5 ms·

More to the point, there is a curious social stigma around having children before you enter your 30s that has developed. The idea that you should "play the fie

More to the point, there is a curious social stigma around having children before you enter your 30s that has developed. The idea that you should "play the field" is part of it, but I'm not sure that tells the whole story. There seems to have been a concerted effort to reduce pregnancies among younger women. In fact, programs like "16 and Pregnant" and "Teen Mom", which follow young mothers in their teens and 20s, were, according to their creator, meant as a "cautionary tale" to reduce pregnancy rates. In modern culture, "rural hick" even conjures up images of a young mother. Not the image most want to portray, which is a powerful social tool. Equally curious, once you enter your 30s all of a sudden the social norms flip to "why haven't you had children yet?", "the clock is ticking", etc. However, once you are in your 30s, there are some rather hard limits to how many children you can practically have.

pjc50 7y ago
As others have said, having children very early is unsafe, and it's a demanding job that requires emotional maturity to do well. Having children before you have economic independence is also a very bad idea. But your 20s are also critical from a career point of view. Women still have to fight a lot of prejudice from employers, which translates into trying to show commitment to career by delaying children. The UK now has a very soft "two child policy": you won't normally get paid child benefit for children beyond two. The US has a ludicrous healthcare system where simply giving birth can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Also, they don't call it labour for nothing: it's a physically demanding, uncomfortable process.
jcater 7y ago
Not only are there hard limits, but at age 35, suddenly it’s considered a “geriatric pregnancy”. The risk of complications go up.
watwut 7y ago
Pregnancies at 16 have very real health risks and 16 years old are not ready to be parents yet, not ready to be independent either. There is nothing curious or odd about the end.
wasdfff 7y ago
I think its less stigma but economic realities that are driving this. People have too much debt and not enough income and are too early in their careers in their 20s to comfortably take time off to have a kid or pay for childcare.
- randomdata 7y ago
  > People have too much debt For what? Less than half of Americans, aged 25-34, have a post secondary education. Less than half of Americans in the same age range own a home. The same age group are much more likely to reject car ownership than generations past. Outside of those purchases, it is not common for young people to take on debt. You no doubt describe a minority, but the majority aren't putting any effort into picking up the slack. Birth rates are falling in all walks of life. > not enough income Or too much income? There is a very strong correlation between being poor and having more children. At the extreme, the women of Niger have over 7 children each, on average. Even the least paid people in America are living like kings in comparison to the people of Niger. But even within America, the reason the "rural hick" is oft associated with young mothers is because rural areas tend to be poorer and poorer people are more likely to have more children. > are too early in their careers in their 20s to comfortably take time off to have a kid While the average reader on HN is certainly career driven, most people are not. "You need to focus on your career" is a line that has been used to deter 20-somethings from having children. I'm not sure that is the same as them actually focusing on their career. Most people simply find what work is available to them, trudge through the day, and then go home as soon as possible to not have to think about work again until tomorrow.
  - Analemma_ 7y ago
    > For what? Less than half of Americans, aged 25-34, have a post secondary education. Less than half of Americans in the same age range own a home. The same age group are much more likely to reject car ownership than generations past. Outside of those purchases, it is not common for young people to take on debt. But the job prospects and odds of financial security for people without a college degree have cratered, and so they're still unable to support a family. Pick your poison: either stable income but a shitload of debt, or no debt but no income, and neither is a good place to start having children. College in America now is damned if you do, damned if you don't.

pjc50 7y ago

As others have said, having children very early is unsafe, and it's a demanding job that requires emotional maturity to do well. Having children before you have economic independence is also a very bad idea. But your 20s are also critical from a career point of view. Women still have to fight a lot of prejudice from employers, which translates into trying to show commitment to career by delaying children. The UK now has a very soft "two child policy": you won't normally get paid child benefit for children beyond two. The US has a ludicrous healthcare system where simply giving birth can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Also, they don't call it labour for nothing: it's a physically demanding, uncomfortable process.

jcater 7y ago

Not only are there hard limits, but at age 35, suddenly it’s considered a “geriatric pregnancy”. The risk of complications go up.

watwut 7y ago

Pregnancies at 16 have very real health risks and 16 years old are not ready to be parents yet, not ready to be independent either. There is nothing curious or odd about the end.

wasdfff 7y ago

I think its less stigma but economic realities that are driving this. People have too much debt and not enough income and are too early in their careers in their 20s to comfortably take time off to have a kid or pay for childcare.

randomdata 7y ago
> People have too much debt For what? Less than half of Americans, aged 25-34, have a post secondary education. Less than half of Americans in the same age range own a home. The same age group are much more likely to reject car ownership than generations past. Outside of those purchases, it is not common for young people to take on debt. You no doubt describe a minority, but the majority aren't putting any effort into picking up the slack. Birth rates are falling in all walks of life. > not enough income Or too much income? There is a very strong correlation between being poor and having more children. At the extreme, the women of Niger have over 7 children each, on average. Even the least paid people in America are living like kings in comparison to the people of Niger. But even within America, the reason the "rural hick" is oft associated with young mothers is because rural areas tend to be poorer and poorer people are more likely to have more children. > are too early in their careers in their 20s to comfortably take time off to have a kid While the average reader on HN is certainly career driven, most people are not. "You need to focus on your career" is a line that has been used to deter 20-somethings from having children. I'm not sure that is the same as them actually focusing on their career. Most people simply find what work is available to them, trudge through the day, and then go home as soon as possible to not have to think about work again until tomorrow.
- Analemma_ 7y ago
  > For what? Less than half of Americans, aged 25-34, have a post secondary education. Less than half of Americans in the same age range own a home. The same age group are much more likely to reject car ownership than generations past. Outside of those purchases, it is not common for young people to take on debt. But the job prospects and odds of financial security for people without a college degree have cratered, and so they're still unable to support a family. Pick your poison: either stable income but a shitload of debt, or no debt but no income, and neither is a good place to start having children. College in America now is damned if you do, damned if you don't.