[crtified]

My anecdotal experience, which illustrates how changing societal norms may be contributing.

Around 1960, my grandmother scandalously fell pregnant with my mother in her late teens. The child was adopted out - well, not out - in. To her own grandmother, to be raised as a "younger sister" to her own mother.

Around 1980, my mother scandalously fell pregnant with me, in her late teens. Despite family disapproval, the child was had, because it was the done thing. It wasn't a time of simple, easy access to birth control and other procedures.

In the late 90's, my late-teens girlfriend scandalously fell pregnant. Her parents + the medical system swung straight into full control, a termination was a foregone conclusion, and we were simply dragged along by the expectations of society at that time.

I'm heading towards 50 now, and have no children. I guess that "scandalous mistake" is the only real chance some people ever get in life, though they don't know it at the time. And for us, modern society's ways effectively eliminated it.

[UncleMeat]

Abortions are not the primary reason why teen pregnancy is way down. There's actual data, you know.

Fewer teen pregnancies is a reason why birth rates in the US are declining. But it isn't driven by abortion. And it is insane to me that I'm now seeing this "oh actually teen pregnancy wasn't so bad" thing pop up all over the place.

[Aurornis]

It’s strange to see that anecdote so highly upvoted when it’s so trivial to look at birth rates by parental age.

Reduced teen pregnancies are not the driving factor in recent fertility rate declines at all.

It is interesting how an appeal to emotion with a difficult story can lead so many to overlook the obvious shortcomings in that explanation. Honestly this entire comment section has a lot of people making guesses or putting forth their own theories without having even skimmed the article.

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

> And it is insane to me that I'm now seeing this "oh actually teen pregnancy wasn't so bad" thing pop up all over the place.

The other side of this is insane to me... the "oh actually looming human extinction won't be so bad" thing. Sub-replacement fertility rates are slow-motion extinction. Animal models where they "bounce back" is irrelevant, those animals have their extremely high above-replacement fertility all through their famines, plagues, and predator massacres such that when those pressures relent their population recovers. There's no known precedent for raising fertility rates that fall let alone so low.

[senectus1]

While I agree, his experience is also salient.

Ease of access to birth control and ease and safety of abortion will be having a very detectable impact on the birthrate.

Not saying they need to be restricted, just that they're very relevant data points.

[Aeolun]

> actually teen pregnancy wasn't so bad

I mean, it was a thing for most of human history. There’s a reason biology makes you capable of having children at a young age. Isn’t it kinda bizarre that we think it’s weird?

[moralestapia]

>There's actual data, you know.

Did you bother to check it out?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_U...

More than half a million in the US alone, per year. That's material.

[swat535]

I think the uncomfortable truth that many are reluctant to admit is that religion and societal norms (as you highlighted above) played a major role in this.

I'm not discounting other facts such as the housing crisis or cost of living but I fear that while those are important, they are secondary.

Women were often forced to carry a child due to outside pressure and had no recourse. However since the introduction of safe abortions and readily accessible birth control methods, they have regained their bodily autonomy which allows them to skip unwanted pregnancies.

I think that ultimately, liberating women is a _good_ thing because child bearing is difficult and no one women should be forced to go through it.

With all that said, having children can be wonderful. Perhaps a better solution is to both celebrate and encourage families while keeping abortion and birth control accessible. It doesn't have to be a binary choice.

[sebmellen]

The issue is not so much the access to the methods, but the negative feedback loop that they cause. For every woman freed from unwanted childbearing, how many are socially pressured into not having a child?

Anecdotally, this is something that my wife and I experienced as relatively young parents (~24 at first child): people expect abortion to be the default. I can't tell you how many people asked us when we were going to “just get rid of the thing” because they expected that to be the default option. We have no idea how damaging this effect is to overall fertility.

The saddest part is that many women will get to an age where they do want to have one or more children, but because they are closer to the end of their fertile window, they cannot. I’ve seen this happen to my extended friends and family far more than the “unwanted pregnancy” scenario, which I’ve only seen happen once.

Fundamentally, there's perhaps a broader philosophical divide. Do you believe that children are burdensome, or the most valuable thing you can produce in life? If you think the former, it's nearly impossible to feel any motivation to tolerate the difficulty of pregnancy and childbearing.

[seanmcdirmid]

Having kids when you are young and financially not established is just irresponsible, but particularly female bodies don’t do well having kids older when you are established enough to do so responsibly. I’m having this problem right now with my spouse (we have a kid, but are thinking about another), it’s just super hard to get pregnant without medical help.

[sebmellen]

Why? Can you defend this for me? I'm genuinely asking. Why is it irresponsible to have a child when you're young and financially not established? Why is it any more irresponsible to do that than to have children at a geriatric age?

Children are resilient, and so are parents.

In my opinion, this idea that you have to have everything perfectly set up in life before you can contemplate having a child is ridiculous.

[evilsetg]

Maybe we as a society should decide that having children is fine when you don't have a stable career yet and finance it as such. The contradiction that our most fertile years are also the most unstable is something society could and should balance.

EDIT: typo

[MagicMoonlight]

Or alternatively, it’s a great idea because your parents can then help raise them and you can then start a career without worrying about having babies. Imagine being 25, already having your kids, and you never need to go on leave.

[redeeman]

are you saying that everyone in poor countries barely making it by are being "just irresponsible" when they decide they want to have kids?

this seems very elitist, possibly racist, and certainly could indicate that your view might be wrong, given the literal billions chosing to do this.

[dyauspitr]

There are also huge probability multipliers in congenital and cognitive problems with late pregnancies.

[squigz]

Don't the difficulties in pregnancy related to age tend to come up around 40 or older?

I don't think the choices need to be "have children at 19 years old" or "have children at 40" - surely having kids at 30-35 is still physically fine and gives you some time to become more financially secure?

[thrownearacc]

Oh, I’m sure some “anecdotal” stories will come up, painting a perfect picture of the “good old days” — without calling them that, of course. Here's one then:

Take my great-grandfather, for example. 56, falls head over heels for a 14-year-old girl from church, and boom — 30 days later, they’re married. 8 months later, my grandfather’s born. They stayed married for 50 years. My grandmother was 16 when she married my 47-year-old grandfather after a chance meeting in the woods, and, guess what, smooth pregnancy again. My parents? Same song, different verse. Now, fast forward to today: I broke up with my girlfriend (late 30s, early 40s) because we wanted kids, but couldn’t conceive — and back then when were were younger and when we could, I couldn’t afford it. See, back then, the older man was not only virile but also financially set, while the young woman could pop out babies at the drop of pants.

Yeah, those “good old days” sound amazing. Make World Pregnant Again.

[squigz]

Your 56 year old great grandfather married a 14 year old girl and was married for 50 years?

[crtified]

It's actually interesting what underlying prejudices readers project upon the anecdotes of others.

In actual fact, I was merely offering a data point. I have no agenda, I am not in the slightest anti-abortion, I am not against 100% female bodily autonomy, I do not consider past generations to be "the good old days" - the events I described were traumatic for everybody involved - and I do not profess to be qualified to draw any conclusions, or to claim that what happened to me is why the world has changed.

I can only see certain cause and effect chains relating to my own generational situation, and suggested that such changing norms may be one factor in the mix. May.

[Exoristos]

Extraordinary how poverty makes a family impossible but only in certain ZIP codes.

[jalapenos]

I mean, at least you're not propagating that woods-rapist line?

[jeffbee]

I'm not sure this scans really because teenage births as well as teenage pregnancies enjoyed a local peak around 1990. There certainly was not a general pan-American societal instinct against teenage births at that time. The rate has fallen by more than 75% since. Even the mother-under-15 birth rate in 1990 was ridiculous (about 10x more than today, in most states).

[dragonwriter]

The local peak around 1990 was a very small bump from the flat run through the 1980s, and was probably a brief rebound effect of the extreme negative social pressure related to unprotected casual sex stemming from the AIDS crisis fading a bit as that became perceived as less acute of a threat, and there numbers dropped rapidly after that peak, quickly going through the floor they had settled in during the long flat period preceding the brief rise and peak.

So it is not at all inconsistent with a strong social force against teenage births existing and being acted on in the late 1990s, in fact, had that not existed the rise up to the 1990 peak would probably not have been so brief and followed by a rapid drop that went straight through the preceding floor.

[wahern]

Teenage births peaked in the late 1950s, by a significant margin. See https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/08/02/why-is-th...

It's difficult to find teenage pregnancy rates before 1972, let alone multiple sources, but if you look at Guttmacher's numbers both teenage pregnancy and abortion rates ramped up significantly between the late 1970s and early 1990s. See https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/pubs/UST... Teenage abortions rates are even more difficult to find before 1972, but abortion certainly existed in the 1950s, and given the birth rate it's possible teenage pregnancy rates were also higher in the 1950s and 60s.

Also, notwithstanding that the data does coincide with the given narrative, one must also consider socio-economic and cultural factors--pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates aren't homogenous across groups. For example, the OP (or their girlfriend) could have been from a segment of society at the trailing edge of a trend.

[pjc50]

> scandalously

Yes. Society hates teen pregnancy. Some societies will carve out an exception for married teens, which is a whole other can of worms. This is not a change in norms, it's the victory of the norms. People have been told not to have children until they are ready, and finally compliance with that is pretty high.

There were even worse alternatives, like the mass grave at Tuam or the Victorian practice of "baby farming". https://www.bbc.com/news/extra/4ko2zsk2tb/Tuam

The short way to get a baby boom is to make it OK to be a less than perfect parent.

[squigz]

> The short way to get a baby boom is to make it OK to be a less than perfect parent.

There are still lots and lots of shitty parents out there.

[jalapenos]

No, parents just hate not being in absolute control over their kids, and an unmarried teen pregnancy is an extreme case of such non-control.

[MarkusWandel]

I like this. It has nothing to do with the "big picture" in birth rates, but it's a personal story. Mine is simpler. My dad had a societal expectation to be married - a position he was eyeing was only open to married men. My mom was the best bet at the time. Here I am. This, too is a scenario that is no longer applicable.

[mensetmanusman]

My mother was also the product of a failed abortion. Crazy to think how different the world would be. Now I have 8 kids!

[KolibriFly]

It's a perspective that often gets lost in the macro-level fertility discussions: how many births never happen not because people don’t want kids, but because the only off-ramp they might've taken got paved over by modern expectations, norms and etc

[squigz]

In the past, how many people had kids not because they wanted to but because of social expectations, norms, etc?

[Qem]

I'm sorry for your loss.

[lisbbb]

What loss? It was not her but her "girlfriend" which I don't even know how to correctly interpret these days. Is she saying it was her love interest or just a friend who is female? Heaven knows!

Kids aren't even dating anymore hardly. My son (15) is having a horrible time navigating social interactions. The girls at his school are all horrible people, it seems (not true, I'm sure, but I constantly have to hear about how he is treated like crap by the girls all the time).

[pyuser583]

No you are not heading towards 50 if you were born in 1980. You are nowhere near 50, and I refuse to believe otherwise!

[csomar]

Oh it’s sure birth control that’s doing it and not the backward societal norms that are still sticking.

Thanks for pointing out that the baby boom happened by accidental births and confirming it with your own anecdotal evidence.

[moralestapia]

I'm really sorry to hear this, and truly wish things have turned out differently.

Kids are a phenomenal experience.

I concur with you, social pressure is a defining element on having/not having them.

[ponector]

Better to have abortion than unwanted child. Usually it's quite miserable childhood for a kid.

[eli_gottlieb]

> In the late 90's, my late-teens girlfriend scandalously fell pregnant.

And whose fault was that, eh?

[crtified]

Partly her parents, for refusing to allow her to go on birth control as a preventative in advance. She did ask. Back then, in my country, parental approval was required by law for people under a certain age. That has since changed.

Unfortunately it took a lot more than asking (i.e. it took "a pregnancy") before they took her seriously.

But primarily, yes, my fault and her fault.

[jalapenos]

Congratulations on not having been killed

Shame you didn't ensure the same for your own kid

[crtified]

I am not sure how you think a 17 year old kid with ZERO legal or social rights or family support or money was somehow meant to overpower the iron will of the girl's furious parents (who in turn intractably convinced the girl herself), whose roof she still lived under - being in the final years of high school - and the medical fraternity, and the laws of my country, and the will of society. What was I supposed to do? Lock her in a tower?

But congratulations on shallowly judging people as murderers on a whim. Perhaps you might consider how that is a less than ideal characteristic, if caring about the lives of human beings is your actual goal here.

[2OEH8eoCRo0]

My grandmother was scandalously had. If abortion had been legal her entire family tree wouldn't exist. Me, my dozen or so cousins, my father, aunts, all gone.

That's why my father is against abortion.

[lazyasciiart]

What terrible reasoning. Does that mean that if he were the child of rape he’d be pro-rape? Anything that would have prevented his existence is bad?

[refurb]

Underrated comment right here.

When the baseline belief in society goes from “make it work” to “better to end the pregnancy” it shouldn’t be surprising that overall the number of birth goes way down.

[groby_b]

The US sees about 20K teen pregnancy abortions.

That's probably not why the number of births is way down.

Number of births in the US are ~3.6M right now. We also have 1M abortions per year. That's - if abortions were the sole problem - 4.6M births / 330M people.

Except... It was 4.3M births / 177M people in 1960. Double the current rate. It dropped off sharply right after the 1960s. Not coincidentally right when the pill was introduced.

It never was about "better end the pregnancy". It was always about women having a say, instead of being default-delegated to brood mare.

We landed in a ~stable equilibrium with that, with a TFR of 2.1 in 1990. And then live births dropped again, like a stone. And, oddly, so did abortions. Which implies that the likely problem is a drop in pregnancies in the 1990s.

Teen abortions are a tiny irrelevant side show compared to this. So maybe let's not speculate on "baseline beliefs of society" based on what's noise in the statistics.

[rsync]

I thought your anecdote was interesting and thought provoking and I appreciate that you posted it. Thank you.

I am disappointed at the hostile reaction it provoked in some others ... as if you, or your anecdote, reminded them of something that angered them and they lost track of the difference.

[crtified]

Thank you! I have taken any off-tone responses in stride, on the understanding that child-bearing is a very contentious and emotional issue for many.

[Yeul]

Only until recently women were basically property who got no say in what they wanted.

You either got married to a man who protected you or you got raped. That's it.

[scottyah]

I think the point of the post is that society has changed its stance on having kids. People who aren't purposefully branching out on their own and are just "going with the flow" of their external influences are more likely to not have kids. Everyone still has the choice, but the default has changed for most of us.

[g-mork]

This is a shocking take. I can personally attest (in my 40s) to the pressure felt from professionals during the foetal abnormality scan, pregnancy especially a first time pregnancy is an incredibly vulnerable and difficult experience where those you're surrounded with in every context have massively outsized influence on your otherwise clueless state.

Our baby had no abnormalities, but the language and presentation of the doctor almost had me ready for violence. It's easy to understand from his perspective - he must dehumanize the thing in many cases he is going to encourage you to abort, and if that is what he recommends, it's a recommendation that would have carried tremendous authority for both parents, who would then have immediately acted upon each other.

[Tsiklon]

I feel this isn’t so generous a response. This person is describing their lived in experience, coloured by the time and experiences they’ve had since. They certainly recognise that it would have been a moment that had things transpired differently would have dramatically altered the course of their life.

I read their remarks as a somewhat mournful expression of a desire to follow “the road not travelled”.

[mapotofu]

I honestly don’t know how you can say this. When my son was born, we were asked enough times about circumcision that it seemed like a battle to get to “no”. (USA)

The system has a system and a narrative. If you’re working against the narrative you have to be very prepared.

[andrewmcwatters]

I read a lot of stupid, vapid, ridiculous things frequently posted on Hacker News, and this is not one of them. It's just a human experience.