WaPo Columnist Laments US "Birth Dearth"

Sparkly

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed May-24-06 08:41 AM
Original message

WaPo Columnist Laments US "Birth Dearth"

Edited on Wed May-24-06 08:49 AM by Sparkly

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301529.html

Edited to add the author's byline:

American fertility is roughly at the replacement rate, 2.1 children per woman. Nor does the U.S. rate merely reflect, as some think, a higher rate among Hispanic Americans. The fertility rate is 1.9 for non-Hispanic whites and about 2 for African Americans, reports demographer Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute. What explains the American exception? Eberstadt cites three differences with Europe and most other advanced countries: greater optimism, greater patriotism and stronger religious values. There's some supporting evidence. A survey by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago asked respondents in 33 countries to react to this statement: "I would rather be a citizen of than of any other." Among Americans, 75 percent "strongly" agreed; among Germans, French and Spanish, comparable responses were 21 percent, 34 percent and 21 percent, respectively.

Children are now usually a conscious choice -- whereas they were once considered economic necessities or religious obligations. Somehow American society better mixes child rearing and jobs than do other societies that provide greater child subsidies (government day care, family allowances). Indeed, generous welfare states may discourage having children. A study by economists at the University of Minnesota found that high Social Security payments and payroll taxes are associated with low fertility rates. People may feel they don't need children to care for them in old age. Or high taxes and poor economies may deter young people from starting families.

No one knows. Among experts, there is much skepticism that Putin-like economic incentives alone will revive fertility rates. By not having children, people are voting against the future -- their countries' and perhaps their own. It is easy to imagine the sacrifices and disappointments of raising children. It is hard, try as people might, to imagine the intense joys and selfish pleasures. People ignore Adam Smith's keen insight: "The chief part of human happiness arises from the consciousness of being beloved."

There's just something odd to me about this "why aren't they having more babies" thing, and it makes me nervous. (I fear government making moves to take away that "conscious choice.") It's also odd that the numbers are always divided by race -- I get the sense the "birth dearth" they're worried about is not among women of color. And it's a bit unnerving to see men guessing at the reasons for women's choices -- especially guessing at correlations involving the government being such a "generous welfare state."

In my own personal experience, there's not *enough* empowerment of women or support for children in our culture and government. It is incredibly difficult, especially for single mothers, to manage work, childcare, housework, transportation, etc. I don't know how that's so hard to figure out. Seems to me if anybody thinks there should be more children in this country, they should be working to promote things that might actually HELP women and children -- programs BushCo has cut, as well as childcare, equal pay for equal work, flexible employment hours, healthcare, etc...

The whole thing just pisses me off. Is it just me?