Latest news with #babyboom
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
What having children later in life means for your money
There are plenty of dads who will be collecting their pension at the same time they're collecting their kids from school, because last year saw a baby boom for fathers over 60. It's not just A-list actors and rock stars who are having children later in life, it's a growing trend among the rest of us too. But if you're planning on postponing having children, it's worth considering what this means for your money. Recent figures from the Office for National Statistics showed that in 2024, the number of births fell for parents under 30, but rose for those aged 30 and over. The largest rise in births for the year was among mothers aged 35-39. Meanwhile, there was a 14.2% rise in births where the dad was over 60. The rise in much older fathers is likely to owe much to those getting remarried after a divorce and starting a second family, but there are plenty of good reasons why those with more traditional set-ups also postpone starting a family. Read more: How to get the best currency exchange deal for your holiday money Runaway rents and sky-high property prices mean more young people living at home for longer – 28% of people aged 20-34 live with their parents – rising to 34% of young men. It makes it difficult to find the space to start a family. Couples are also more likely to live together for longer before considering marriage or children, so even after they move out, they're not in a rush to have kids. There are some benefits to waiting, because you've had time to build your financial resilience, so you have more to draw on during the expensive early years. However, there are also some challenges you need to plan for. On average, your offspring will move out at the age of 24. If you're in your mid-40s when they're born, you may already be above state pension age. Typically, the 'empty nest' period is when people prioritise pension savings. If it doesn't arrive until you're retired, you need to work harder on your pension while you're younger, and keep up consistent pension payments throughout as many of your years as parents as you can. Your own parents will be older too, so they may not be able to help with grandchildren and you might need to factor childcare costs into your plans. They may actually need more support themselves, so talk to them about the potential costs of care, and the part they expect you to play. Becoming a sandwich carer is always challenging, but doing so without warning makes it even more difficult. Read more: Should parents help their kids with student loans or a mortgage deposit? If parents are much older – including those in their 60s – consider how you'll cover household costs in retirement and whether you have enough in your pension or SIPP to cover the expensive years of parenting. If you plan to keep working later in life, you also need a plan B, in case your health forces you to stop work. You need to think about insurance cover too. Parents need to have life insurance in place to ensure their children are supported for as long as they need it if they were to pass away. They should also consider critical illness cover and income protection – both of which provide support if you suffer an illness or injury and can't work. It's vital to make a will too, including details of who will take care of your children if something was to happen to you. It's not a nice thing to have to think about when you're looking forward to a joyous birth of a child, but the earlier you consider the challenges and make plans for it, the more chance you can weather your children's early years in your golden years without stretching your finances to breaking more: How to get the best currency exchange deal for your holiday money How to build passive income Do you trust your partner enough to give them money for tax purposes?Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
19-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
S'pore sees no baby boom in Year of the Dragon despite slight rise in births in 2024
SINGAPORE – The much hoped for baby boom did not materialise in the Year of the Dragon, but there was a slight rise in births in 2024. In total, 33,703 babies were born in 2024, up by 0.5 per cent from the 33,541 born in 2023, according to the Report on Registration of Births and Deaths 2024. The report was released by the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority on July 18. Singapore's birth rate is among the world's lowest, and the Government has been trying for years to get Singaporeans to have more babies. Meanwhile, the number of deaths fell from 26,888 in 2023 to 26,442 in 2024, a drop of 1.7 per cent. This is the first time the number of deaths fell from the previous year in almost a decade, a check by The Straits Times found. With Singapore's rapidly ageing society, the number of deaths has been steadily rising over the decades. The Covid-19 pandemic is likely to have also contributed to the higher number of deaths between 2020 and 2022. The two leading causes of death in 2024 were cancer and heart and hypertensive diseases, which accounted for over half of all deaths here. In February, Ms Indranee Rajah, Minister in the Prime Minister's Office, said that the dragon year effect has been diminishing over the years, reflecting the generational shifts in attitudes and priorities among young couples. Ms Rajah, whose ministry oversees population issues, said the preliminary total fertility rate (TFR), which refers to the average number of babies each woman would have during her reproductive years, remained at 0.97 in 2024. This is the same figure as 2023, when Singapore's TFR fell below 1 for the first time. In February, the total number of babies born in 2024 was not made public yet. In the Chinese zodiac calendar, the Dragon Year has traditionally been considered an auspicious time to have children, as the dragon is associated with good fortune, success and leadership, among other desirable traits. Historically, there has been a baby boom each dragon year, which falls every 12 years in the zodiac cycle. For example, there were 36,178 babies born in 2011 but 38,641 in 2012, which was Year of the Dragon – an increase of 6.8 per cent. The increase in births in the dragon year before that was even higher. In the 2000 dragon year, a total of 44,765 babies were born - an 8.3 per cent jump from the 41,327 babies born in 1999. Over the past two decades, the Government has introduced a slew of measures and benefits to boost the country's birth rate. The Large Families scheme, where families with three or more young children will get more financial benefits and support, was announced in February. Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction Discover how to enjoy other premium articles here
Yahoo
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Meet the Maga moms inspired to have children for Trump
Los Angeles-born and Ivy League-educated, Peachy Keenan isn't the typical picture of a pro-natalist. Yet the married, mother of five is part of a growing movement of mostly Catholic, well-educated women in deep blue California inspired by Donald Trump's calls to have more children. 'To save the country, we need to get out and push the babies out, and to do it in mass scale,' she said. Ms Keenan, who gave up her job to raise her children, aged eight to 19, added: 'When did raising your own baby become this political taboo?' On the campaign trail, Mr Trump pledged to bring about a 'baby boom' to tackle America's ailing birth rate and has since proposed a slew of policies to encourage women to have more children, including paying them. National fertility rates sat at 1.63 per cent last year, slightly higher than a record low set in 2023, but far below the rate needed for a generation to replace itself. The fertility drive has been taken up with abandon by members of Mr Trump's cabinet, with Sean Duffy, the transport secretary and a father of nine, suggesting grants be funnelled into communities with higher marriage and birth rates. His comments echo an agenda pushed by senior Trump allies Elon Musk, a father of 14, and vice-president JD Vance. Whether it's Mr Musk's six-year-old son, X, sitting on his father's shoulder, or Mr Vance's child patting his parents on the head during the inauguration, the second Trump administration has set a new standard for making children a visible part of day-to-day operations. When she's not blasting reporters in the briefing room, the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also occasionally brings her nine-month-old son to the office. 'I am deeply proud to support a president and administration so keenly aware of the attack waged against the family in the West today and doing what they can to combat it,' said Isabel Brown, 27, who captioned a picture of herself on social media, cradling her bump with 'Project 2025'. The married content creator and author gave birth to her first child in recent weeks – the first of several, she hopes. 'The Trump administration has started some powerful conversations here in the United States about our fertility crisis,' she said. 'I can tell you that almost all of my friends are currently getting married, are pregnant, or just had their first babies. 'It's an incredibly exciting time to be at the forefront of this fight for the family.' The goal to supercharge birth rates has created an 'unholy alliance' between two wings of the movement, according to Catherine Pakulak, an economist at the Catholic University of America, who is a mother of eight herself. On one hand, there are pro-family voices such as Mr Vance, who has said he wants 'more babies in America', 'not just because they are economically useful. We want more babies because children are good'. Then there is the pro-natalist wing, led by Mr Musk, who has warned 'civilisation is going to crumble' if fertility rates do not climb. 'You talk about it because it excites part of your base. It's clearly the pro-family and pro-life part of the Republican party,' explained Ms Pakulak. Despite their shared objectives, the two factions' means of achieving their aims could not be more different. Flag-bearers of the pro-natalist movement Simone and Malcolm Collins, a Pennsylvania former tech-industry couple who have four children through IVF, have grabbed headlines by using genetic screening to select desirable characteristics in their offspring. Mr Musk has sparked fascination and outrage in equal measure through his efforts to breed a 'legion' of offspring, in part by recruiting potential mothers on X, according to The Wall Street Journal. For many on the pro-natalist wing, the desire to boost the fertility rate is driven by economic concerns. America's birth rate has been in decline since the early 1970s, and that has accelerated since the 2008 recession and the pandemic. According to Ms Pakulak, the author of Hannah's Children: The Women Quietly Defying the Birth Dearth, the long-term decline is fuelled by a range of factors, including economic growth and mechanisation, whereby children are no longer needed in the workforce; and improved social security, meaning parents no longer need to rely on their children to take care of them in old age. The other driving forces are effective contraception, giving women the ability to select when and how many children they want to have; and economic uncertainty. 'When there is uncertainty and distress, people postpone having children, and some fraction of people who postpone will never have that baby,' she explained. If left unchecked, there are fears the country could end up in a similar position to South Korea or Japan, where a perfect storm of increased life expectancy and a precipitous decline in birth rates to as low as 0.78 has led to economic stagnation, with the shrinking workforce propping up a growing population of retirees. However, discourse around the issue is often coloured by a more contentious vision: one tainted by ethno-nationalism and fears over immigration. A $10,000-a-ticket pro-natalist conference in Austin, Texas, last month featured speakers promoting conspiracy theories and, allegedly, eugenics, according to The Daily Wire. Ms Keenan, who attended this same conference, dismissed these views as belonging to a 'tiny fringe' who are not representative of her community. 'The women I know who are deciding to have kids have literally no idea about population decline,' she said. 'They're not thinking about it in racial terms. They would find that lens super gross and super offensive.' Ms Pakulak said: 'What seems very difficult is to get people to have kids who don't want them.' Birth rates aside, many pro-family Trump supporters are chiefly concerned with the decline in family values and view the single-parenting birth factory goals of Mr Musk as anathema to their own. 'I am incredibly sceptical of any proposal that makes children a means to an end,' said Emma Waters, a policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. And many of those who support the Trump fertility drive remain completely unaware of being part of a political movement. Elissa Fernandez, 43, a mother of eight from Seattle, said she had never heard of pro-natalism, and never set out to have lots of kids, as did Kamiyo Culbertson, 60, a married mother of nine from Washington State. However, Ms Culbertson welcomed Mr Trump's push for women to have more children. 'It's encouraging to hear,' she said. 'I think there's been a leaning the other way – don't get married, don't have kids, that's definitely the story we got from our culture.' Peachy Keenan is the author of Domestic Extremist: A Practical Guide to Winning the Culture War Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Meet the Maga moms inspired to have children for Trump
Los Angeles-born and Ivy League-educated, Peachy Keenan isn't the typical picture of a pro-natalist. Yet the married, mother of five is part of a growing movement of mostly Catholic, well-educated women in deep blue California inspired by Donald Trump 's calls to have more children. 'To save the country, we need to get out and push the babies out, and to do it in mass scale,' she said. Ms Keenan, who gave up her job to raise her children, aged eight to 19, added: 'When did raising your own baby become this political taboo?' On the campaign trail, Mr Trump pledged to bring about a 'baby boom' to tackle America's ailing birth rate and has since proposed a slew of policies to encourage women to have more children, including paying them. National fertility rates sat at 1.63 per cent last year, slightly higher than a record low set in 2023, but far below the rate needed for a generation to replace itself. The fertility drive has been taken up with abandon by members of Mr Trump's cabinet, with Sean Duffy, the transport secretary and a father of nine, suggesting grants be funnelled into communities with higher marriage and birth rates. His comments echo an agenda pushed by senior Trump allies Elon Musk, a father of 14, and vice-president JD Vance. Whether it's Mr Musk's six-year-old son, X, sitting on his father's shoulder, or Mr Vance's child patting his parents on the head during the inauguration, the second Trump administration has set a new standard for making children a visible part of day-to-day operations. When she's not blasting reporters in the briefing room, the White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also occasionally brings her nine-month-old son to the office. 'I am deeply proud to support a president and administration so keenly aware of the attack waged against the family in the West today and doing what they can to combat it,' said Isabel Brown, 27, who captioned a picture of herself on social media, cradling her bump with ' Project 2025 '. The married content creator and author gave birth to her first child in recent weeks – the first of several, she hopes. 'The Trump administration has started some powerful conversations here in the United States about our fertility crisis,' she said. 'I can tell you that almost all of my friends are currently getting married, are pregnant, or just had their first babies. 'It's an incredibly exciting time to be at the forefront of this fight for the family.' The goal to supercharge birth rates has created an 'unholy alliance' between two wings of the movement, according to Catherine Pakulak, an economist at the Catholic University of America, who is a mother of eight herself. On one hand, there are pro-family voices such as Mr Vance, who has said he wants 'more babies in America', 'not just because they are economically useful. We want more babies because children are good'. Then there is the pro-natalist wing, led by Mr Musk, who has warned 'civilisation is going to crumble' if fertility rates do not climb. 'You talk about it because it excites part of your base. It's clearly the pro-family and pro-life part of the Republican party,' explained Ms Pakulak. Despite their shared objectives, the two factions' means of achieving their aims could not be more different. Flag-bearers of the pro-natalist movement Simone and Malcolm Collins, a Pennsylvania former tech-industry couple who have four children through IVF, have grabbed headlines by using genetic screening to select desirable characteristics in their offspring. Mr Musk has sparked fascination and outrage in equal measure through his efforts to breed a 'legion' of offspring, in part by recruiting potential mothers on X, according to The Wall Street Journal. For many on the pro-natalist wing, the desire to boost the fertility rate is driven by economic concerns. America's birth rate has been in decline since the early 1970s, and that has accelerated since the 2008 recession and the pandemic. According to Ms Pakulak, the author of Hannah's Children: The Women Quietly Defying the Birth Dearth, the long-term decline is fuelled by a range of factors, including economic growth and mechanisation, whereby children are no longer needed in the workforce; and improved social security, meaning parents no longer need to rely on their children to take care of them in old age. The other driving forces are effective contraception, giving women the ability to select when and how many children they want to have; and economic uncertainty. 'When there is uncertainty and distress, people postpone having children, and some fraction of people who postpone will never have that baby,' she explained. If left unchecked, there are fears the country could end up in a similar position to South Korea or Japan, where a perfect storm of increased life expectancy and a precipitous decline in birth rates to as low as 0.78 has led to economic stagnation, with the shrinking workforce propping up a growing population of retirees. However, discourse around the issue is often coloured by a more contentious vision: one tainted by ethno-nationalism and fears over immigration. A $10,000-a-ticket pro-natalist conference in Austin, Texas, last month featured speakers promoting conspiracy theories and, allegedly, eugenics, according to The Daily Wire. Ms Keenan, who attended this same conference, dismissed these views as belonging to a 'tiny fringe' who are not representative of her community. 'The women I know who are deciding to have kids have literally no idea about population decline,' she said. 'They're not thinking about it in racial terms. They would find that lens super gross and super offensive.' Ms Pakulak said: 'What seems very difficult is to get people to have kids who don't want them.' Birth rates aside, many pro-family Trump supporters are chiefly concerned with the decline in family values and view the single-parenting birth factory goals of Mr Musk as anathema to their own. 'I am incredibly sceptical of any proposal that makes children a means to an end,' said Emma Waters, a policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. And many of those who support the Trump fertility drive remain completely unaware of being part of a political movement. Elissa Fernandez, 43, a mother of eight from Seattle, said she had never heard of pro-natalism, and never set out to have lots of kids, as did Kamiyo Culbertson, 60, a married mother of nine from Washington State. However, Ms Culbertson welcomed Mr Trump's push for women to have more children. 'It's encouraging to hear,' she said. 'I think there's been a leaning the other way – don't get married, don't have kids, that's definitely the story we got from our culture.'
Wall Street Journal
09-05-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Can Trump Raise the American Birthrate?
Editor's note: In this Future View, students discuss the potential for a baby boom. Next we'll ask: 'Are deportation policies for international college students fair, or should there be more protections in place?' Students should click here to submit opinions of fewer than 250 words by May 5. The best responses will be published Tuesday night. We Need an Economic Boom First If the White House wants a baby boom, its time is best spent trying to orchestrate an economic one. Consider Hungary, whose pronatalist policies are praised by Trump officials. Hungary spends 5% of gross domestic product on pro-birth policies, dwarfing the roughly 3.6% the U.S. spends on defense. Hungary's myriad birthrate inducements include income-tax reductions, subsidized mortgages, child-care allowances and interest-free loans of approximately $36,000, which are canceled if a couple has at least three children. These efforts make President Trump's proposed $5,000 'baby bonus'—the most ambitious pro-birth policy floated by the White House thus far—look paltry in comparison. Even if Mr. Trump proposed such an expensive policy apparatus, it wouldn't be the most efficient use of his political capital. Hungary's approach worked for a time, with the country's fertility rate rising through the 2010s to peak at 1.61 births per woman in 2021. It has declined notably in recent years, however, as birth incentives fail to outweigh rising costs and economic uncertainty. While Hungary's policies may help cushion the birthrate blow caused by a global economic contraction, Mr. Trump can do more if he governs judiciously to steer the U.S., and by extension the world, away from a global recession. It won't be only the U.S. birthrate that benefits from his actions. —Rachel Gambee, University of Oxford, Christian ethics We're All Depressed Why should people who don't feel optimistic about the future choose to procreate? Parenthood offers a purpose larger than oneself—a legacy, something to be proud of. It's a taxing responsibility, however, one that requires stability and hope. When people are anxious, uncertain and depressed, they tend to avoid such responsibilities. A 2016 study found that people satisfied with life are more likely to produce more life. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 42% of high-school students report feeling sad or hopeless most of the time. Another study finds that 58% of young adults feel alone most of the time. This crisis is compounded by economic challenges. A 2021 LinkedIn study found that nearly 40% of entry-level job postings require three years of experience, leaving young Americans shut out, even amid labor shortages. Better mental health, increased economic opportunity and national optimism are the ingredients for a baby boom. The White House must tackle these issues by prioritizing mental-health reform, ensuring fair economic opportunities, and restoring hope in America's future. Only then will we see a future where young Americans feel confident enough to build families and invest in tomorrow. —Mohammad Namous, Moravian University, political science Inspire the Young The Trump administration should champion emerging fertility technology to spur population growth. In vitro fertilization and advanced fertility treatments have transformed the American family's ability to have children. Millions face infertility, and while Mr. Trump supports IVF, his February executive order to expand fertility treatments doesn't do enough. The Trump administration should launch a campaign focused on the consequences of declining birthrates and what new technology can do to mitigate it. It should spotlight Americans who have reshaped society: Who will be the next Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Sally Ride or Sonia Sotomayor? These people, products of a robust generation with robust birthrates, have driven the nation forward. This is an opportunity for the administration to inspire the next generation of Americans. —Devin Mehta, University of Wisconsin-Madison, finance Turn to the Church, Not the White House A birthrate in decline is the mark of a nation in decline. America—like much of the developed world—is no longer maintaining its population through births. While it's encouraging that the Trump administration is concerned, the real problem is one of spiritual well-being. Only a return to religion will usher in a baby boom. America's declining birthrate is often attributed to unaffordable housing and child care, economic immobility and a host of others issues that justify expanded government interference. But this fails to address the root of a global issue. While the world's wealthiest—and least religious—nations are seeing a baby bust, the poorest—and most religious—are witnessing a baby boom. Declining birthrates aren't the result of an economic problem. They are a consequence of a religious problem. The administration still ought to pursue a pro-family agenda. Providing incentives narrowly targeted at young families in need can be helpful. Public policy, however, can go only so far. An encouraging number of young Americans are converting to Catholicism—embracing orthodoxy and tradition. This trend must continue. The administration should be applauded for trying to encourage a baby boom. But the answer will be found in the church, not the White House. —Connor Lee, Gonzaga University, political science Click here to submit a response to next week's Future View.
