U.S. sees 5.7 million more childless women than expected, fueling a “demographic cliff” | This profound change in childbearing patterns has contributed to a cumulative total of 11.8 million fewer births over the past 17 years than would have occurred if earlier fertility rates had been maintained.
U.S. sees 5.7 million more childless women than expected, fueling a “demographic cliff”
47 Comments
From the article: New [research](https://carsey.unh.edu/publication/factors-contributing-demographic-cliff-more-us-women-childbearing-age-fewer-have-given-birth) from the University of New Hampshire paints a stark picture of shifting family structures in the United States, revealing that millions more women are without children than historical trends would predict. The analysis shows that in 2024, there were 5.7 million more childless women in their primary childbearing years than anticipated, a gap that has widened substantially in recent years. This profound change in childbearing patterns has contributed to a cumulative total of 11.8 million fewer births over the past 17 years than would have occurred if earlier fertility rates had been maintained.
The rationale for this investigation stems from a long-standing question among demographers and sociologists about the lasting effects of major societal disruptions on personal life decisions, specifically the choice to have children. The period beginning with the Great Recession in 2007 initiated an era of significant economic, social, and later, public health turbulence, which was intensified by the global pandemic.
Initially, many experts believed that the decline in births seen during these periods was a temporary delay, and that many people who postponed starting a family would eventually “catch up” once conditions improved. However, nearly two decades after this period of instability began, fertility rates in the United States have not rebounded to previous levels. Instead, they remain near historic lows, prompting researchers to explore whether these changes represent a temporary pause or a more permanent societal realignment regarding family and childbearing.
This study sought to quantify the extent of this shift and understand the complex web of factors contributing to it. Beyond major economic and health crises, the researchers acknowledge a landscape of evolving social norms and practical realities. These include expanded educational and career opportunities for women, which can alter timelines for starting a family.
At the same time, practical considerations like the soaring costs of housing, the substantial expense of raising children, and limited access to affordable child care and paid family leave present significant hurdles. Changing patterns in relationships, such as declining marriage rates and shifts in cohabitation, also play a part. While fertility rates have always been lower among unmarried women, the research aimed to see if childlessness was also increasing among married women, suggesting a broader cultural change in attitudes about having children.
But who will work the low paying jobs that keep you from being able to afford having children in the first place, which is really a vicious cycle. You want the peasants having children to keep the infinite growth economy rolling, but they are just peasants to you after all, so the hell with them right?! But who will work the low paying jobs that………………
Its like an ouroboros of oligarch greed and stupidity.
I think the fundamental shifts in societal expectations over the last generation or so are more to blame than are any temporary disruptions.
Functionally, there is now no substantial pressure on the average American woman to have children when compared to the absolutely unyielding societal expectations of just a generation ago.
My parent’s generation having children was *what you did*, and everyone understood that, with every relative/friend/boss/etc reinforcing it every step along the way.
Today, it’s a question that is asked, something that would have been inconceivable not far back.
I always found analyses like these interesting because they seemingly say next to nothing and are an exercise in either some form of statistical modeling or new technique. Yes it should be studied but I wonder what is the effect of these purely scientific posts that are mostly devoid of real commentary. America like many countries is going through a near demographic collapse, at some point the conversation has to shift from observations and speculation on the why instead pushing effort forward to suggesting meaningful policy positions that reverse the trend or soften the landing.
Decrease income inequality especially for starting jobs.
2 people making a combined 150k a year in much of the US feel comfortable
2 people making 75k combined? Not so much.
Make a society worth bringing a child into, and babies will follow. It’s not complicated.
The US is a hostile place to affordably raise children. If it had a similar social safety net as other wealthy countries, this would change.
Plus many potential American parents don’t see their gov’t trying to make the future a better place for potential children (esp RE climate change, growing fascism, extreme inequality, skyrocketing health care costs for profit) so there’s even less incentive to bring children into a world that will be even harder for them than it is now for their parents.
When I had a kid daycare was $1300/months and my insurance went up $800/mo. That was more than my mortgage. I could have leased a Lamborghini with that money, more or less. It’s worse now, and my house went from 240k to 450k in that period.
If you want more kids maybe make an economy that isn’t basically demanding you not have any.
It’s happening all over the world — women empowered to make a choice, and facing economic uncertainty, are choosing not to have kids.
This is why the right is demonizing birth control.
What?! Women don’t want to be just baby-making machines?? Say it isn’t sooooooo.
I’m getting close to my now-or-never age for babies, and I’ve always wanted to be a mom.
Stagnant wages, increased childcare, no parental leave, political tensions, gun violence, high unemployment, etc… these things are not very encouraging.
The people who want the birthrate to increase are morally opposed to spending any money to improve the country.
Responsible people pay for the things they want, so they may need to make some tough choices going forward. Or they’ll go full Handmaid’s Tale.
It’s both the obvious childcare costs that have gone way up, and the non-obvious ones too.
Obviously, housing is crazy expensive. So is childcare, food, utilities, clothes, etc.
But also… expectations that you spend a lot of money are up too! Years ago kids went to school and then they had maybe some free sports in the local little league or whatever. Now? It’s expected you put them in gymnastics lessons, violin lessons, pay for after school activities, buy things for clubs and teams, put them in travel teams, sign them up for ballet, and on and on. Obviously not every kid does every one of those, but… most kids do a lot.
And the TIME is a lot more too. Like it or not, the culture has changed. The images of kids just roaming the neighborhood from movies about the 80’s and before aren’t made up. Parents would just say “go outside, see you at dinner” and that was all they had to do. Now? It’s shuttling and supervising kids 24/7. They can’t just “go out to play” it has to be playdates, it has to be paid groups, lessons, teams, and on and on.
It’s SO MUCH MORE WORK now than it used to be, in addition to the higher costs.
We’ve done such a good job of making people into consumers that it’s cutting into our birth rates because people freak out at how they won’t be able to consume as much if they have to feed and clothe a child.
Somebody please explain to me why population growth is good.
Or, conversely, why a slowdown is bad.
Maybe giving all of the money to the top 1% was a mistake?
Universal healthcare
Universal child care
Provide free breakfast and lunch for all public school children
Raise the federal minimum wage to a living wage
Make the rich fucks pay taxes on everything they own. We don’t need billionaires
Then we’ll talk about having kids again
Isn’t that supposed to be a **good** thing? In the face of the impending Climate Apocalypse, isn’t it a good thing that we aren’t bringing even more people into this overstressed planet?
Or are we finally ready to have the discussion about how pensions are basically glorified Ponzi schemes?
[Antinatalists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Never_to_Have_Been) would title this, “5.7 U.S. million women help prevent the suffering of 12 million people!”
For years society said, Don’t have kids you can’t afford.
Then society made life with kids unaffordable. What do they expect?
1. Those childless women will still contribute to society’s children in valuable ways.
2. Much has been reported on are downsides of fewer births, but what the possible upsides of fewer births?
Meanwhile in 2019 when my first was born the maternity ward was so full we gave birth in the initial exam room.
Maybe not protecting pedophiles in the government would give women more trust and want to bring kids into this world.
1. In 2025 most straight men expect their wife to earn 50% of the money, yet do 100% of childcare, cooking and cleaning. In the 1950s most men also expected their wife to do 100% of childcare, cooking and cleaning, but did not expect her to earn money at all.
2. In 2025 because of education and access to information more young girls and women are aware of the health risks of pregnancy: pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, morning sickness, PPD, PPP, vaginal tearing, chest ptosis, stretch marks, gravidarum hyperemesis, diastasis recti. The list is endless. Why should I knowingly destroy my health just so some corporation can get an extra worker?
I think the thing that they don’t realize is women are totally fine with being by themselves. If you think women are a lesser human being and don’t deserve the same rights , nobody is going to be interested in dating or meeting with you, as it should be.
At least one thing is trending in the right direction!
Not in the US and but I’m of the opinion every given country should have a really big inventory of houses built and maintained by the governament. Something that could cover a good chunk of the population. Some countries already have this and its something you built towards. They don’t have to be top of the line three story high houses. A small condo or something… People put so much regulations on houses that sometimes they forget that any house is better than no house at all.
This isn’t only economic: It’s psychological.
If you really want this to change, fix the fact that having babies is kind of…a terrible idea for women. Naturally an educated group of women with the ability to choose not to take that risk wouldn’t. If you could choose *not* to juggle knives, wouldn’t you?
Career hit, sudden realization your partner contributes *negative help* around the house, not just possible but *likely* lifelong health complications which will be handled by a medical system that dismisses concerns as “WW” (whiny woman) in charts.
None of which your partner goes through, probably (assuming heteros).
For most mammals, the female of the species can handle having an infant/litter yearly and said infant is ready out of the box as a miniature mouse, deer, whatever. But our giant-brained young are spectacularly difficult and dangerous to give birth to, especially for bipeds. And maybe only marsupials are more helpless as newborns–but they’re also *less* time-consuming for the mother, as they pouch up.
Medical science improving and also *focusing* on women’s needs during pregnancy, along with the economic fixes, is the only thing that will even put a dent in it.
Microplastics, PFA’s, and climate change only point to looming disaster, and any regulation that might’ve been in the works to mitigate these was all but upended with the latest administration.
I always hate this phrase “childless women” – as if women are soley responsible for children 🙈
I actually really want children. But I spent my 20s and the first half of my 30s focusing on getting out of poverty. Now by the time I find a partner I actually want to have kids with, it’ll probably be too late.
The only way you can have a massive family in the US is if you are already filthy rich, part of a cult, or live off government assistance.
For years, the elders have been saying: People should stop having kids if they can’t afford them!
Young’uns: Okay!
Many moments later….
Elders: No, not like that!
Most of the decline is accounted for by the drop in teen pregnancies, which is an unalloyed good. And this doesn’t even account for other unwanted and terminated pregnancies stemming from rape, poverty, danger to the mother, etc. For all the economic and social reasons being given for the declining birthrate, these are the two big ones. If our society can’t maintain itself without women and young girls being forced to ruin their lives by carrying children to term that they can’t raise, then perhaps it doesn’t deserve to continue.
Well. Raising a child is a full time job. When a woman is already doing a full time job, and still barely having the ends meet, would she take a second one for free?
Baby boom was there for a reason. It was possible to live on one income while raising kids. Now it’s a completely different story. But it’s not forever, these things change.
Lmfao good. They banned abortions, and told women to keep their legs closed, they reaped exactly what they sowed.
U.S: treats women like shit, has shit health care, has shit child care.
U.S: shocked Pikachu face
If only there were a stable economy with good paying jobs that gave me confidence to raise a family!
It’s not “fertility rates” it’s “cost of living”
“Can’t afford children. Don’t have children.”
“Ok, we won’t”
It’s not complicated.
That’s some of the best news I’ve seen all year. As an aside, if you think more and more and more people is better, why? What benefit does ever more people have and what does that look like against the downsides?
I wonder if we will ever do a study on how many women were FORCED for centuies to have kids without their consent and what the birth rate woulda been if men hadn’t done that. Whoop. Women have a choice now and they are saying HELL NO. This society is sick, it looks at children like objects, no sane person would birth another being into this world.
Nobody can afford anything. TF would I bring a kid into this hate filled divided world
The best thing that you can do to stop climate change is to not have children!
Many animals (including humans) will forgo or reduce breeding when environmental conditions are poor, as a crucial survival strategy. This is a trade-off in which an animal prioritizes its own survival over immediate reproduction, thus increasing its chances of living to breed successfully when conditions improve.
The human race has far exceeded its carrying capacity, and we are witnessing the stress response to it in most developed nations, including the United States.
If we are just having kids who are going to be eaten by a flawed system and have no chance to succeed or flourish in it, best not to have kids.
The only one at this point who would push you to have the kids are likely the ones who wish to predate off them or you.
Welcome to not only End Stage Capitalism, but also the 7th mass extinction event on this planet which is almost entirely human driven and that scientists believe is accelerating.
We did this to ourselves, and can only blame our pride and greed for it.
Sorry to be a downer, and I am not a doomer. I have hope; but it’s in that life itself will find a way to continue on long after we are gone.
Maybe something wiser and more benevolent than us will step in and aid us as we try and fix this. But I am not holding my breath for that help to arrive, and I need my oxygen from all the screaming I’ve done trying to reach deaf ears.
Not to worry, they’re about to make birth control illegal over there, looks like. That should fix things right up.
:rolleyes:
Much like the age crisis in Japan.. .have they tried, y’know, social reforms?
Love how the study fails to mention the extreme cost of HEALTHCARE!?
I’m getting my tubes tied. They are trying to say birtch control and IUDs are abortions now.