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

Skip to comments.

Finance biggest deterrent to having children, report says
Guardian Unlimited ^ | 10/4/06 | John Carvel

Posted on 10/04/2006 9:39:29 AM PDT by qam1

The fears that deter young couples from starting a family have been revealed in a report published today. The study, carried out by the Future Foundation into the reasons why Britain's birth rate has tumbled since the end of the 1960s baby boom, found financial pressures were the greatest inhibition.

It found that two-thirds of a sample of childless adults under the age of 45 said they were delaying having children until they could save enough to afford them. Half were postponing having a family until they could move to a bigger home.

The foundation said this fear was well founded because the average cost of raising a child to the age of 18 was now more than £122,000. "To a generation of potential parents inundated with debt, financial pressures will continue to be an inhibitor," it said.

However, other fears could be considered to be more self-centred. Around 50% of childless men and 40% of childless women said they were not ready to make the lifestyle changes necessary to accommodate the needs of young children.

Twenty and thirtysomethings were participating in twice as many leisure activities as 25 years ago and appeared reluctant to give them up.

The researchers found that 61% of new fathers and 56% of new mothers became less satisfied with their leisure time in the year after their first child was born.

.....

But only 7% did not want to have children because they thought they would not be a good parent.

"The findings reveal that having children is now thought of as a lifestyle choice rather than an inevitable life stage," the foundation said.

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: children; deathofthewest; genx; havemorebabies; kids; parents
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 next last
To: Antoninus

I'll give you an example of a couple I know making mid-six figures. Two kids, both in private school at about $25,000 a year apiece. One of the kids is about to take the SATs, so that's an added $100 an hour three times a week for "SAT coaching." One kid who is particularly driven, has been taking Mandarin lessons twice a week for the past three years and has traveled to China about a half dozen times. The other kid, who is a jock, takes tennis lessons -- don't know the cost, but it can't be cheap.

I know both the kids -- they are bright, but not brilliant. But the basic idea is to "launch them" (the parents' phrase not mine) into a life somewhere above where their parents reside. Even with the parents' not insignificant dual income, this would be impossible with four or six kids.

Bottomline, these are incredibly ambitious people who want their kids to do better than they did.


61 posted on 10/04/2006 12:32:44 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: durasell
I know both the kids -- they are bright, but not brilliant. But the basic idea is to "launch them" (the parents' phrase not mine) into a life somewhere above where their parents reside. Even with the parents' not insignificant dual income, this would be impossible with four or six kids. Bottomline, these are incredibly ambitious people who want their kids to do better than they did.

And that's fine if your ultimate goal is to make sure your kids have more 'stuff' than you did.

My goal is to make sure my kids love God, love their family, love their neighbor, love their country, serve their community, teach the Gospel and ultimately get to Heaven. Everything else is just fluff.
62 posted on 10/04/2006 1:22:27 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Stuff and fluff matters to some people. I applaud your priorities.


63 posted on 10/04/2006 1:33:54 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Any "rational analysis" of this subject will almost always tell you "not yet" because you are influenced by pure self-interest

Not necessarily. Intangibles like life enrichment and love are part of a rational analysis. If a couple is on firm financial footing, with enough resources to meet the immediate costs of childbearing and a secure belief that they will continue to bring in enough to cover the costs of childrearing, if the couple wants children it would make rational sense for them to have them immediately.

But parents have responsibility not only for their own basic needs, but for those of their children. See Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs; having children (which I agree is a good thing) comes at the "love/belonging" stage, meaning only after immediate physiological needs and safety (future well-being) are secured. No one wants to be in the position of being unsure how they will meet their next month's expenses; I can't imagine how horrible it would be for parents not to know how they would pay for their child's food/clothes/education/health care/etc. So of course it makes sense to wait to have children only until you can reasonably ensure you won't find yourself in that position. That's what I mean by a rational analysis.

64 posted on 10/04/2006 1:36:05 PM PDT by Turbopilot (iumop ap!sdn w,I 'aw dlaH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Turbopilot; Antoninus

Read Antoninus last post to me. The Maslow stuff doesn't apply...


65 posted on 10/04/2006 1:38:34 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: durasell
Stuff and fluff matters to some people. I applaud your priorities.

Absolutely it does. And I would argue that those folks are misguided.
66 posted on 10/04/2006 1:40:50 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: durasell
Read Antoninus last post to me. The Maslow stuff doesn't apply...

You bet it doesn't... Remember, the first two syllables of "psychology" are "psycho"...
67 posted on 10/04/2006 1:42:46 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

They're not misguided. Their priorities are different. They see the world as a very tough place and getting tougher. They simply want to prepare their kids for that...there's nothing wrong with wanting your kids to have their own comfortable home, an interesting profession and the ability to afford a few of the luxuries in life.
While your priorities may be in service to God, country and community, with all the other stuff secondary, they see the other stuff as important.


68 posted on 10/04/2006 1:45:59 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

psych -- from the greek for soul/spirit. The original meaning was study of the soul...


69 posted on 10/04/2006 1:50:16 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: durasell
They're not misguided. Their priorities are different.

I never said they weren't different. But different and misguided aren't antonyms.

there's nothing wrong with wanting your kids to have their own comfortable home, an interesting profession and the ability to afford a few of the luxuries in life.

Who said there was? My point was, the desire for material goods should be pretty low on a person's priority list. Much lower, certainly, than having children.

As for me, I chose to give my kids the greatest gift that any parent can give their children. No, not a car on their 16th birthday. Not a $100K education at a marxist indoctrination center. Not a nice little condo. Lots of siblings. There's nothing in the world like a brother or sister.
70 posted on 10/04/2006 1:55:38 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: durasell
psych -- from the greek for soul/spirit. The original meaning was study of the soul...

Most humanist psychologists don't even believe in a soul...
71 posted on 10/04/2006 1:56:23 PM PDT by Antoninus (Attention GOP---Rule 4: See Rules 1 and 3. Rule 5: NO FOLEYS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: durasell; Antoninus
With respect, the Maslow hierarchy does apply to a responsible decision to be a parent; I think you may have misunderstood my point. Instilling one's values in one's children is an admirable goal, but not one on the same level as meeting basic physical needs. One is not able to teach children values if one cannot keep those children fed, clothed, sheltered, educated, healthy, or safe.

That's not to say that one needs a new BMW and a condo in Destin before one should have kids; just that a certain level of financial stability and security is necessary to meet the basic needs of children, and a reasonable decision to have children takes into account whether the parents have that stability and security or whether they should work a while longer to obtain it.

72 posted on 10/04/2006 2:02:17 PM PDT by Turbopilot (iumop ap!sdn w,I 'aw dlaH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Not having a dog in this fight, I tend to look at it in a very cold blooded way. Someone can have one or two kids and give them all the little perks that help to assure a prosperous life, education, travel, a relative amount of financial security...or, they can have five or six kids and live on the financial edge -- no travel, no high end education, no financial security for the kids.

And people do fall over the edge every day -- I've seen it in ghettos where decent people go on public assistance just to feed the four or five kids. And then folks get down on them for having more kids than they can afford.


73 posted on 10/04/2006 2:06:36 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Twenty and thirtysomethings were participating in twice as many leisure activities as 25 years ago and appeared reluctant to give them up.

===========================================

Well, there you have it.....kids.

74 posted on 10/04/2006 2:08:01 PM PDT by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
On that note, I shall go home and enjoy watching "Elmo Goes to the Potty" once again.

----------------------------------------

That's the one with the cool subliminal messages.

75 posted on 10/04/2006 2:09:42 PM PDT by wtc911 (You can't get there from here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: qam1
But only 7% did not want to have children because they thought they would not be a good parent.

cool I'm in the minority where's my gubment check?

76 posted on 10/04/2006 2:31:15 PM PDT by CzarNicky (Gentlemen, Dethklok has summoned a troll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

If we had waited until we could "afford" children we'd still be childless. I'm going to snuggle with my baby and read stories to all 3 of them at bedtime tonight. I pray we get to add to our family soon. My kids are my leisure time!


77 posted on 10/04/2006 5:05:31 PM PDT by samiam1972 (Live simply so that others may simply live!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: samiam1972

I think people are going to be unhappy, no matter how much money they have, if they give their love to what can't love them back. Your family can love you ... not as much as you need - that's one reason we need God ... but your house, investments, job, car, or education can't love you at all.


78 posted on 10/04/2006 6:25:34 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("There's nowhere to go and you've got all day to get there ... on some beach, somewhere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Award-winning posts! I followed your comments all afternoon, and there was one great point after another.


79 posted on 10/04/2006 7:29:36 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("There's nowhere to go and you've got all day to get there ... on some beach, somewhere.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: valkyrieanne

"Since it's a Great Britain article, they can't be including health care."

Great observation, thanks for the input.


80 posted on 10/05/2006 4:35:19 AM PDT by CSM ("When you stop lying about us, we'll stop telling the truth about you." No Truce With Kings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-114 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