Not The Onion

21196 readers

1543 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

Links to news stories from...
...credible sources, with...
...their original headlines, that...
...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

kescusay@lemmy.world

475

Fox News doc says not enough ’15 to 19′ year-olds are having kids: ‘The fertility is down’ (www.mediaite.com)

submitted 2 days ago by resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world

123 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/45445434

Fox News Senior Medical Analyst Marc Siegel made some eyebrow-raising comments lamenting that birth rates are down among teenagers aged 15 to 19.

On Thursday, the National Center for Health Statistics reported that the U.S. fertility rate fell to another record low. The agency reported that the number of births per 1,000 women of childbearing age declined from 53.8 in 2024 to 53.1 last year. The latest figure represents a continuation of a decades-long decline in fertility rates.

Siegel joined Friday’s edition of America’s Newsroom, where Dana Perino said that while the continuing trend is not surprising, “the numbers might feel a little shocking.”

(page 3) 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

I feel like we're in the upside down....

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

As another commentor pointed out in the article thee thread, yea, he says these words, but that's not what it seems like he means, or even some Freudian slip.

He's talking about the problem with the numbers, and happens to start with the teenage statistic, immediately moving on the young adults and then the "why" behind it.

So many crazies on TV, this guy doesn't seem like one of them (other than agreeing to be on FOX).

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] papalonian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I mean, isn't it odd that the statistic reported uses that age range? I don't wanna defend Fixed News for anything they do, but if the range they're given is 15-19, and they want to say that "young adults" (18 to early 20s) birth rates are down, they have to include the 15 year olds.

It's really strange that the data available lumps "barely old enough to be biologically capable of bringing a child to term but mentally and emotionally incapable of making their own informed decisions" into the same category as "legal adult who may have taken deliberate action to prepare and plan for a pregnancy". I'd be curious to see how splitting the ages up to something like 14-17 and 18-21 would effect the data, and what was reported.

[+] scarabic@lemmy.world -6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

We had kids in our 30s and one of the delivery ward doctors we spoke to told my wife “Your age classifies you as geriatric but don’t take the label too hard. You’re just not 15 anymore.” And I remember saying “15? Gee do you see a lot of 15 year olds having babies in here?” And she said oh yes, all the time, and “They’re the superstar athletes of giving birth. In, out, easy, done.”

I guess my point is that while we consider sex a crime before 18, nature doesn’t care and 15 year olds are not merely eligible but in some ways at human peak for fertility.

It’s uncomfortable, but it’s biology. I am not surprised if 15yos are making a real contribution to fertility rates in aggregate. I’m not saying that’s right and we should encourage it. Again, just uncomfortable realities here.

[–] andxz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

How much gas was that doctor huffing in between getting the word geriatric wrong and declaring 15 year olds as superstars at giving birth?

..or you, for that matter, because none of that shit is true, hopefully.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

getting the word geriatric wrong

Such a rude comment hardly deserves a reply, but it gives me pleasure to inform assholes when they are dead wrong:

Cleveland Clinic

“Advanced maternal age” is a term that describes anyone who is 35 or older and pregnant. … Advanced maternal age is the newer and preferred name for a geriatric pregnancy.

Nebraska Medicine

We define advanced maternal age (formerly geriatric pregnancy) as those who are 35 years or older at their estimated delivery date.

Madison Women’s Clinic

Have you heard the term; geriatric pregnancy? No, it doesn’t mean your grandma is expecting. Maybe it’s you your 35 year old friend. A geriatric pregnancy is just that, a woman over age 35 that conceives a child.

Now run along and eat shit.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments