U.S. Birth Rate Reaches Record Low [why have the women given up?]

HHS | June 2003 | Centers for Disease Control

[ex-snook]

U.S. Birth Rate Reaches Record Low
Births to Teens Continue 12-Year Decline; Cesarean Deliveries Reach All-Time High

For Immediate Release
Wednesday, June 25, 2003

The U.S. birth rate fell to the lowest level since national data have been available, reports the latest Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) birth statistics released today by HHS Secretary Tommy G. Thompson.  Secretary Thompson also noted that the rate of teen births fell to a new record low, continuing a decline that began in 1991.

The birth rate was 13.9 per 1,000 persons in 2002, a decline of 1 percent from the rate of 14.1 per 1,000 in 2001 and down 17 percent from the recent peak in 1990 (16.7 per 1,000), according to a new CDC report, “Births: Preliminary Data for 2002.”  The current low birth rate primarily reflects the smaller proportion of women of childbearing age in the U.S. population, as baby boomers age and Americans are living longer.

There has also been a recent downturn in the birth rate for women in the peak childbearing ages.  Birth rates for women in their 20s and early 30s were generally down while births to older mothers (35-44) were still on the rise.  Rates were stable for women over 45.

Birth rates among teenagers were down in 2002, continuing a decline that began in 1991. The birth rate fell to 43 births per 1,000 females 15-19 years of age in 2002, a 5-percent decline from 2001 and a 28-percent decline from 1990. The decline in the birth rate for younger teens, 15-17 years of age, is even more substantial, dropping 38 percent from 1990 to 2002 compared with a drop of 18 percent for teens 18-19 years.

“The reduction in teen pregnancy has clearly been one of the most important public health success stories of the past decade,” Secretary Thompson said. “The fact that this decline in teen births is continuing represents a significant accomplishment.”

More than one fourth of all children born in 2002 were delivered by cesarean; the total cesarean delivery rate of 26.1 percent was the highest level ever reported in the United States. The number of cesarean births to women with no previous cesarean birth jumped 7 percent and the rate of vaginal births after previous cesarean delivery dropped 23 percent.  The cesarean delivery rate declined during the late 1980s through the mid-1990s but has been on the rise since 1996.

Among other significant findings:

In 2002, there were 4,019,280 births in the United States, down slightly from 2001 (4,025,933).

The percent of low birthweight babies (infants born weighing less than 2,500 grams) increased to 7.8 percent, up from 7.7 percent in 2001 and the highest level in more than 30 years.  In addition, the percent of preterm births (infants born at less than 37 weeks of gestation) increased slightly over 2001, from 11.9 percent to 12 percent.

More than one-third of all births were to unmarried women.  The birth rate for unmarried women was down slightly in 2002 to 43.6 per 1,000 unmarried women, reflecting the growing number of unmarried women in the population

Access to prenatal care continued a slow and steady increase.  In 2002, 83.8 percent of women began receiving prenatal care in the first trimester of pregnancy, up from 83.4 percent in 2001 and 75.8 percent in 1990.

Data on births are based on information reported on birth certificates filed in State vital statistics offices and reported to CDC through the National Vital Statistics System.  The report is available on CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics Web site.

[MrNatural]

..If you don't care about all those people in the past who made your life possible and prepare other lives
for the future somebody else will...It's natures way of culling the herd, and getting rid of the weak and useless..

Very well put.

[LizardQueen]

To be honest, you do sound judgemental, and this topic is also dear to my heart as I have personal experience with the "if not doing it right, then not at all"

My story: shortly after getting married, my husband developed some mental issues as well as a substance abuse problem. I battled this for almost 8 years, we almost split up countless times, etc. etc. The details are too ugly to go into.
I made a conscious decision that I would NOT bring a child into this relationship until he was straightened out.

Eventually, he got it together. But now there's the issue of my age and health making it a non-starter to start a family at this point (more ugly details that I won't go into here). Plus other husband issues that are secondary to the health ones.

So, was I selfish to not bring a child into a situation like that? You may think so, but I do not.
Sometimes people make the decision not to have kids not because it's in their best interest, but because it's in the best interest of the potential child.

I have another set of friends who didn't have kids because a serious mental illness ran all over the husbands family tree. It broke the wifes heart, but the husband was too afraid to take the chance the kid would have it, or that he would get it while the kid was growing up (every male in the line has had at least some of it - no, I'm not 100% sure what the disease is).

So before you judge, I respectfully suggest that you know the entire stories of those you judge. The facts beneath the decision may surprise you.

And frankly, I wish more people were "selfish" and didn't have kids, instead of having them and neglecting them, abusing them, treating them as fashion accessories, and all in all doing a crappy job of parenting them. Having them and not doing your best to raise them is the real selfish act.

LQ

[xrp]

Ok, maybe 'picky' would be a better description.

[FourPeas]

I'd like to see more of a breakdown of this. In SW Michigan, we're having a baby boom. Could it be that there is a correlation between the parts of the country where birth rates are down and other factors? I suspect so.

[7DayRepo]

Ok, maybe 'picky' would be a better description.

Good for you!

[xrp]

It's natures way of culling the herd, and getting rid of the weak and useless

I disagree, because for the last couple of hundred years, human compassion has resulted in providing too much for the weak and useless. Whoops!

[xrp]

Here in Atlanta too. All my whitey friends (lots of them) are having babies! Some more than 2! Good for them!

[wazoo1031]

Hey now! Y'all just need to pipe down a bit! It takes a lot of money to raise a child properly, and by that I mean one parent to stay home to raise said child properly. I used to plan having a child or two, but as a single woman working her way through college in New Orleans at an older age, I did not exactly meet "Prince Charming". (The time literally flies; One day your ovaries are ready and then in the blink of an eye your in your mid-30's going "Huh?!") I have now met him however, and unfortunately at 36 it may be getting too late for me, as I want to go to graduate school (Not to mention my boyfriend lives in England, so even IF I have a baby, my little 1/2 American will probably be born over there). It really is simple: raising a child IS a career as well as a drastic lifestyle choice/change. There is no written law that says that every woman must bear children. Some women simply do not want to produce children, for their own personal reasons, and they contribute to society in many more ways than just being reduced to a "vessel". I would never have a kid and then have to turn around to get my WIC handout and my "guvmnt cheeze". My siblings and I come from a large family...and there is one niece that we all share. We adore her.

[wazoo1031]

Hey now! Y'all just need to pipe down a bit! It takes a lot of money to raise a child properly, and by that I mean one parent to stay home to raise said child properly. I used to plan having a child or two, but as a single woman working her way through college in New Orleans at an older age, I did not exactly meet "Prince Charming". (The time literally flies; One day your ovaries are ready and then in the blink of an eye your in your mid-30's going "Huh?!") I have now met him however, and unfortunately at 36 it may be getting too late for me, as I want to go to graduate school (Not to mention my boyfriend lives in England, so even IF I have a baby, my little 1/2 American will probably be born over there). It really is simple: raising a child IS a career as well as a drastic lifestyle choice/change. There is no written law that says that every woman must bear children. Some women simply do not want to produce children, for their own personal reasons, and they contribute to society in many more ways than just being reduced to a "vessel". I would never have a kid and then have to turn around to get my WIC handout and my "guvmnt cheeze". My siblings and I come from a large family...and there is one niece that we all share. We adore her.

[MrNatural]

..for the last couple of hundred years, human compassion has resulted in
providing too much for the weak and useless..

Oh, true enough; but when the crash comes, and it will, what will happen to all
those who live by the kindness of strangers?

[7DayRepo]

Demographics is destiny. It looks like America will be a backwater, third-world appendage of Mexico by 2100.

[xrp]

Whew...my gameplan has me retiring in 25 years, buying a nice sailboat and sailing the Caribbean until I croak.

[goodnesswins]

"American women (except for FR babes) are exquisitely narcissistic and superficial. They are too selfish and self-centered to have children in their lives."

Well....I agree...except there are the STUPID American women, two of whom I know, who've decided to have babies without being married (or a man in the house).

[Torie]

Isn't that sentiment rather age dependent? Happiness however is precious, and to be savoured. Alas it is also punctuated by pain and suffering, typically.

[7DayRepo]

Boy, you had it tough, huh?

[sarasmom]

You made the right decision.
It is extremely hard to be a single parent, and the only excuse is that it was an accident, albeit still a miracle direct from God.
To plot or plan to be a single parent is...I dont know of any word to adequately describe it.
Forever villified by the hollier than thou married parents.
Having to constantly hear comments from ignorant "taxpayers" who think they have contributed one dime to your personal family situation,knowing they have not.
Biting ones tongue, because you really beleive a two parent household is ideal, just not what your own personal reality wound up granting you.
It takes a very thick skin.It also takes a lot of work to teach your child to do as I say, not as I've done.
OTOH, life begins in a new way the day your child is born.
No matter the circumstances and challenges.
I do not cast stones on this decision, for I have had too many cast against me for mine.

[jordan8]

A disease of wealth. Augustus made laws to try and force the Roman elite to have children.

[narses]

Why religion mattares. At least Catholicism does. A nation that stops having babies, DIES.

[Woo Way]

Although I am also unworried about the low birthrate, I don't think crowding is an issue...we have a *huge* country. Technology has obviated the issue of crowding for a *very* long time now. Ask those Godforsaken Mormons in Salt Lake City. Rich, and yet...not prime property. Maybe *you* should move to Montana.

You're still living in the Age of Reason. You want to stick with Newton? I'll take Einstein -- an excellent example of why accepting immigrants instead of indiscriminately pumping out babies is the root of what makes our country the strongest in the world.

My German Grandmother didn't come to the U.S. with my Irish immigrant American soldier father and my infant mother in the late 40's to escape overcrowding. Did my formerly Soviet friends come to escape overcrowding? Ahiyikue wasn't working on his citizenship because Gabon was overcrowded...it was because -- despite the fact his diplomat father insisted he spend summers in Africa -- he had brains and skills (chemistry degree) and wanted to be part of the greatest country in the world. My ex-girlfriend "Kelly" Yu-Jong Han's family left South Korea because they put bankrupt businessmen in prison there.

Age of reason, or age of reactionary? Conservative or Liberal, Republican or Democrat, our diversity is what makes us strong. Asian, European, Latin American, African: Can you think of one single person who doesn't have those roots somewhere in their family tree?

If you have a problem with the fact that areas of dense population require more government, maybe you should should be the one who moves to the woods. If you really need "forest by the sea," move to Oregon. The U.S. teen birthrate is not the reason why the situation is so abysmal there. It's because everyone who is born there *leaves*. And not because of overcrowding.

You are worried about overcrowding? These other people are worried that we might not be a mostly white country? I say: Leave. I want to be a citizen of the greatest country in the world; if you think we're better off spending money to encourage every American to have babies or if you think we should reduce our population growth...move to France or China.

[MinorityRepublican]

Demographics is destiny. It looks like America will be a backwater, third-world appendage of Mexico by 2100.

I disagree, there were laws curtailing immigration in American history, the most recent in 1924 (which limited immigrants from Northern and Western Europe.)

Once we have over 10% unemployment, immigration will be sharply reduced.

Then, our immigrants will have time to adapt to American values.