 2.1 is replacement level. I also know that despite death rates and birth rates being very close our UK population is still growing due to immigration.

I was commenting on the drop in fertility rate in UK - we have background decline seen in nearly every country and an accelerated decline unique to UK.

The TFR in the UK in 2022 was 1.49, dropping from 1.55 in 2021.

Most countries are seeing a drop in the fertility rate - ours is just happening particularly quickly.

Absolutely.

It's not that long ago that women still had to get married, it was society's expectation and pretty much the only way to have any independence (such as it was at a time when laws around divorce and matrimony were much more heavily weighted in the favour of men and women were treated as chattels). If all the good men were taken then you had to take what you could get, meaning that even the crappiest of men could probably find a wife who'd have to put up with him.

Nowadays many women are rightfully more discerning. Why do you want to be shackled to someone who makes your life worse? If someone is lazy and selfish when you co-habit (the ultimate in "try before you buy"), they won't improve when children arrive but now you're stuck not only with them (even if you divorce you'll have to co-parent/chase for maintenance) but a child you're doing all the heavy lifting for. The hundreds if not thousands of threads on here lamenting dismal men who've let their partners down left, right and centre serve as a cautionary tale.

It's not shameful to be single any more, or to live alone and studies repeatedly show that men are most happy when they're married and women when they're single. Wonder why that is...?

.

I think it's so much work now too. I have 1. Was a single parent from when he was 18 months and had to do alot alone. No way could I do that and working full time again. I'd keel over. .

Even in Africa I have read it varies widely from country to country with many countries also experiencing a fall.

I live in a poor area. I see many with big families still. Most people have three in those areas. In the more expensive areas mainly one or two.

Even in Africa I have read it varies widely from country to country with many countries also experiencing a fall.

There are various maps out there showing fertility this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate

Replacement rate is 2.1 - most countries in the world are below replacement level or near to it. We should be nearing a world peak then have a rapid drop in world wide population in next few decades end of century.

There a drop but for us in UK we've had a more sudden drop than in previous decades when there was a decline - we've been below replacement level in UK since late 1970s I believe.

Surely it’s not that hard to understand why this is happening.

piss poor maternity health care
high childcare costs
high housing costs

simple

My Mum in an areas I can't afford to live in - siblings are luckily in HA housing - say the same so many kids - but when you look at the figures for entire county it's still down. I think she just in area with good schools and is around in day so see them.

Here where I am - all the school are full - it's because the surrounding cities are pricing families out so they move here - driving prices up for locals.

This is why we collect national figures so we can see what is actually going on. Bigger families still exists but figures I last looked at showed they were down for all social economic groups.

Expense, leaving it later, and more people moving away from networks.

My sister would have loved to be a mum. Unfortunately she dated someone who strung her along until she was 35 then dumped her out of the blue. She's been single ever since, now nearing 40 - and it's looking increasingly unlikely.

She doesn't want to do it by herself because a) she can't afford it/there's no way she could afford childcare c) we don't have family to help out so she would truly be 100% alone.

So whilst there are lots of people choosing not to have them (like me) I think sadly the people who do want them are also finding it much harder.

This.

Plus your parents living longer and higher retirement age - who is available to help with childcare.

I do think a lot of it is this. People cannot afford bigger families or people who wanted kids but are childless by circumstance (I am also like that. Always children. Was never in a position to have them due to lack of a suitable partner.)

I know a lot of childless women and only three are childfree. The rest wanted them but life never worked out like that for them.