this post was submitted on 06 May 2026
62 points (87.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39494 readers
1797 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Here's the thing: lower birth rates are actually a sign of a more developed country. There are a number of reasons for this. If you can't be sure if the system will properly take care of you in your late years, people tend to have more children so that there will be someone to take care of them in old age. If people (especially women) are better educated, there will be more of a focus on persuing careers, and children can be an impediment to that. Also, if people have better access to healthcare and birth control, many will use it. Just a couple of examples.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] atro_city@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago

Opportunity to do something else with your life. Kids are unaffordable. World is going to shit.

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

As the average income of a country goes up, birthrate goes down. That's just how humans are. We guess at reasons, but it's just a universally observable fact.

All high income industrialized nations developed low birthrates. North america, europe, japan, korea and now china.

If rich nations allow room for anyone else to claw their way up out of the low end of the value chain, we'll see the same thing happen there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lod@moist.catsweat.com 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Feminism/Equality and the changes it has brought.

This isn't a bad thing, which is important to get out early because some far-right groups use it as an example for why we should wind back the clock.

Most women in advanced countries work, they have and want to have meaningful careers. Having children conflicts with that, in the immediate significant time off, and the long term impact of being the default parent when they have issues at school or are sick.

Lifestyles in advanced countries really rely on two incomes. Stopping work for a significant period to raise multiple children is a significant impact on that income, plus the long term expenses of the child combine to reduce that lifestyle. Not having children, or reducing the number, can be an economic choice.

The culture of both parents working also impacts the support network. Your working, your friends are working, the village is behind a desk not supporting you.

Finally women get a choice now, which is a change that is recent, isn't global and doesn't seem to be as widely acknowledged as it should be.

Society needs to change to address these issues and provide these missing supports. Which is going to take time, but as they are addressed we will probably see the birth rates start to climb again.

[–] ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago

While I appreciate the optimism, I'm not sure that the historical data bears out that we will probably see the birthrates climb again when the supports are in place. This is a massive challenge for all of the Global North, but especially Japan, China, South Korea, and then all the way up in the "developed world." Some where around Panama, Indonesia, or Myanmar is where you see the 2.1 replacement rate (from 2024 data), so something close to 100 countries below 2.1 TFR.

Bribes have been tried (as in one time payments for kids). Child Care coverage has been tried. Other structural changes (like the Nordic dual parent paternity leave, or even time shifted paternity leave like France and others).

Maybe you mean more than just economic and governmental supports. As Claudia Goldin has said "cultural changes around gender and women's autonomy are the primary drivers of fertility decline, not just economic factors that policies might address"

This is why, as an American, I'm so confused about the anti-immigration bonanza happening. It's not only against the American ethos, but shooting ourselves in the foot both economically and culturally. We need more people to make up for the future loss that is happening, and people from around the world have wanted to come. They pay for their worth in huge amounts (I'm already digressing so I won't paste more journals and such on this), and what's more if we want the economy to thrive and survive we need them... (Should we have a growth based economy is another question, that is worth asking, but again digression.)

Anyway, the point is Global North has tried and failed to address TFR, and no one has one that battle. Greater standard of living = lower TFR.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 week ago

The fragmentation of multigenerational households. Without that support network, raising children is much harder and more expensive and much, much more daunting.

[–] FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I really, really dislike children

I have an amazing life, and the way I live is completely incompatible with kids, even if I wanted them

More people are realising that it's not compulsory to breed, and that they can have vastly better lives without children

[–] Josey_Wales@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Sounds awesome. What do you do?

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hoohoohoot@fedinsfw.app 9 points 1 week ago

I know what you mean, but your queetion is incorrectly phrased

My personal reason is impossibly stressful, abusing, stealing and raping legal system and the society we face.

Otherwise I would have 10 kids

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

As quality of life rises there are more things competing for peoples interest as well as the cost of large raising a child being very high. Like if you're 25 and making money do you want to fly around the world creating experiences and having fun in the short term or do you want to save up your money to spend it all on your kids.

To increase births the recurring living costs need to go down, we need housing to ~20% rents or house prices. Maybe groceries down 10% and we're probably see an increase. Public daycare's becoming more common as well because that costs an arm and a leg.

Also im reason only leaving out working time because its not bad here averaging 37 hours per week with lots of holidays and paid maturinty leave and your job must be held open for you to return to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IWW4@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago

Isn't it obvious?

They don’t want to.

[–] ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

This is a great question, and I highly recommend diving into this and it's implications. It's a sort of simple answer, but is really very complex with some deep fundamentals.

I went on a rant @lod's comment, which I maybe should have posted directly, but I've spent years digging in on this and it's impacts.

I'm happy to have direct conversations about it, but I have found out that Lemmy isn't the forum for more than simple direct answers.

I hope you get some great answers though!

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

One more thing. It's not that people don't have kids. They just have less kids. For example, in my apartment building out of 16 families, 2 have 3 kids, 8 have 2 kids, 2 have one kid and 4 don't have any kids. That looks fine but it's still way below replacement levels. Couple of decades ago we would see many families with 4-5 kids and vast majority would have more than two. Now majority of people stop at 1 or 2. For majority of people having more than 2 kids is hard to justify. You already have your family unit, why have more? Having 5 kids is considered weird now.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] chunes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Online, parents are candid about how crappy parenting is.

We can see this and learn from it.

Multiple times, I have seen parents sympathizing with other parents who have such an overwhelming urge to shake their baby that they have to abandon the kid and go to another room.

[–] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Lots of different reasons depending on the context of the person (lack of money, bleak future outlook, not wanting to pass down family trauma/bad genes etc)

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Social pressure. Anywhere you go children are unwelcome.

Other than spaces specifically designated for children, you won't exactly be encouraged to bring your kids. Most activities people find necessary or fun like workplace, entertainment, travel, parties, etc, are exclusive of children.

And it doesn't work like that. "it takes a village to raise a child" as the saying goes. Raising children is not something that can be compartmentalized into a separate sphere of life, while you still perform all the activities you were used to or liked without them.

Add to that the cost of housing - you need to put those children somewhere - and you have the perfect storm.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)
  1. Income increase.
  2. Fear
  3. See #2
[–] ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Data doesn't support that at all.

Many just don't want to, which is not fear. Only a few of those polled (across many countries) indicate fear (state of the world, fear of being a parent, etc) as being the reason. Egotism, insecurity, genetics, finances, etc are all some of the basis and they cannot all be boiled down to just fear. This is structural and cultural not just emotional.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I didn't want to have kids, and I was pretty vocal about it to my wife. Regrettably, my kids heard what I said and were pretty upset.

[–] Crackhappy@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago

I don't care what your rules are about replying to yourself. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. ;) I love you anyway.

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Education the more educated you are the likelihood you start too see how having children means responsibilities. That compounds with numbers and in turn money. Being uneducated would not have that thinking they would just shit out children like chickens. With little to no care for their upbringing.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›