Falling birthrates in developed countries have led to numerous proposals, some of which have been implemented, about how to reverse the trend. Catherine Ruth Pakaluk argues that most people seeking to solve the problem are going about it wrong:
South Korea suffers the world’s lowest birthrates—0.71 expected births per woman. In the city of Seoul, that number is just 0.59. The South Korean government estimates that it has spent $210 billion trying to revive its gasping birthrate. The cash hasn’t worked. It hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried.
Pronatalist policy proposals in the U.S. make two faulty assumptions about falling birthrates. First, that religious outliers [who have several children] have zero relevance for reviving American families. Second, that we can incentivize anything we want with tax and subsidy schemes.
Pakaluk has spent the past four years traveling around America speaking with women who have chosen to have large families. Many are deeply religious. Among them is Leah, who, along with her husband, embraced Orthodox Judaism while in college:
Leah’s story made it excruciatingly obvious why child subsidies won’t raise the birthrate. Cash incentives can’t answer what needs to be answered: a reason to give up dreams and aspirations that can’t hang on past one or two kids. We know we can incentivize moving away from oil, cigarettes, and Big Gulps. But can we incentivize moving away from careers and interests we’ve prepared women to fulfill from their earliest school days? My research suggested that such a choice comes from deep within. It must be wanted for its own sake, counted as worth the costs, which are personal and subjective.
Read more on Fusion: https://www.fusionaier.org/post/the-pulse-of-natality-what-we-re-missing-about-falling-birthrates