Latest news with #pro-natalist
The Independent
30-06-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
‘Have more children' is simplistic and idealistic – who can afford to start a family, minister?
Bridget Phillipson has come up with a canny idea to get Britain's 'worrying' birth rate back up – have more kids. As official data showed fertility rates in England and Wales dropped to 1.44 children per woman in 2023, the education secretary warned of the 'worrying repercussions' posed by a decline in birth rates; saying she wants 'more young people to have children, if they so choose'. To which we can only say: if only it were that simple, minister. 'Have more children' may have a nice ring to it (though it does smack a little of the weird pro-natalist couple Simone and Malcolm Collins, responsible for telling Trump how to up the birth rate) – but who can afford to start or expand a family, in this economy? Phillipson did admit that she realises people are having fewer children as a consequence of higher costs of living, but her sentimental platitudes – she told the Daily Telegraph falling birth rates were not only a concerning trend but one which 'tells a story, heartbreakingly, about the dashed dreams of many families' – ring hollow to the pragmatists amongst us. Where Phillipson falls down is in stopping short of providing a real and actionable solution – like slashing the cost of childcare for all children, whenever parents need it. At the moment, working parents can access 15 hours of free childcare for children aged 9-months to two (this is increasing to 30 hours from September 2025). Meanwhile, all three and four-year-olds get 15 hours of free childcare per week – with some families eligible for 30 hours if both parents are working. Single parents, meanwhile, should be able to claim 30 hours – but it can be a nightmare to find a childcare setting that receives enough funding to offer it. Plus, single parents on Universal Credit using the Tax-Free Childcare scheme run into even greater difficulty, as you cannot claim both at the same time. Complicated? I'd say – and it's clear to see how the UK is letting parents down when you compare it to the Swedish model, which is, simply: a universal, publicly funded, municipally-run preschool system for children aged one to five. Sweden was the first country in the world to introduce paid parental leave for fathers; and last year it launched a ground-breaking new law that allows grandparents to step in and get paid parental leave. If only it were the same in Britain. Rather than being simple and clear-cut, Phillipson's solution of 'just have more babies' is achingly idealistic – and naive. And going full The Handmaid's Tale and putting the burden on women to breed isn't helpful; it's actively damaging. It plays right into the hands of the burgeoning 'trad wife' lifestyle that has started to seep over from the US – with worrying backing from the far-right, including the anti-abortion lobby who were responsible (along with Donald Trump) for overturning Roe v Wade. We already know that it is women who are expected to bear the literal and metaphorical weight of having a child, but we also have to take the hit with our careers. Some 74,000 women lose their jobs every year for getting pregnant or taking maternity leave, a marked increase on a decade ago; plus women are two thirds less likely than men to get promoted at work after having children. Then there's the additional domestic and emotional labour associated with motherhood: research from the University of Alberta, investigating the split of duties in the home for heterosexual couples, found that women not only do the lion's share of the housework at the start of their relationships – but for years onwards. In fact, women's domestic workload 'only increased during the child-rearing years". Meanwhile, childcare costs in the UK are still 'crippling' working parents, with tens of thousands of people in the UK left feeling strapped, trapped and desperate, despite the rollout of free school meals for half a million children, free school breakfast clubs (part of a trial that's only running until July) and the expansion of government-funded childcare (if your child is aged between nine months and four years old and you live in England). The cost of having kids has never been more real – over on Mumsnet, one commenter recently revealed her entire £45,000 annual salary was 'wiped out' by the soaring sums of childcare for two children. The Family and Childcare Trust found in 2015 that it simply 'does not pay to work'. Has anything really changed? I am out of the immediate disaster years when it comes to paying for all-day childcare, as both of mine are at school – but I do still pay for wraparound care, by way of breakfast clubs and after-school pick ups, which comes to more than £500 a month. Before that, my family was just one of those shelling out £8,400 a year for three days per week of childcare at a London nursery. And I was one of the 'lucky' ones – I know parents who pay as much as £30,000 a year to a nanny who's 'on call' whenever they need her. Over the summer holidays, some of my peers spend £4,000 on ad-hoc care. And while it might be inconveniently pricey for some parents, it is devastating for others. Research shows that parents and carers on the lowest incomes – single parents, those on universal credit, those with disabilities or with a Black ethnic background – are most impacted by childcare costs. One in three with a household income of less than £20,000 have to cut back on essential food or housing as a direct result of bills relating to childcare. 'Have more kids' is a lazy solution that can't work in a broken system. Perhaps Bridget Phillipson should be paying more attention to why more and more people are choosing to be child-free?
Yahoo
01-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Can Nigel Farage boost Britain's birth rate?
As Sir Keir Starmer continued to drag his feet over one of the most contentious policy issues among Labour MPs and voters, Nigel Farage spotted an opportunity. Proclaiming during a speech last week that Britain had 'lost our sense of focus of just how important family is', the Reform UK leader unveiled plans to lure frustrated Labour voters while also attempting to arrest a decline in the UK's birth rate. Farage pledged that an elected Reform would scrap the two-child benefit cap and introduce a transferable tax allowance for married couples, in a bid to encourage people to have children. 'This is part of a bigger package and policy that we are putting together to try and make the family a more important element in British life,' said Farage. It marks the party's move into pro-natalist policies. This embedded content is not available in your region. Reform's proposed transferable tax allowance for married couples takes inspiration from central Europe. During his time in office Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian prime minister, has placed significant focus on the importance of birth rates and traditional families. Earlier this week, Farage said he was 'not moralising' on the significance of marriage and added that having been divorced twice his 'track record was not so good on this'. Reform's policy would exempt one partner in a marriage from paying tax on the first £25,000 of their salary. Ben Ramanauskas, a senior fellow in economics at the Policy Exchange, says the proposal would bring the UK 'into a territory where most European countries are'. He adds: 'They have a much more generous system when it comes to taxing households and families.' However, Ramanauskas cast doubt on the idea that the measure could encourage couples to have children: 'The proposal itself won't have much of an impact on what Farage is aiming for in terms of hoping to increase the birth rate.' Reform's plans also miss out a key group of would-be parents. More than half of children in the UK are born to couples out of wedlock. So with the transferable tax allowance only reserved for married couples, the baby boosting effect of the policy is unclear. The party has also said it would scrap the two child benefit cap, a pledge which is estimated to cost £3.4bn, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Tomáš Sobotka, deputy director at the Vienna Institute of Demography, says abolishing the cap would help to lift children out of poverty but its impact on Britain's birth rate is likely to be 'marginal'. 'Most parents today don't desire more than two kids so it's a select group of women and families who are having a third or a fourth child,' he says. 'Providing a bit more in services … will not change fertility planning among many couples.' In Hungary, Orbán's attempts to fix the country's birth crisis mean it spends around 5pc of its GDP on measures aimed at encouraging couples to have children. The most significant of these measures is the country's large tax breaks. Currently mothers under 30 pay no income tax and mothers with three or more children are exempt from paying income tax for life. Orbán has also pledged to extend the measure to mothers of two children by January 2026. The government also offers loans to newly-weds that can be partially or fully written off if the couple has two or three children – as well as subsidies for family car purchases and housing. Despite Orbán's significant spending and hopes of a baby boom, Hungary's birth rate stood at 1.52 children per woman in 2022, in the UK it was 1.53 children per woman in 2021. For context, a country needs a fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman to ensure it has a stable population, without immigration. 'In the last few years Hungary has experienced fertility declines to the same extent as other countries and it now has exactly the same fertility rate as the European average ... from that perspective Hungarian policies are not bringing in tremendous success,' says Sobotka. But Orbán's focus on large families is helping to deliver an uptick in the number of households with three or more children, Sobotka adds. In the Nordics, the picture isn't any clearer. Finland pioneered the introduction of family friendly policies including parental leave and childcare from the 1980s onwards. The country reported a rise in its birth rates in the 1990s despite going through a financial crisis. 'Introducing these kinds of policies if they are long term … longer parental leave and especially affordable childcare have been shown in a wealth of studies both in the Nordic countries and from other countries to be associated with somewhat higher fertility,' says Anna Rotkirch, of the Family Federation of Finland's Population Research Institute. However, she warns these measures 'are not enough for today's situation,' and that 'there's no silver bullet policy.' Indeed, the initial boost to Finland's birth rate in the late 20th century has waned and since 2010 the country has seen its birth rate decline by a third. Yet, Rotkirch says that while government spending and Reform's proposed policies might not have much of a demographic impact they were an important element in reducing child poverty. 'The cost of parenting is real and it is also economic,' she adds. 'Why do we have a society where you get poorer if you have a child?' Over in South Korea the picture is even more challenging. In May 2024, the then-president Yoon Suk Yeol asked for the parliament's cooperation to establish the Ministry of Low Birth Rate Counter-planning. 'We will mobilise all of the nation's capabilities to overcome the low birth rate, which can be considered a national emergency,' he said. The country has gone through a raft of measures including baby bonuses, subsidised fertility treatments and housing assistance but the country's fertility rate stood at 0.78 children per woman in 2024. Melinda Mills, a professor of demography at Oxford University say: 'They've also shown that throwing a lot of money at it doesn't work so you have to get to the root of people's lives. What are their work hours? Where do they live and work? Where's childcare?' One nation that has a slight edge in the birth rate compared to its European neighbours is France. Mills added that France's more comprehensive package of subsidised childcare, parental leave and school support goes some way in encouraging couples to have children. Indeed the measures seem to be having a small effect on the country's fertility rate, which was 1.8 children per woman in 2021 compared to the EU average of 1.53 during the same year. 'It's harder work than throwing a baby bonus and trying to think you could do a silver bullet but actually creating an ecosystem that has childcare, that has good maternity and paternity leave, has a good work-life balance – that's where France has done very well,' says Mills. However, it's clear that there is no one pro-natalist policy which will act as a catalyst to boost birth rates. While Farage's proposed Hungarian-style tax breaks look unlikely to persuade couples to have children, Mills explained that measures which addressed quality of life were likely to be more impactful. 'People need a good life, they need good jobs, be able to get a house, childcare,' says Mills. 'It's about wellbeing, it's about work-life balance. That's not as sexy … but these are the things that have been shown to be more effective.'
Telegraph
01-06-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Can Nigel Farage really boost Britain's birth rate?
As Sir Keir Starmer continued to drag his feet over one of the most contentious policy issues among Labour MPs and voters, Nigel Farage spotted an opportunity. Proclaiming during a speech last week that Britain had 'lost our sense of focus of just how important family is', the Reform UK leader unveiled plans to lure frustrated Labour voters while also attempting to arrest a decline in the UK's birth rate. Farage pledged that an elected Reform would scrap the two-child benefit cap and introduce a transferable tax allowance for married couples, in a bid to encourage people to have children. 'This is part of a bigger package and policy that we are putting together to try and make the family a more important element in British life,' said Farage. It marks the party's move into pro-natalist policies. Reform's proposed transferable tax allowance for married couples takes inspiration from central Europe. During his time in office Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian prime minister, has placed significant focus on the importance of birth rates and traditional families. Earlier this week, Farage said he was 'not moralising' on the significance of marriage and added that having been divorced twice his 'track record was not so good on this'. Reform's policy would exempt one partner in a marriage from paying tax on the first £25,000 of their salary. Ben Ramanauskas, a senior fellow in economics at the Policy Exchange, says the proposal would bring the UK 'into a territory where most European countries are'. He adds: 'They have a much more generous system when it comes to taxing households and families.' However, Ramanauskas cast doubt on the idea that the measure could encourage couples to have children: 'The proposal itself won't have much of an impact on what Farage is aiming for in terms of hoping to increase the birth rate.' Reform's plans also miss out a key group of would-be parents. More than half of children in the UK are born to couples out of wedlock. So with the transferable tax allowance only reserved for married couples, the baby boosting effect of the policy is unclear. The party has also said it would scrap the two child benefit cap, a pledge which is estimated to cost £3.4bn, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Tomáš Sobotka, deputy director at the Vienna Institute of Demography, says abolishing the cap would help to lift children out of poverty but its impact on Britain's birth rate is likely to be 'marginal'. 'Most parents today don't desire more than two kids so it's a select group of women and families who are having a third or a fourth child,' he says. 'Providing a bit more in services … will not change fertility planning among many couples.' In Hungary, Orbán's attempts to fix the country's birth crisis mean it spends around 5pc of its GDP on measures aimed at encouraging couples to have children. The most significant of these measures is the country's large tax breaks. Currently mothers under 30 pay no income tax and mothers with three or more children are exempt from paying income tax for life. Orbán has also pledged to extend the measure to mothers of two children by January 2026. The government also offers loans to newly-weds that can be partially or fully written off if the couple has two or three children – as well as subsidies for family car purchases and housing. Despite Orbán's significant spending and hopes of a baby boom, Hungary's birth rate stood at 1.52 children per woman in 2022, in the UK it was 1.53 children per woman in 2021. For context, a country needs a fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman to ensure it has a stable population, without immigration. 'In the last few years Hungary has experienced fertility declines to the same extent as other countries and it now has exactly the same fertility rate as the European average ... from that perspective Hungarian policies are not bringing in tremendous success,' says Sobotka. But Orbán's focus on large families is helping to deliver an uptick in the number of households with three or more children, Sobotka adds. In the Nordics, the picture isn't any clearer. Finland pioneered the introduction of family friendly policies including parental leave and childcare from the 1980s onwards. The country reported a rise in its birth rates in the 1990s despite going through a financial crisis. 'Introducing these kinds of policies if they are long term … longer parental leave and especially affordable childcare have been shown in a wealth of studies both in the Nordic countries and from other countries to be associated with somewhat higher fertility,' says Anna Rotkirch, of the Family Federation of Finland's Population Research Institute. 'No silver bullet policy' However, she warns these measures 'are not enough for today's situation,' and that 'there's no silver bullet policy.' Indeed, the initial boost to Finland's birth rate in the late 20th century has waned and since 2010 the country has seen its birth rate decline by a third. Yet, Rotkirch says that while government spending and Reform's proposed policies might not have much of a demographic impact they were an important element in reducing child poverty. 'The cost of parenting is real and it is also economic,' she adds. 'Why do we have a society where you get poorer if you have a child?' Over in South Korea the picture is even more challenging. In May 2024, the then-president Yoon Suk Yeol asked for the parliament's cooperation to establish the Ministry of Low Birth Rate Counter-planning. 'We will mobilise all of the nation's capabilities to overcome the low birth rate, which can be considered a national emergency,' he said. The country has gone through a raft of measures including baby bonuses, subsidised fertility treatments and housing assistance but the country's fertility rate stood at 0.78 children per woman in 2024. Melinda Mills, a professor of demography at Oxford University say: 'They've also shown that throwing a lot of money at it doesn't work so you have to get to the root of people's lives. What are their work hours? Where do they live and work? Where's childcare?' One nation that has a slight edge in the birth rate compared to its European neighbours is France. Mills added that France's more comprehensive package of subsidised childcare, parental leave and school support goes some way in encouraging couples to have children. Indeed the measures seem to be having a small effect on the country's fertility rate, which was 1.8 children per woman in 2021 compared to the EU average of 1.53 during the same year. 'It's harder work than throwing a baby bonus and trying to think you could do a silver bullet but actually creating an ecosystem that has childcare, that has good maternity and paternity leave, has a good work-life balance – that's where France has done very well,' says Mills. However, it's clear that there is no one pro-natalist policy which will act as a catalyst to boost birth rates. While Farage's proposed Hungarian-style tax breaks look unlikely to persuade couples to have children, Mills explained that measures which addressed quality of life were likely to be more impactful. 'People need a good life, they need good jobs, be able to get a house, childcare,' says Mills. 'It's about wellbeing, it's about work-life balance. That's not as sexy … but these are the things that have been shown to be more effective.'
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.'
