Why do European women have no children?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
This NY Times article has a good summary:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/magazine/29Birth-t.html?pagewanted=all I find demographics fascinating, and I have been researching trends for years. The US is below replacement now. Americans of European heritage have similar birth rates to European women--just over 1, well below replacement. The constants in all far-below-replacement societies are as follows: secularism, materialism, and economic anxiety. Additional factors are late marriage and declining overall marriage rates; high rates of cohabitation and divorce; a complete separation of procreation from sex. Certain societies have unique quirks. Japan shows amazingly high rates of low sex drives. Russia has unbelievably high rates of alcoholism, abortion, and suicide, and life expectancy is declining. South Korea has an oppressive education system, so parents put all their effort into one child, if any. Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict both talked extensively about Europe's declining population. It all goes back to separating the procreative and unitive aspects of sex. |
Anonymous
As people become more wealthy and educated they have LESS children. Often educated parents want to throw all of there resources on a limited number of children to provide them the best opportunity in life. If you break people up in this country by socioeonmic status and education levels you will see the following trend: poor/uneducated=more children middle/upper middle class/educated=less children. Europe also has limited amount of space and real estate is at a premium, this limits the amount of kids one has. |
Anonymous
| materialism and secularism means that you have no contract with the future. Why fix SS or Medicare when you are only concerned about yourself and current times? (obviously some without kids can worry about the planet's future). Having kids makes you think about these issues more. |
Anonymous
|
"ah, I think it is because of the selfishness of this ME ME ME generation. Sad. They will regret it, and they are destroying their societies as a result. "
sad that people limit their kid-making to the number they genuinely want (so children are wanted and not simply accepted) and actually afford? yeah, I suppose that's so sad. Everyone would be much better off to simply keep having babies regardless of the ability to support them! |
Anonymous
This is bad policy for baby girls in China and India. Those societies have to change their ways. They will pay in the end. |
Anonymous
sad that they think they want zero kids. these are wealthy countries, the families can support one or two kids each. |
Anonymous
All of us in the US are doing just fine. But thanks for your concern. My father recently died from Parkinson's but my mother kept him home and hired two assistants to help out. Again, thanks for your concern. (sarcasm, btw - b/c you seem a bit too dense to "get it") If you would look outside of your little world, you'd understand that not all countries are run like the US - and that not all people are as selfish and greedy as we are. good luck - You'll need it. Most pathetic people do. |
Anonymous
How is it selfish not to have children? Who is being denied what by such selfishness? I've never understood this "it's selfish" argument about children, given that the children in question are non-existent. |
Anonymous
| Having a family leaves them with no place in the labor market, and seriously mommy tracked. |
Anonymous
Ah, like all the French folks who refused to give up their long August breaks to take care of elderly relatives? You know, the relatives who ended up dying alone in those awful heat waves several years ago. |
Anonymous
|
Low birth rates are dangerous, but not as bad as we think. They might pick it up in the next generation.
They have fewer children because life is too hard there if you have more kids. Cramped housing and lines for everything makes anyone wonder. |
Anonymous
I am European and this is the your answer. Really sad but true. |
Anonymous
| clearly families DON'T mean much to these Europeans. Kids = families. Selfish on many levels. |
Anonymous
NO what is sad is people who have kids because they "think" that is what they should be doing or just because they can financially "support" them. What is selfish is having children just "because" that is what everyone else is doing or just because you have money. Money and wealth does not buy the love of a child. The decision to have children, IMO, should be based upon FIRST your desire to bring another human being into the planet, the desire should come from a genuine place and with lot of thought. SECONDLY you should be able to support those children and provide them with opportunity, which is based on your personal finances. I respect people who choose not to have children. There are far too many people ALL OVER THE PLANET who have children that they cannot support. I'm from south Africa and there are far too many people having children all over Africa that they cannot support, feed, or care for. The number of orphans is tragic. In additiona to fighting malaria, they should be passing out copious amounts of birth control, probably in the form of IUD.. |
Anonymous
|
I have many relatives in Europe and it's been that way for a long time.
Most governments over there offer incentives (years off of work, monthly stipends per kid, etc) for mothers to give birth...just to keep the population from dying out. At least where my relatives are, money is tight, space is at a premium, and there just isn't much motivation to have a big family. http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-08-10/news/17121159_1_birth-rates-low-birth-ibm-france |