3 ms·
It's a fair sentiment. Infertility, while sad, is good population control. Unfortunately, it tends to affect well-educated, high earning people the most. Meanwh
by jbob2000 9y ago
It's a fair sentiment. Infertility, while sad, is good population control. Unfortunately, it tends to affect well-educated, high earning people the most. Meanwhile, teenagers in fly-over county have had 4 children before they hit their 25th birthday.
- DoubleCribble 9y agoPerhaps that's the rub? Had those same well-educated, high earning folks pursued procreation instead of education and careers in their formative years, the infertility later in life wouldn't be a concern (and likely more of a blessing).
- watwut 9y agoIf you are poor, then having children before 25 birthday is likely better choice. The older you are, the more health problems happen and the more tired you are. In that situation, having children while you are still physically strong and healthy is better idea then waiting till you are over 30, tired and cant afford to pay for higher risks. These people wont have better paying jobs when they are older. It makes little difference financially.
- magduf 9y agoThe educated and affluent people having few or no kids, while poor teenagers have lots of them, is not a recipe for the long-term success of a nation or society.
- sushid 9y agoThat sounds like selection bias to me. If you're infertile and uneducated/low earning, then you're not going to be pursuing any IVF options.