home
RSS
U.S. women having fewer children
December 6th, 2013
12:01 AM ET

U.S. women having fewer children

New numbers out from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveal that fewer women in the United States are having children.

Between 2000 and 2009, pregnancy rates for U.S. women fell by 12%, or nearly 6.4 million pregnancies. The pregnancy rate is the lowest it has been in 12 years.

In fact, the rates for teenage pregnancy reached historic lows in 2009, for all three major race groups: non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanic teenagers. In 2009, there were 39% fewer teen pregnancies than the 1991 peak rate of 61.8 teen pregnancies for every 1,000 teens.

"Research suggests that more teens are delaying initiating sex, waiting longer to have sex," said Rachel Jones, a senior research associate with the Guttmacher Institute, who was not associated with the study.

"More teens are using more contraceptives and using more effective methods of contraception," Jones said.

But while pregnancy rates for women younger than 30 fell, rates for women older than 30 have increased steadily since 1990. In fact, the number of women between the ages of 35 to 39 becoming pregnant has jumped by 30% since 1990.

"The expectation is that women in their 30s have considered career and education, delaying childbirth till their 30s, so they're making a conscientious decision to become pregnant and have a baby," Jones said.

Abortion rates overall have also dropped since 1990. There were 32% fewer abortions in 2009 than in 1990. The biggest drop was seen in the number of teen abortions. The rate of teen abortions in 2009 was less than one-half the rate it was in 1990.

"A lot of effort and lot of money have been spent on reducing teen pregnancy, and it shows that you can make a change... that when you put the effort in," said Jones.

The CDC also came out with birth rates for the past year. Between June 2012 and June 2013, nearly 4 million children were born. While the number of births has been dropping steadily since 2007, the number of children born this year remained steady since the previous year.


soundoff (246 Responses)
  1. Art

    Have you seen the straight men they have to choose from? You wouldn't have children either!

    December 6, 2013 at 07:26 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Jessica McGwin

      And it is not just their looks. Men do not stick around for the 25 yrs it takes to get a child grown, healthy, safe and educated. In today's world it is expected by men that you be the provider, homemaker, and child raiser. By the time you are financially stable enough to raise a child your egg basket is all but hard boiled. The way I see it is men have done this to themselves. They still make the rules. Tricks and traps. Men have no time limit. When they are ready the just try to find the youngest one they can. I had mine young. It was so hard to do it alone. I was not a "welfare" mom. I did it on my own. No family and hired help. But we made it. I would not do it again. Men just are not stable enough.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:10 | Report abuse |
    • D Russell

      RE: "men do not stick around" – that is a pretty broad brush you are using there. Let me edit that for you: "In my experience men do not stick around". Women seem to think it high crimes and treason when men suggest that all women are the same or have the same negative traits.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:18 | Report abuse |
    • natural man

      Now you know why immigration never really changes. We need those dang people from the south because we aren't replacing ourselves up north.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:59 | Report abuse |
    • Mr. Mom

      Jessica, I raised my kid myself because my wife left us. She was just not stable enough. Get over yourself. Is it any wonder a man wouldn't stick around when he has to listen to the kind of self-righteous garbage you just spewed out?

      December 6, 2013 at 09:48 | Report abuse |
    • jkld

      Arshagarbon – maybe you ought to take a look in the mirror at your EGO. That turns off a woman quicker than you know. If you're as shallow as you sound, you'll die alone, as you should.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:55 | Report abuse |
    • Kat

      @Arshagarbon... I go to the gym for an hour and a half most days and am in great shape also. Probably most of the women that do this are already taken, like me lol. I'm 27, married 6 years with 2 kids 🙂 When they complain about you going to the gym, invite them along! Even if they just walk on the treadmill, it's something at least

      December 6, 2013 at 10:18 | Report abuse |
    • Patrick_P

      Why just attack the straight men that women have to choose from. There are plenty of undesirable straight women out there for men to chose from as well. Even if you are single, you can adopt a child from American foster care or a local orphanage if you can afford it and want a child. No need to pump out a copy of yourself or adopt from a foreign country. We used to pride ourselves on taking care of our own in America, but many people still choose creating too large families (ego thing?) or adopting foreign.

      December 6, 2013 at 11:06 | Report abuse |
    • Xira

      It's this liberal feminist propaganda that says that women should wait for prince charming that's going to doom the white race.

      He has to be good looking and fit.
      He has to have an 'alpha dog' personality (but feminists push all men to act like betas)
      He has to make more money (something that's rarer today than ever).
      He has to have an acceptable education (at least as much as she does).
      He has to be totally 100% nonviolent, not even yelling is allowed(meanwhile, women commit the majority of domestic violence and get away with it).
      He has to be willing to do the household chores (in addition to all the yardwork).
      He has to be sensitive to her emotions (and put up with all her yelling).

      Feminist requirements are higher than ever. Unrealistic in most cases. Women are told they shouldn't settle, so they don't, until they start to get really scared then they jump in bed with the first man who they think will be able to pay child support.

      Meanwhile, you have 4 times as many genetic mutations at 35 as at 14. Even if they aren't obvious in the baby you produce they are still there, like genetic landmines waiting to cause problems in future generations.

      December 6, 2013 at 13:47 | Report abuse |
  2. James Dillon

    I predict that by the end of this century, embryos will be incubated.

    December 6, 2013 at 07:40 | Report abuse | Reply
  3. njarcher

    You can be sure this report DID NOT include Lakewood, NJ women here are shooting them out like Octomom.
    On any given Sunday ... Five in a shopping cart under the age of 6 and a bun or two in the oven. Our tax dollars at work.

    December 6, 2013 at 07:45 | Report abuse | Reply
  4. David Busi

    This report is not news it is confirmation of several facts. First birth control works and a falling teenage pregnancy rate is a VERY good thing. We do not want pregnant teenagers. Second – economic reality dictates that it is EXPENSIVE to raise children and the more children you have the more financial resources you require to raise them. Along with this the other side of economic realities are that in real terms income is harder to come by now than it was in most prior generations. Also people are more self centred – they do not wish to make the sacrifices in their lives that their parents made for them.

    December 6, 2013 at 07:51 | Report abuse | Reply
    • D Russell

      It's called a depression. The same patterns – delayed marriage, lower birth rates, etc were all seen after the great depression.

      December 6, 2013 at 07:58 | Report abuse |
    • skeptical

      The sacrifices our parents made for us? My baby-boom parents made zero sacrifices for me. They screwed around, cheated, self-indulged, and generally lived irresponsibly, resulting in raising 6 kids in poverty.

      I have 4 kids. I have put myself through college and grad school (no help from my parents there) and my husband and I are putting all 4 kids through high quality private school rather than indulge in fancy cars or expensive vacations. I put myself ahead first, and now I'm putting my kids ahead in life.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:59 | Report abuse |
    • Responsible249

      I agree with skeptical. My baby boomer parents were pretty self-centered. I think a lot of us kids of the 70's, 80's, and early 90's with boomer parents were on our own. I learned my values from The Facts of Life, The Cosby Show and Fraggle Rock. lol
      One thing that people aren't saying is that people a long time ago used to have 5, 6, or 7 kids and have the older ones raise the younger. I don't see very many people doing that anymore. The parents are raising the children and not the siblings. I find that more responsible.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:30 | Report abuse |
  5. Alexjohn

    Obviously something is causing the decrease, but people don't seem to grasp the seriousness of this situation. Fluoride in our water, mercury in our vaccines, aluminum and barium in our air, and why is the government poisoning us without our consent? In 1985 it was proposed that the world resources would dry up if we didnt lower the population growth or raise the death toll. For years they have been trying to make counter progress against the growing population. Wake up people, this is no coincidence.

    December 6, 2013 at 07:54 | Report abuse | Reply
    • D Russell

      Put your tin foil hat back on – the rays from the mother ship are getting to your mind again..... There is no evidence (unless you want to present some) that indicate that a woman today (vs the previous century) could not biologicially have as many children as before. Not to mention that medical care today would mostly guarantee both the mother and children would survive. It is all about economic and cultural changes not 'evil things governments put in the water'.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:03 | Report abuse |
    • WakeUpPeople

      Absolutely, AlexJohn is correct!! You all need to wake up! Your government is NOT protecting you. Do you really think teen behavior has changed? Not only are the chemicals in the food, water, and air (via chemtrails) causing infertility, but most of the corn in the U.S. is genetically modified and includes a chemical that mimics spermicide. Do your own research! The facts are out there. You just need to be brave enough to brace yourselves for the TRUTH.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:09 | Report abuse |
  6. danita

    I guess working women a slowing down... Now lets here the same from the welfare department. Women are now taking their free birth control...

    December 6, 2013 at 07:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Danielle

      Or, more women are opting to not have as many, if any children at all by choice. I have a steady job, pay for my own healthcare, and chose to have my tubes tied after my only child was 6 and knew I didn't want any more. I have no doubt there are countless others like me that are financially stable, and making these choices on their own. Regardless, would you rather they took the 'free birth control' or collected more money after popping out a new baby each year? Stop btching and be happy that the programs are working and people are listening and trying to be more responsible.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:41 | Report abuse |
  7. jacobv

    The culprit is the government. They have done everything possible to make maternity an unpleasant experience to go through. job-wise, money-wise, future-wise, and social-wise. Women are taught that they must become the bread winner and have a career first. The most healthy and fertile women in America waste their youths taking pills to avoid pregnancy and live like society tells them to. By the time they are financially able to have kids they are too bitter to tolerate a partner like a husband and they cant have more than 1 or 2 kids if they can have them at all. The same goes with Fatherhood. Laws over the past few decades have made Fatherhood an embittering experience to so many men. Men who would otherwise be wonderful fathers are made to feel bitter and powerless over their kids. The criminal justice system makes a lof of the poorer class men go through hell making fatherhood all but doomed in certain neighborhoods in America. We've got a lot of work to do. Instead of pointing fingers

    December 6, 2013 at 07:56 | Report abuse | Reply
    • D Russell

      No it was the not "government" – it was called the 'women’s rights movement'. They wanted the choice to work, to have only as many children as they wanted and could afford, etc. All choices have consequences, intended, unintended, good and bad. It would be simple and immature to think otherwise. Worse – it would be hypocritical in the extreme to blame others (like the government) for and perceived negative effects of those choices.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:11 | Report abuse |
    • BD70

      I think you have government mixed up with corporations.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:15 | Report abuse |
    • visitor

      Men are only "powerless" over their kids when they abandon them and then want to have a relationship from the outside. Men are only "powerless" over their kids if they spread their seed among several women. Men are only "powerless" over their kids when they get themselves addicted to something, or abuse the mothers of their children. Stop blaming women for absentee men. I am a child of divorce. I remember the b.s. my dad used to spew to get out of child support. The only reason my mom divorced him was because he was an abusive drunk.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:07 | Report abuse |
    • ES71

      Actually, the reason women want to establish themselves financially is because
      1) men don't want to marry young anymore, they want to be boys well into their 40s. So, even if the woman is ready to marry and stay at home there are no men willing to take her
      2) men don't stick around; after a woman stays homne for 5-6 years, has 3-4 kids then suddenly the man thinks she is not intresting anymore ( since she is exhausted taking care of little kids all the time) and not is good looking. So, he leaves and finds someone else yonger and hotter. The woman is left with kids to support working a minimum wage job.

      I have 2 daughters and I am teaching them to get education, a good job, a career, the men are not difficult to find once you establish yourself. These day men women who support themselves, it is easier for the men.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:31 | Report abuse |
  8. kiddosforme

    I have two beautiful daughters. I would of liked more but my husband did not. Plus we did not have children until we were in our thirty's.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:01 | Report abuse | Reply
    • PS

      I hear you. I have two as well, boy and a girl. I was in my 20s when I had my oldest, in my 30s with the youngest. We also wanted one more but my equipment broke down a few years ago.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:42 | Report abuse |
  9. 77rtoocc

    Lower birth rate equals higher standard of living. This is good. Editor the use of the word "conscientious" is incorrect, the women make a "conscious" choice to wait, there is no moral difference in having a child at 19 or 39. The tax rate should reward those who have less children since it is better for society and the environment if there are less consumers of limited resources, and greater focus and energy can be placed upon rearing fewer dependents. Finally, the human race shows no sign of going extinct, except for the stupid actions of itself, fighting over less and less resources.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:11 | Report abuse | Reply
    • OwlsNSpace

      You obviously have never studied anything regarding population "replacement" rates or how declining birth rates can affect economies. Less children (to a point) means a higher quality of living. Past that point and it's abysmal for national economic health.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:41 | Report abuse |
    • Patrick_P

      @Owlinspace: I'm no economist, but why not develop an economic model that does not require more and more people to share less and less resources?I am sure the best way to support an increasing population is to keep growing the economy. If population growth stabilizes or begins to decline, and an appropriate economic model is selected to mirror that, then wouldn't that mean there will be more resources for less people in the future? Stabilizing population growth can only be good for the planet and the population left on it in my opinion.

      December 6, 2013 at 12:44 | Report abuse |
  10. Sam

    Kids are expensive is one of the reasons why, people are not having them. In 1960 if you wanted to have 5 kids with a job as a mailman with your wife staying at home taking care of the kids you could but now she better be a nurse while you are a mailman and you would still be struggling to make ends meet

    December 6, 2013 at 08:14 | Report abuse | Reply
    • JoM

      Also, back then, kids were an asset. Kids help raise kids, clean, cook, helped on the farm, etc; nowadays, kids do not want to boil a pot of water and they are expensive.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:43 | Report abuse |
    • Ali

      and paying someone else to raise your children...

      December 6, 2013 at 11:28 | Report abuse |
  11. Q1

    Yet women's group blame men for not wanting to commit and start a family. Why do women always blame men for everything? Three decades of totalitarianism laws against fatherhood, men take the logical and common sense approach...I am not going to get into a relationship and have children because I have no rights. Women created this problem...you reap what you sow.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:16 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MarkinFL

      Boohoo, big bad women's movement make you feel inadequate? Put on your big boy britches and find a wife who is your equal. Need a a subservient wife? Says more about you than her.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:10 | Report abuse |
    • ES71

      Mes don't want to commit. It is a fact.
      I am not blaming them, what is the use.
      Women are simply forced to deal with it. And they do by havinh less children and later once they do find a partner willing to commit.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:34 | Report abuse |
    • jkld

      Women's equality isn't to blame that a LOT of guys don't WANT to grow up and become MEN. They'd rather stay children and play video games all day and night. Jeez! Women want men who are mature, not "children" in their late 20s-early 30s. Grow UP!

      December 6, 2013 at 10:00 | Report abuse |
  12. Peas

    In case everyone missed the point, this is not a crisis. This is really good news. Fewer births mean fewer people, and that's not a bad thing. The goal should be negative population growth. Once the population of the Earth is reduced by half, things will be better all around. People are bad; let's get rid of them.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:28 | Report abuse | Reply
    • OwlsNSpace

      Public education has failed you. Have you taken into account the fact that people (in the US, for one example) are living longer? That will mean more older people (i.e. non-working, non-producing people) being supported by fewer people of working age. How exactly does that sound like "really good news"?

      December 6, 2013 at 08:47 | Report abuse |
    • Roxanne

      Agreed this is not a bad thing. Additionally, many women are choosing not to have as many kids and to accomplish more in life personally before delving headfirst into parent hood. This provides a higher standard of living for their children, and higher satisfaction for themselves. Sorry but I don't believe you have to choose between career, personal accomplishment and parenthood. You can have it all if you plan ahead.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:49 | Report abuse |
    • Partisanhackshatefacts

      people are bad. lets get rid of them

      you're a 'people'....so i'll thank you to lead the way

      December 6, 2013 at 08:52 | Report abuse |
    • visitor

      Owl – I agree the current system is unsustainable. We can't have a younger class paying for an entire Senior class and their burgeoning health care, keeping them in their entirely separate living units, while taking care of their own homes and families.

      I think people should not be expected to be brood mares to pay for an aging population. It might help if people started taking care of their aging parents which was the case for most of human history, or if aging parents did not insist on their own homes in Florida courtesy of the tax payers. Eventually we will hit a tipping point if we hadn't already but adding to the population is not the answer. Figuring out where we are going as a society with this and how the Senior population is going to sustain ITSELF without previous safety nets like pensions is something that needs to be discussed.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:22 | Report abuse |
    • ES71

      It shouldn't be an issue since US birthrate is still above replacement rate.
      However, we are turning into an idiocracy beacuse it is the poorest and least educated who have most kids. and they cannot raise them properly.
      While educated working people giet no breaks from either the govenment or the society and have less children because they don't have time or resources to dedicate to raise more than 1-2 kids properly.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:36 | Report abuse |
    • mlynn

      Doesn't the current Federal benefits program (social security and Medicare/Medicaid depend on an increasing population base generating positive revenue in the US to fund the programs? If the population continues to decrease doesn't that mean that future funding will not be available to support the retiree benefits (at current levels) for those who are paying into them now?

      December 6, 2013 at 11:45 | Report abuse |
  13. Soraya

    I wonder if the teen rate is still that low, since its been 4 years since that last study. I know in my area, Prince William County right outside of Washington DC, the teen pregnancy rate is sky high. My daughter who is now 21 is the only person she knows out of high school who does not have a kid, many of the girls she knows are on their second or third kids. Perhaps it an issue in pockets but I cant believe that its not a problem in other areas as well.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:30 | Report abuse | Reply
    • D Russell

      There was a period of time where birth control and contraception were stripped out of school curriculum and access to birth control and abortion restricted due to religious interference in politics – perhaps you are seeing the effects of this. In addition, It could also be case that during a depression, people will take whatever lifeline they see. More people went on disability during the recent depression as an example. A sliding scale of benefits based on number of children might help. In other words, 'the more children the less money', not the current system of 'the more children the more money' starting after two children.

      December 6, 2013 at 08:43 | Report abuse |
    • visitor

      Children generally learn about birth control from parents. Parents that are open about birth control and abortion have less unplanned grandchildren. Parents that aren't, have more. It is no surprise that among my on teens' friends the one that started activity the youngest had the virginity pledge. Met her boyfriend at church. Her older sister had a unwed child which Grandma is raising, not the mother and who knows where Dad is. Needless to say denial about the need for protection didn't help either one of them.

      December 6, 2013 at 11:11 | Report abuse |
  14. Partisanhackshatefacts

    Teen girls have also learned that they can keep their over-anxious boyfriends happy by giving them bloo-jobs...<-Fact

    hey....not saying it's 'good'....but better than unwanted kids

    December 6, 2013 at 08:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  15. mel

    Here's what I got from that article that no one seems to have picked up on...birth AND abortion rates have dropped because more effective forms of birth control are more accessible than ever. The Pro-Life camp is trying to protect babies and that's a worthy goal, but usually, the faith that motivates them is also the same faith that pushes them to endorse abstinence-only sex education to teens. Telling hormone-infused teens NOT to do what their bodies are telling them is counter-productive. This article seems to offer proof that teaching them ALL the ways to prevent pregnancy results in fewer abortions.

    December 6, 2013 at 08:52 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MarkinFL

      Yep, EVERY abstinence only program has been an abject failure. That is one reason you do not hear so much about them. They still get implemented locally but they cannot stand the light of debate since ALL evidence is that they only increase pregnancy rates.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:12 | Report abuse |
    • mel

      Here in NC, they teach abstinence-only by default...UNLESS I sign a release that specifically requests that my middle-school son receive the full sex education class. You bet I signed that release!

      December 6, 2013 at 09:33 | Report abuse |
    • Savior

      Then it's time to bring back the hellfire and brimstone talk and scare these reckless teens into proper fear of God for their wicked fornication.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:37 | Report abuse |
  16. wiredawg

    Apperently this survey did not include illegals and welfare moms.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  17. 24 no kids

    I'm 24, a young professional in DC, and kids couldn't be further from my mind! I love gallivanting around bars, dating babes, buying expensive clothes, and doing all these amazing things in my life that would be IMPOSSIBLE if I wasted my life away raising brats.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:05 | Report abuse | Reply
  18. natural man

    So many reasons for this. Decline in marriage as the central focus of American life. Increase in birth control after all who wants to provide for 12 kids? Living a more selfie life of activities, hobbies, vacations, etc instead of just raising kids and focus on family and kids. Allowing any kind of immigration so we have somebody to run the country and pay social security. It takes 2.2 kids per family to replace the 2 parents and maintain population and we are down to like 1.3 per female. And of course the LGBT do not produce offspring naturally and test tube babies are expensive to produce. Lots of reasons.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:06 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MarkinFL

      Ummm, LGBT is nothing new. Just not so hidden anymore. you do not have any older uncles or aunts that remained unmarried and childless?

      December 6, 2013 at 09:14 | Report abuse |
  19. jcvet33

    Men don't stick around? &0% of all divorces are nowfiled by women. When women near 40 most go nuts and cheat on their husbands if they are still f-able. Then the divorce judges do all they can to make sure the man is not a part of the childrens lives. That o
    is BS for most married men.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:09 | Report abuse | Reply
    • MarkinFL

      MOST go nuts? Can I see a reference to your statistics please?

      December 6, 2013 at 09:15 | Report abuse |
    • JoM

      Today, there is NO limited on how someone behaves or act. Women in their 50's and 60's are looking 30 years old or younger. Sorry but very few people are looking like women of the 1840's nor do they have the mindset of women of yersteryears.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:42 | Report abuse |
  20. Bobby

    One income used to be enough until more women began to work full time. This caused an proportional rise in home prices since people can afford to spend more each month. Much of the additional income goes towards child care and a higher mortgage canceling out the benefit of having two incomes. Were all working harder now for not much more in return.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:09 | Report abuse | Reply
  21. western world woes

    Europe and USA, this isn't only a USA problem, its the western society and civilization. 7 + billion people, you just have to get the message thru to the 3rd world countries. Slow down and breed smartly, we need kids sure, but not everybody needs to be procreating.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:14 | Report abuse | Reply
  22. SteveInMN

    Thank.
    God.

    Land. The only thing they're not making more of.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:20 | Report abuse | Reply
  23. Greg

    Nothing wrong with slowing population growth considering some of the issues we will face if it isn't curtailed.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:27 | Report abuse | Reply
  24. SeriouslyThough

    And who is this examined age group? Not Millenials but, yes, Gen X'ers.

    Avoiding the mistakes our BB parents made so long ago. Why? Because some of us learned, from their example, that the American dream being sold to us is and always was a lie.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:31 | Report abuse | Reply
  25. johnmip

    Having kids just makes no financial sense and the need to nurture can be fulfilled by rescuing a few dogs from the shelter. As more women become educated and understand return on investment, you can expect even less children to be born in the future.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:33 | Report abuse | Reply
    • JoM

      So true. And lets not leave out that people can not raise their kids how they want to. Kids are rude nowadays and they have the laws to back them even when they are wrong and mishaving.

      December 6, 2013 at 09:39 | Report abuse |
  26. JoM

    IT COST TO HAVE CHILDREN. There is too much going on nowadays where people have freedom to do what they want, people with being independant (men and women can support themselves), too much drama, etc and this is causes alot of people to not have children and not even want to get married. Lets be real, the average marriage with todays couple last at best 5 to ten years. Sorry but it is the changing of the times. Back in the day, children were an asset now they are a liability and some people do not want to deal with it.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:37 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. JJ

    One mistake, CNN. Your picture shows a black pregnant woman. Black women are NOT reducing the number of children they're having. They're popping them out like there's no tomorrow. I'm sure the illegals Mexicans aren't keeping their legs closed, either. Only white women are having fewer children. Soon, this country will look a lot like South Africa.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:41 | Report abuse | Reply
  28. Vicky

    This is pretty good news. Our resources are diminishing and the less people in the world the better.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:44 | Report abuse | Reply
  29. topcide

    I'm 32, my wife is 31. We are married, both have good jobs, own a home, and are college graduates. I'd like to think I am a pretty good subsection of a 1980's born person to look at as an example as I find that my story is allmost identical to most of my close friends.

    My wife and I met in college, we both graduated in 2005. We split up for a a few years, then got back together in 2007. We moved in together in 2008. We got engaged in 2009. We delayed getting married untill this past yeart as the cost of a wedding has gotten absolutely absurd these days, and we wanted to buy a home, then budget a wedding not the other way around. So we bought a home 2 years ago, then we planned, budgeted, saved, and had a modest wedding. We do not have children, but we are planning to start a family in the next 2-3 years.

    It really comes down to a few things,the big ones being economics and lifestyle.

    When we both finsihed college in 2005 i was 24, she was 23. we both graduated high school in 2000, and with the cost of books, rent, tuition, ETC it took us each 5 years to finish college which has become the norm these days.
    The economy tanked right around then, and it took me allmost a year to find a "real" job with a big company. I was fertalizing lawns and delivering pizza to make ends meet before that, and the entry level job I did get paid around 32k a year. My wife was basically in the same boat at the time. I put in my time for 4 years there, and once the economy picked up a bit and i had a better resume, I was able to get into the company I work for now, and during this time my wife has climbed up a few rungs at her company and we finally both make decent money now.

    Since then we have worked to eliminate out debt, get our house, and save money for the future.. We are finally at the point where the student loans are done, the cc debt is gone, the cars are allmost piad off, and now we have the income to make some investments, go out to a nice dinner,take a vacation, and make a few improvements to our home. Now that we have finally gotten to the tipping point with income vs. liabilities, we can breath a little and enjoy our life without the constent stress of money.

    Quite frankly up untill now it would have been completely irresponsable financially to have a child. I know people say you will never feel like you have enough money to have kid, but at 25 i was living check to check, there was barely enough money to support myself , let alone another person.

    My wife and I are also firm believers that when you have a kid, your life is 100% devoted to them from that point on. The kid comes first, everything else comes second. Now that we can finally live a little, we are enjoying being married and having some time for us, and at this exact moment we are just plain not ready to give that up.

    Both of us love kids, and we are really excited to be parents in the future and look forward to it. But this time wasn't right before, and it still isn't at this moment.

    Some may say we are being selfish, I say we are being responsible.

    December 6, 2013 at 09:53 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Kristin

      It is spelled "almost," not "allmost." Do you want a cookie for writing out your biography?

      December 6, 2013 at 10:19 | Report abuse |
    • Din

      Pay check to pay check is a never ending processes for many of us even one have children or not. In US a person who gets his college degree has to pay back all loans for couple of years than later in their life they have to pay mortgage and car loans etc. If we have free college education then women may not delay pregnancy in their 30s.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:41 | Report abuse |
    • Kelly Lynn

      topcide – fellow 80's child here, married to another 80's child. Im 28, my hubby is 27. We got married in 2009, bought our house in 2010 and are still paying off a little more of our miscellaneous debt before thinking kids. Ive always wanted 2 kids, but we talked it out a couple of months ago and both agreed 1 is a better plan. The cost of child care is basically the only deciding factor on that. No sense in putting ourselves in unnecessary financial hardship.

      On the flip-side, every single one of my friends from high school had kids in their earlier 20's. None of them own a home. All of them have crushing debt that they will never escape. The debt has ruined all of their credit, basically making getting a mortgage before they are 40 a dream in la-la-land.

      I get the "if you wait for the right time, you'll never have kids" ALL the time from people. What they dont understand is Im not sitting here thinking I am going to have everything together and absolutely no worries; Im just hoping to make the living situations a little better for our future kid. I see that as being more responsible, but people act like it is less responsible all the time. So what if I wait until my early thirties? It's not like Im going to let myself get to 37 and then freak out. And even if Im 33 and we realize I cant get pregnant, we will be in a good situation for adoption. Stable, steady home with mature adults ready to raise a child. What adoption agency would refuse? There are always options, Im not going to rush just because Im scared it wont happen. And I certainly wont rush because those around me think Im being irresponsible about my reproductive system.

      December 6, 2013 at 11:09 | Report abuse |
    • D Russell

      topcide – you need to look at fertility rates and the increasing possibility of special needs children. The biological age to have children for women is late teens to 30 and 30 is pushing it. Biology does not care when you are "ready", how much money you have, what is politically correct, what is fair, etc. Mid teens – early 30's or you are pushing your luck. So is life.

      December 6, 2013 at 12:29 | Report abuse |
  30. CommonSense

    Hmmm ... the birth rate of older women (35-39) has jumped 30% since 1990 and the number of developmental-related disabilities (e.g., Autism) has dramatically increased in the same time period. I wonder if there is a hidden cost to the decision to delay having children?

    December 6, 2013 at 09:55 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Kelly Lynn

      Studies show links to older fathers and autism, not mothers at this point. But there is well known higher risk for developmental problems with older mothers. This isnt a "hmmmmm" situation. It's already known, and older mothers know this too. They require I downs syndrome test at 5 months if you are over 35 (at least last I knew... could be younger now) due to the increased risk of issues. The test is optional to younger mothers.

      December 6, 2013 at 11:12 | Report abuse |
  31. julnor

    This is why programs like Medicare and Social Security have no future. These are wealth transfer programs that take money from younger workers and give it to older retirees. When you run out of people to take from, you won't have anything to give.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:01 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Kristin

      No, that is when America will open the floodgates and allow foreigners to immigrate to this country. Strictly to pay taxes into our Medicare and SS.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:16 | Report abuse |
  32. mah29

    This is a good thing. In response to the autism increase, research has shown it is relate to older fathers. Unless the unspoken iissue is fewer white births which is a racist consideration an has no place in a scientific discussion. We cannot employ he people we have now.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:02 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Bobby

      Yes older men tend to have older wives too. I can see why an older man is more likely to have an autistic child. If he's 45 the mother is probably close to 40. It's not uncommon to have old fathers but it's more common to have older first time mothers now than it was 40 years ago, hence the higher rates of disabilities.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:32 | Report abuse |
  33. smartaz

    And they are also making fewer sandwiches.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:09 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. Din

    It is all about broken believe system, economy and expensive health care. Stable relationship comes from inside not the appearances of a person. In other part of the word the only entertainment they have is to have relationship with their spouses without any protection since they don't have enough education and money.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:13 | Report abuse | Reply
  35. Kristin

    RESPONSIBLE WOMEN are having less children, yes, because it is what we could afford. I personally do not want to raise or have children if I am in a poverty situation. That is just wrong.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:15 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. Fr33d0mhawk

    And US women should continue to have fewer babies. The main problem is that we have way too many people and not enough jobs, so cut back on the children and then the peasants labor will become valuable again. There is only one reason why we the people are being paid less and less because we have a glut of labor. The next thing you will see is that lawmakers who claim to be for smaller government will try to outlaw birth control, because if labor becomes scarce, it becomes more valuable and that would mean the little people have a bit more power. So, Republicans, naturally as a function of smaller government, will micromanage every orifice of every US citizen in order to keep the serf pipeline full.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:18 | Report abuse | Reply
  37. jack

    Many contributing factors, and they are not just limited to US

    * More women are working
    * Financial independence decreases need to stick together as family
    * Both men and women in general are away from family life more than ever
    * More focus on "enjoying" life has driven both men and women away from duties of procreation

    December 6, 2013 at 10:20 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. Michael

    When they say fewer abortions, does that include abortions by pill? Probably not since they would be difficult to count. It is interesting that the rates have supposedly come down since Plan B became available. I do believe some of the lower teen rate is due to education – abstinence and protection, but I wonder how much of the lower abortion rate is because the abortions by pill are not counted.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:24 | Report abuse | Reply
  39. Alice

    So teen pregnancy rates are falling does not mean that teens are not having sex. The issue should be teens having sex at all, not because they avoid getting pregnant by the male using a condom or a female using birth-control. It's not a good thing just to say contraptions is what is stopping pregnancies while not viewing the entire picture.

    That's all this nation thinks about anymore. It's NOT okay for minors to be having sex period, and let's start talking about the diseases and emotional stress sex can cause that we so kindly exclude or gloss over. Sex is suppose to be an adult thing, not minors bonking each other or others.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:25 | Report abuse | Reply
  40. ed dugan

    A lower birth rate is great news. Now if we could just get to a zero birth rate for hispanics the world might stand a chance of surviving.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:36 | Report abuse | Reply
    • sanjosemike

      Mr. Dugan, I worry less about Hispanics than I to Muslims. Hispanics are not trying to kill us. Muslims are.

      sanjosemike

      December 6, 2013 at 10:51 | Report abuse |
  41. Who needs morals?

    "Who's your daddy!"

    "I don't know."

    The bigger concern should be kids raised as weeds by broken or no families. Of course, freedom to do as you please is your right. Who cares what happens to society! Government will step in and give you what you need – or want.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:37 | Report abuse | Reply
  42. Pat

    I doubt Utah has seen any decrease in fertility. Since the baby factories get tax exemptions for dependents (in Utah, schools are funded primarily via the State income tax) we can't build schools fast enough to keep up with them.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:38 | Report abuse | Reply
  43. JAG

    It's a sad fact that over 50% of American girls have been or are the product of a broken home. Young women are positioned to view marriage as a sort of scam as men do leave. The women, married or not, still do most of the child-rearing. So a girl, too frequently, when considering marriage asks herself what's the point?
    This mindset is exacerbated by the fact that the media sends messages to men that, no matter how unattractive, unproductive and just plain unmarriageable, there is always a younger female out there waiting for his embrace.
    Not all men are like this of course. But men have to realize that if American women get back on track to having larger families again, that fidelity has to be top priority, and that the American male is capable of loyalty to wife and children. That mesaage is not conveyed at all.

    December 6, 2013 at 10:39 | Report abuse | Reply
  44. ananth

    Well I had to get rid of my White wife because she got too busy with Television and had time for nothing else. No wonder they don't reproduce. There are too fat and lazy!

    December 6, 2013 at 10:43 | Report abuse | Reply
    • bearitstrong

      Troll elsewhere, please.

      December 6, 2013 at 10:49 | Report abuse |
  45. sanjosemike

    We have to be truthful here: babies and children are an ATTACK on "family" financial and structural integrity. That has to be the most ironic statement ever, but it is true. Children are incredibly expensive and usually represent a threat to intimacy. I know you will say that I am selfish, but look at the facts:

    1. Raising children is the most expensive "hobby" a couple can have
    2. Children obstruct the ability to get ahead financially
    3. Children obstruct your ability to save for retirement
    4. Paying for college is a bomb to your retirement planning
    5. The time children take away from you and your spouse subtracts from your intimacy
    6. The time children take away from you often makes it impossible to take care of your body
    7. Children are demanding and highly self-centered
    8. In non-agricultural societies, children are not particularly necessary
    9. Children obstruct emergency savings and ability to plan in cases of job loss
    10. Children require you to purchase larger living quarters which cost you more

    You need to seriously reconsider having children you CANNOT afford. It is not OUR obligation to pay for them. It is YOURS. I expect some nasty comments. But you cannot deny the truth of my statements.

    Our world has plenty enough inhabitants. We don't need any more.

    sanjosemike

    December 6, 2013 at 10:48 | Report abuse | Reply
  46. aaron

    I read several years ago that birth rates would naturally drop due to the massive increase in life expectancy. People are living a lot longer now than during anytime in history, so population growth became massive worldwide. But, that's not the case in every country, especially the ones that can't support large populations. Hence, the massive migration from the countries with high birth rates to those with low birth rates. But, working age people are still needed to support our large number of elderly people. It's still a shame that so many Western cultures are disappearing as a result. The Germans are the only ones that have acknowledged the irreversible end of their culture due to low birth rates, which fell below an average of 2.3 children per woman for over 20 years.

    December 6, 2013 at 11:00 | Report abuse | Reply
  47. Randy, San Francisco

    Anti-immigration Tea Partiers and conservative purists should pay attention to the CDC report and undersatnd there will be fewer young people to support an aging population if immigration is not reformed and increased.

    December 6, 2013 at 11:01 | Report abuse | Reply
  48. Silence DoGood

    People say that they have trouble saving for their child's future. I have explained how one can do it for a dollar a day. Have a look at it and let me know what you think. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Good luck.

    [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=videoseries&w=640&h=360]

    December 6, 2013 at 11:07 | Report abuse | Reply
  49. Gus

    Best news in a long time. When people all over the world realize that you shouldn't have children you can't afford, this will change the world...

    December 6, 2013 at 11:07 | Report abuse | Reply
    • davecu

      Giving birth is now a tactical weapon.
      It's working for any who wish to bring down the USA faster that any shooting war could.

      December 6, 2013 at 11:12 | Report abuse |
  50. Keel Hauler

    Good. We're getting enough imported babies as it is.

    December 6, 2013 at 11:11 | Report abuse | Reply
1 2 3

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Advertisement
About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.