Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

More Women Than Ever Are Childless, Census Finds
New York Times ^ | August 18, 2008 | Katie Zezima

Posted on 08/19/2008 6:54:24 AM PDT by reaganaut1

Women are waiting longer to have children, and more women than ever are choosing not to have children at all, according to a new Census Bureau report.

Twenty percent of women ages 40 to 44 have no children, double the level of 30 years ago, the report said; and women in that age bracket who do have children have fewer than ever — an average of 1.9 children, compared with the median of 3.1 children in 1976.

“A lot of women are not having any children,” said Jane Lawler Dye, a Census Bureau researcher who did the report, which looked at women of childbearing age in 2006. “It used to be sort of expected that there was a phase of life where you had children, and a lot of women aren’t doing that now,” Ms. Dye said.

Women with advanced degrees are more likely to be childless, the study found. Of women 40 to 44 with graduate or professional degrees, 27 percent are childless, compared with 18 percent of women who did not continue their education beyond high school, the data show.

The numbers are consistent with a 2006 report Ms. Dye issued on the same subject. While year-by-year change is slow, Ms. Dye said, the data show that women of the baby boom generation are continuing to transform the American family.

Hispanic women are the only group bucking the trends found in the study, averaging 2.3 children each by their 40s. The number of children a Hispanic woman has decreases sharply, however, depending on how many generations her family has lived in the United States, the data show.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: census; childfree; demographics; genx; hispanics; women
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last
Because 27% of women with graduate or professional degrees are childless, I will be less likely to encourage my daughter than my sons to pursue education beyond college or be career-oriented. The decisions will be theirs, of course.

Since intelligence, like other human traits, has a strong hereditary components, intelligent women having fewer children reduces the average level of intelligence. It would be better to have social policies that encourage them to have more kids than to throw money at public schools in vain efforts to close achievement "gaps".

1 posted on 08/19/2008 6:54:25 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim; Allegra; Jersey Republican Biker Chick

FREERIDERS!


2 posted on 08/19/2008 6:55:40 AM PDT by martin_fierro (< |:)~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

the u.s. birth rate reached 1.7 in the late 1970’s due to the feminist movement. boomer women who came of child-bearing age in the mid-sixties didn’t have kids.

then, in the early 1980’s the burger flippers, maids and landscapers arrived from across the border.


3 posted on 08/19/2008 6:56:58 AM PDT by ken21 (people die and you never hear from them again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

“More Women Are Childless”

Not if they have husbands!! LOLOL


4 posted on 08/19/2008 6:57:27 AM PDT by gimme1ibertee (BHO is DOA in NOV...IF McCain picks the right VP!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Social policies today are intentionally anti-family.

The commies intend to dissolve the traditional family in order to inspire more loyalty to the state, ala “1984”.

See the “Communist Goals for America” written into the Congressional Record in 1963.

Anti-family culture is all around us.

Every issue that the left promotes, and has infiltrated into our society, has the effect, AND THE INTENT, of destroying the family:

easy divorce
denigration of the role of fathers
welfare (replacing fathers with the state as provider)
denigration of respect for tradition and the wisdom of the aged
erosion of parental authority
emphasis on state education and raising of children
promotion of materialism and high taxes, forcing mothers to work
promotion of women’s “fulfillment” in the career fields instead of motherhood

abortion
alleviation of other consequences for (ie, promoting) sexual promiscuity
normalization of homosexuality, and soon “adult-child” sex
pornography
promotion of obscenity as “free speech”
feminism and gender blending

discrediting and “socializing” of religion/Christianity
discrediting Biblical authority in favor of “intellectual maturity” (Man wiser than God)


5 posted on 08/19/2008 6:58:00 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

It could’nt mean that MEN are waiting longer to get married, now could it.


6 posted on 08/19/2008 6:58:20 AM PDT by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Since intelligence, like other human traits, has a strong hereditary components, intelligent women having fewer children reduces the average level of intelligence.

Waiter, can I please have some dime store eugenics with my coffee?

7 posted on 08/19/2008 6:59:34 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

If it is mainly liberal women who are less likely to have children, then I think this should be a trend to encourage, not discourage.


8 posted on 08/19/2008 7:00:53 AM PDT by pnh102 (Save America - Ban Ethanol Now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

Why get married?

The “sexual revolution” removed women’s requirements of men for marriage, stability, and character in order to have access to sex.


9 posted on 08/19/2008 7:01:06 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ken21

You are spot on.

Also, taxes are so much higher that it is harder for one parent to stay home and watch the children.

Policies and courts seemed to be against the fathers - and the presence of a father is a great influence on a child’s success and likelihood of staying in school.

And schools seem to be pushing propaganda instead of teaching the basics. It’s quite a hostile environment to raise kids these days.


10 posted on 08/19/2008 7:02:21 AM PDT by NEWwoman (let them eat cake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

The left has openly stated, however, that they intend to be child”free” and let conservatives take on the challenges of raising children.

They intend to “procreate” their ideology by indoctrination in public schools - an openly stated goal.


11 posted on 08/19/2008 7:02:39 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Maybe I should change my tagline to “Having all the kids & grandkids that liberals won’t have”


12 posted on 08/19/2008 7:02:57 AM PDT by Alouette (Vicious Babushka)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

100% correct BUMP.


13 posted on 08/19/2008 7:03:34 AM PDT by Malacoda (A day without a pi$$ed-off muslim is like a day without sunshine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Where is the error in my reasoning? Are you denying that intelligence is partly inherited?


14 posted on 08/19/2008 7:03:41 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
"Since intelligence, like other human traits, has a strong hereditary components, intelligent women having fewer children reduces the average level of intelligence. It would be better to have social policies that encourage them to have more kids than to throw money at public schools in vain efforts to close achievement "gaps"."

While I and others do not disagree with you, your thesis above assumes that women with M.S. degrees are more intelligent than those without. There I differ to a degree.

Yes, a woman with an advanced degree in computer science or physics is of superior intelligence, and not having offspring would be a loss.

But a woman with a M.S. in sociology or women's studies is probably of average or lower-than-average intellect. No loss there.

15 posted on 08/19/2008 7:04:21 AM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NEWwoman

We also live in a society that promotes the instant gratification of any whim or desire over self-denial and self-sacrifice — both of which are required to raise children. Children are promoted/seen as a drag or an anchor, rather than a labor of love and a joy.


16 posted on 08/19/2008 7:05:42 AM PDT by Malacoda (A day without a pi$$ed-off muslim is like a day without sunshine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro; Allegra; JimWforBush; Jersey Republican Biker Chick; najida; Tijeras_Slim; ...

FREERIDER PING!!!!


17 posted on 08/19/2008 7:07:56 AM PDT by Jersey Republican Biker Chick (Some days it is not worth chewing through the restraints.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Malacoda

Did this study include ILLEGAL ALIENS?


18 posted on 08/19/2008 7:08:15 AM PDT by Blue Turtle (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
I guess these liberal cows didn’t want to be “punished” with raising a child. Also some probably are living their alternative life style.
19 posted on 08/19/2008 7:08:27 AM PDT by 4yearlurker (Any day above ground is a good day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
One could conclude, therefore, that:

1) Intelligent women make better choices, and logically conclude that children are more of a burden than a blessing, confirming years of leftist thinking.

2) Intelligent women are more concerned with income and career than children, and by choosing the former they just end up childless as a consequence.

3) Women with advanced degrees are less intelligent, and therefore make a bad choice by not having children.

4) Women with advanced degrees have been brainwashed by 8-10 years of Government schools, and deliberately decide to remain childless because children are a burden.

I think we all know that the most likely explanations are 2) and 4).

20 posted on 08/19/2008 7:08:40 AM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pnh102

“If it is mainly liberal women who are less likely to have children, then I think this should be a trend to encourage, not discourage.”

I think the causation goes both ways, though. It’s possible that Maureen Dowd, for example, would not be such a bitter liberal if she had gotten married and become a mother. A funny thread about her hating Christmas, unlike her more traditional female relatives, is at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1294490/posts .


21 posted on 08/19/2008 7:08:41 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrB
You have listed a good chunk. Add in the increase of homosexuality and the whole 'living together' rather than marriage and we can see the beginnings of the downfall of the U.S. as if it were a repeat of Rome.

Immigrants will replace natural-born citizens. The whole 'melting pot' ideal that America was, is changing to segregated cultures that don't want to be "Americans" but maintain the identity of whatever country they came from with their own 'cultural identity' and language and dress and food...and on and on...

22 posted on 08/19/2008 7:09:39 AM PDT by KriegerGeist (Lifetime member of the "Christian-Radical-Right-Wing-Kook-Factor")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Completely true. We need leaders who will declare this war and identify the enemy clearly.


23 posted on 08/19/2008 7:10:51 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

And Islam will inherit the earth...


24 posted on 08/19/2008 7:10:56 AM PDT by Boagenes (I'm your huckleberry, that's just my game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

If we need a phrase to describe these people I would suggest

EDs - Evolutionary Dead ends.


25 posted on 08/19/2008 7:11:22 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Geist Krieger

I didn’t think I missed those -

see “normalization of homosexuality”
and “promotion of promiscuity”
and denigration of the traditional family (anti-marriage)


26 posted on 08/19/2008 7:11:51 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
"Women with advanced degrees are more likely to be childless, the study found. "

Note how the study doesn't look deeper into cultural phenomena like religious faith and political leanings. Another brilliant NYT reporter who never had an original thought in her head.

We all know that:

Christian women have more children than tatooed, pierced babes on the West and left coasts. In surburban San Diego, where we live, there are huge numbers of college-educated white women having three and four children (Mrs Tom H and I have three). Ditto for the Mormons.

Conservative women have more children than liberals.

So this conclusion that "smarter" women correlates with few children is pure cr-p. Look a little deeper and learn why it really is happening.

27 posted on 08/19/2008 7:12:46 AM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: qam1; ItsOurTimeNow; PresbyRev; Fraulein; StoneColdGOP; Clemenza; m18436572; InShanghai; xrp; ...
Xer Ping

Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.

Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.

28 posted on 08/19/2008 7:13:40 AM PDT by qam1 (There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ecomcon
We need leaders who will declare this war and identify the enemy clearly.

RAISE those leaders.

1 Chron 12:32
Of the sons of Issachar, men who understood the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do, their chiefs were two hundred; and all their kinsmen were at their command.

29 posted on 08/19/2008 7:14:09 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MrB

How much does infertility factor into these numbers? It isn’t always a choice.


30 posted on 08/19/2008 7:14:29 AM PDT by Jaded (does it really need a sarcasm tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tom h
Conservative women have more children than liberals.

Now, don't turn them over to liberals it indoctrinate (educate).

31 posted on 08/19/2008 7:15:16 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
Ms. Dye said, the data show that women of the baby boom generation are continuing to transform the American family.

And they're getting plenty of help from abortion providers too!

Odd that the study doesn't mention fewer women getting pregnant.

Is this the "change" The One is always talking about?

32 posted on 08/19/2008 7:15:25 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker; reaganaut1
Waiter, can I please have some dime store eugenics with my coffee?

If anything, she understated the magnitude of the apocalyptic catastrophe which is racing towards us at light speed.

Prepare for the worst folks - things are about to get very, very bad.

Circa 2020, the USA will crumble beneath the weight of the demographic imperative, and there's no telling what will emerge to replace it [or even if anything will emerge at all].

33 posted on 08/19/2008 7:15:41 AM PDT by KayEyeDoubleDee (const Tag &referenceToConstTag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jaded

Adopt.

In the present culture war, it is far more important to pass on your values than your genes.


34 posted on 08/19/2008 7:16:21 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 4yearlurker
I've known several women that admitted they wouldn't have a child because it would "destroy their body."

At least one married a man (who's wife had died) with young children already.

35 posted on 08/19/2008 7:17:53 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Geist Krieger

You have listed a good chunk. Add in the increase of homosexuality and the whole ‘living together’ rather than marriage and we can see the beginnings of the downfall of the U.S. as if it were a repeat of Rome.

Did Rome REALLY fall because of homosexuality???? I think that is a myth.


36 posted on 08/19/2008 7:18:10 AM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I agree with you totally. I knew some charming young ladies in college (we’re all 51 now) who were as traditional as any gal back then. They fell for the women’s movement expectation of career before men or children, and today they are accomplished but are childless, loveless, and basically lonely. Only very few will admit they made a mistake. I’ll see how they are at the 30th reunion later this year.

Mo Dowd is probably another casualty.

She makes me laugh. Only today has she finally realized that men don’t want to marry ball-busting women.


37 posted on 08/19/2008 7:18:35 AM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

It couldn’t be that women are giving away what used to be precious and MEN see no need to marry. Sex is free, cheap and easy and viewed as a means only of physical satisfaction, rather than life.

How many women are childless because they had early abortions, STDs, or waited too long?


38 posted on 08/19/2008 7:18:53 AM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
If it is mainly liberal women who are less likely to have children, then I think this should be a trend to encourage, not discourage.

hear hear!

I HIGHLY encourage libs, feminazis, pro-aborts and anyone who thinks children are a "drain on the planet" to abstain from reproducing.
39 posted on 08/19/2008 7:19:43 AM PDT by Zechariah_8_13 ("If we give the bureaucrats our children, we may as well give them everything else." - J. G. Machen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
College educated mother of three ... oops, I guess I missed the memo about not having kids ;-)

But, so many of my college friends have either one child or none at all. I do feel sorry for them, especially the gals that waited until they were 40 to “try.”

Gals my age got the impression through the 1980s that due to infertility treatments we didn't have to worry about our age so much.

We were sold a bill of goods.

Many of my kids’ friends’ moms are about 10 years younger and in our community the younger families are getting bigger. Three and four children are common with a few of five or six. These are good people. One of my cousins, mom of five, was told that families like hers ought to have bigger families b/c they would raise the children right.

Yes, many gals my age missed out, but our younger sisters and cousins seem to have learned from our mistakes.

40 posted on 08/19/2008 7:20:13 AM PDT by Cloverfarm (Children are a blessing ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

We’re doing our best with 4 homeschooled kids.


41 posted on 08/19/2008 7:20:31 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Zechariah_8_13

They then focus their energy on “getting” YOUR kids.

That way, they can pass on their values while still living a narcissistic lifestyle.


42 posted on 08/19/2008 7:20:43 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ecomcon
We’re doing our best with 4 homeschooled kids.

hurrah, kudos, and GOD BLESS!

43 posted on 08/19/2008 7:21:45 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: tiki
"How many women are childless because they had early abortions, STDs, or waited too long?"

After 45 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, a huge number. And don't forget that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer and the incidence of endometriosis.

And, with STD infection rates at 50% or higher among sexually promiscuous young adults, many women are or will be sterile, also.

44 posted on 08/19/2008 7:22:14 AM PDT by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Which is why we homeschool. ;) (see my borrowed tagline)


45 posted on 08/19/2008 7:24:49 AM PDT by Zechariah_8_13 ("If we give the bureaucrats our children, we may as well give them everything else." - J. G. Machen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Comment #46 Removed by Moderator

From the HealthNews Website, article titled STD's affect 26 Percent of Female Teens: On March 11, 2008 the Centers for Disease Control released data...study found that African-American girls are the most affected as almost 50 percent have an STD, compared to 20 percent of white teen girls and 20 percent of Mexican girls. The infection rate was 40 percent among all girls who admitted to being sexually active

I find it interesting that the % of childless women is about the same percentage of women with STDs.

47 posted on 08/19/2008 7:26:10 AM PDT by figetyfiggs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1; Fred Nerks
intelligent women having fewer children reduces the average level of intelligence>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

NAH! You miss the point.

If they were intelligent , they WOULD be having children.

These women are less intelligent, and their genes deserve to enter the Darwinian scrap pile.

And on top of all that they likely have been so disintelligent as to create the very gurly men that they are loath to marry.

(I mean, Maureen O'Dowd went to Australia looking for a lumberjack type, she would have no truck with the panseys that feminist culture had created.)

Darwin Award in Order!

48 posted on 08/19/2008 7:26:32 AM PDT by Candor7 (Fascism? All it takes is for good men to say nothing, (Ridicule Obama))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

I wish I had children. I have never been married so no kids for me.


49 posted on 08/19/2008 7:27:54 AM PDT by peggybac (Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
I heard a little of Boortz just before Rush came on one day, and he was reading some study that stated: single young college-age women are liberal, then when they get married, they become more conservative, then when they have children they become the most conservative (want the government to stay the 'H' out of their family's business), then when they get divorced, they become more liberal than ever.

The reason is that when they become divorced, single parents, they want the government to be their husband and take care of them and to be the father and raise their children.

I don't know if this is true, but it sounded cool.

50 posted on 08/19/2008 7:29:14 AM PDT by KriegerGeist (Lifetime member of the "Christian-Radical-Right-Wing-Kook-Factor")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-173 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson