Anonymous wrote:I really like kids, but I've never had the desire to have more than 1 or 2 of them. they're expensive and time-consuming, and I find that by having only one, I can still maintain some vestige of my own interests and personality.

I always suspect that some people who have a large number of kids are just not very bright, or aren't organized enough to figure out the whole birth control thing.

Or want a lot of kids. Some people have different desires than you do, imagine that.

Ill bite - I am 32 and my DH is 30. Our HHI is 175k and two big reasons we aren't having kids yet - in the immediate we can't afford it (day care is upwards of $1600-1800 a month in DC) and in the long term we can't afford it (our under grad institutions are pushing 60k+ per year NOW) and the other reason is most of our friends aren't even married at this point and the ones that are have not had kids. If we had a kid we would only be breaking even for the next few years and would be in debt if we had 2 and were paying for daycare. Husband is a JD working government and I work in the non profit world and have only a BA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of affluent Caucasian couples in the DC area are not interested in having children. I don't buy this paradigm.

The women I know having 3+ kids are affluent white women. At last Thursday's sixth grade orientation, there was a pregnant mom pushing a stroller (toddler) with two preschoolers in tow. I guess five is the new two.

No, it's not.

Anonymous wrote:I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of affluent Caucasian couples in the DC area are not interested in having children. I don't buy this paradigm.

The women I know having 3+ kids are affluent white women. At last Thursday's sixth grade orientation, there was a pregnant mom pushing a stroller (toddler) with two preschoolers in tow. I guess five is the new two.

I have 4, so I've got at least two of you covered.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - so some of the answers seem to make it an issue about wealth - i.e. wealthy and developed countries aren't having kids (see japan).

If that is the case, then why are russians and slavic countries (and balkans) have very low birth rates when they are a lot poorer than western europe, for sure.

An example - turkey is richer than bulgaria, but turkey has a tfr at or above replacement level but bulgaria is at 1.5

So I don't believe it being something about strictly wealth/development and opportunity costs.

Russia, and slavic/balkan countries aren't all "white." Indo-Europeans came from the Middle East and China.

Well, the most accepted theory is the Kurgan hypothesis, that Indo-Europeans came from the Pontic Steppe, around Ukraine. Another, less accepted, theory is that they emerged from Turkey. But no one claims that Indo-Europeans "came from" China, though the Tocharians did settle in what is now western China.

Historical DNA research is shedding light on ancient migrations and makes for very interesting reading because of all the new discoveries and insights. There were 3 migration waves that formed modern Europe. The earliest, hunter gatherers, are thought to have been blue eyed with dark skin. Modern Baltic people career the highest proportion of this heritage.
The next wave was Anatolian farmers. Modern Sardinians carry about 80% Anatolian farmer DNA so have a look at photos of them to know what ancient Anatolians looked like.
Next came the milk drinking cattle herders from the steppe, spreading indo-european language and lots of yDNA, the kurgan culture. Here's a good recent gloss on the research: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/sep/18/ancient-ancestors-europeans-dna-study

Anonymous wrote:I think people should only have kids if they want them. Truly. But acting as if it's common/normal to not want kids is disingenuous. Like every other species, we are biologically programmed to want kids. It's the biological norm, and our genetic fitness is 0 if we don't reproduce. So, no, I'm not buying that "most" people of any group don't want ANY kids.

But there are at least two groups of people who don't have children.

1. People who don't want children and don't have them
2. People who do want children but don't have them

I think people should only have kids if they want them. Truly. But acting as if it's common/normal to not want kids is disingenuous. Like every other species, we are biologically programmed to want kids. It's the biological norm, and our genetic fitness is 0 if we don't reproduce. So, no, I'm not buying that "most" people of any group don't want ANY kids.

Anecdotally, I know Germans, Singaporeans, Brazilians, Bulgarians, Japanese, Russians and Iranians who have children - they are classmates to my kids here in the U.S. and usually have an American spouse. I've never read of a study that looked at emigration and birth rate together.

Anonymous wrote:What a depressing thread. I guess I just can't relate. I am white, educated, and in the upper income brackets and I love kids. I always wanted a big family. I have two and I'd have more if DH were on board. I WOH full time and I get a lot of satisfaction from my profession. My kids though- even though they're hard and life is chaotic sometimes, the good times are like a little glimpse of Heaven. They're just golden.

Having kids is worse than divorce or death? Ridiculous. I agree if you don't like kids, don't have them. It wouldn't be fair to the kids or to the people who didn't want to be parents.

You actually are relating, given that you have fewer than 2.1 children.

Anonymous wrote:The countries with the lowest fertility rate are the ones with the highest rates of female education but where the traditional role of women has not caught up. In Italy, Germany, and Japan, for example, it is very hard to be a working mother, and many women are forced out of the labor market. In such a situation, getting married and having kids is not a very attractive option. In those countries with the best childcare options, and where working mothers are not stigmatized, like the UK, Sweden, and Norway, fertility rates are close to replacement ratio.

I should add that the US is something of an exception, with relatively high fertility despite high rates of female education and the lack of family-friendly policies. Partly this reflects immigration, but also cultural factors - higher rates of teen pregnance, much more religious, encouraging people to get married earlier, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here - so some of the answers seem to make it an issue about wealth - i.e. wealthy and developed countries aren't having kids (see japan).

If that is the case, then why are russians and slavic countries (and balkans) have very low birth rates when they are a lot poorer than western europe, for sure.

An example - turkey is richer than bulgaria, but turkey has a tfr at or above replacement level but bulgaria is at 1.5

So I don't believe it being something about strictly wealth/development and opportunity costs.

Russia, and slavic/balkan countries aren't all "white." Indo-Europeans came from the Middle East and China.

Well, the most accepted theory is the Kurgan hypothesis, that Indo-Europeans came from the Pontic Steppe, around Ukraine. Another, less accepted, theory is that they emerged from Turkey. But no one claims that Indo-Europeans "came from" China, though the Tocharians did settle in what is now western China.

The countries with the lowest fertility rate are the ones with the highest rates of female education but where the traditional role of women has not caught up. In Italy, Germany, and Japan, for example, it is very hard to be a working mother, and many women are forced out of the labor market. In such a situation, getting married and having kids is not a very attractive option. In those countries with the best childcare options, and where working mothers are not stigmatized, like the UK, Sweden, and Norway, fertility rates are close to replacement ratio.

I find it hard to believe that the vast majority of affluent Caucasian couples in the DC area are not interested in having children. I don't buy this paradigm.

Anonymous wrote:I'll play. We both enjoy working, have no maternity leave, daycare is outrageous and we can't afford for one of us to stay home.

And multiply that scenario times every middle class family in America. If I could pop out a 5 year old I would happily do so.

Pop out a five year old? Huh?