Nov 25, 2025, 12:00 PM ETInterview, Fireside Chat

Fertility declined 4.5x faster after 2016. Why?

Global fertility rates declined 0.04 per year between 2006–2016, but the rate of decline accelerated by 4.5-fold from 2016–2023.
Projections for 2023 suggest population halving occurs every generation in countries with fertility rates near 1.0 (e.g., UK) and a 25% reduction per generation in countries with rates near 1.5 (e.g., US).
Financial cost is identified as a poor explanation for declining fertility, as countries and individuals have become wealthier while fertility crashes.
Opportunity costs have increased because the "quantity and quality of non-child options" (internet, digital content, careers) have expanded enormously in the digital age.
Social norms have shifted such that 63% of young people viewed having children as essential to a flourishing life in 1993, dropping to 25% today.
Relationship availability has decreased, with the fraction of people aged 25–35 in relationships dropping from 67% in 1990 to 53.5% in the EU.
The rise of women's financial independence reduces the pragmatic necessity of forming relationships for economic support, leading to more singlehood.
Conservative and liberal populations now show diverging fertility trends; liberal groups have seen fertility drop twice as fast as conservative groups, creating a 1.17 vs 2.2 child gap.
Policy interventions like cash transfers have limited efficacy; even spending 1–2% of GDP yields only marginal increases (0.2–0.3 fertility points) because it is difficult to target only "marginal" births.

The "intensive parenting" ideal (a mother staying home to do 90%+ of childcare) is described as a "complete historical aberration" with no precedent in human history.
Historical norms involved cooperative parenting where children interacted with multiple caregivers (siblings, extended family) rather than single-parent attention.
Modern parents face intense pressure to actively entertain children, a shift from the 18th-century norm where children entertained themselves via peer play.
Current social norms dictate that parents must feel guilt if a child is bored, whereas past generations viewed boredom as a catalyst for self-entertainment.
Evidence suggests children do not require constant, one-on-one parental engagement to develop secure attachments; multiple caregivers and ~33% parental attention appear sufficient.
There is a perceived "feminist rage" regarding the biological burden of pregnancy, which involves months of severe nausea and hormonal mood shifts that are medically under-addressed due to pharmaceutical risk aversion.
Doctors often under-prescribe anti-nausea medication during pregnancy due to fear of liability despite evidence of safety, prioritizing theoretical fetal risk over maternal suffering.

Rob's son (19 months) has a happy disposition, sleeps well, and is described as determined and persistent but occasionally exhibits "pushing" and "biting" phases.
Rob's transition to fatherhood included six weeks of full leave and 12 weeks of half-time work, which he regrets as a "misfire" due to low productivity overheads.
Rob now employs two nannies (2 days/week) and a nursery (3 days/week), allowing his wife (Louisa) to return to work full-time.
Louisa describes her pregnancy (6 months in) as "terrible," citing nausea and mood issues in the first three months and a recurrence of severe discomfort in the third trimester.
Louisa expresses "gender disappointment" upon learning she is having a boy, despite hearing that boys are generally "straightforward" compared to girls' social pressures regarding beauty and relationships.
Rob's parenting style involves prioritizing his own well-being, arguing that parents should have "equal regard" for their own preferences and children's needs to avoid resentment.
Rob uses a "Google Doc" list of product recommendations, citing the changing station and diaper bin as highly useful despite common skepticism about their necessity.

Rob holds a view that AI will likely replace humans in the labor market within coming decades, reducing the urgency of maintaining human population growth.
Rob anticipates his child will not have a traditional office job in 2044; education should focus on flourishing, decision-making, and social skills rather than "grinding" or academic credentialism.
Rob acknowledges that having children reduces his work productivity by approximately 20%, viewing this as an acceptable trade-off for personal fulfillment despite ethical concerns.
Regarding screen time, Rob advocates for "zero" exposure to actively harmful or hyper-stimulating content (e.g., weird YouTube autoplay chains) but accepts moderate exposure for necessary quiet.
Rob considers "watching TV together" (e.g., Bluey) socially beneficial compared to solitary screen time, as it allows for family interaction and distraction from the screen.
Rob's primary concern for his child's future is not death, but "living terrible lives" in a world that has not improved, a scenario he considers a stronger argument against having children.
Rob advises parents to avoid "neuroticism" regarding safety, noting that historical high childhood mortality rates required adults to "just get on with their lives."

Louisa anticipates feeling "guilt" and "fear" about handing over childcare, specifically worrying about her child attaching to the nanny or her missing key developmental moments.
Rob counters these fears by citing evidence that children can maintain secure attachments even with multiple caregivers, provided the parents are consistent and attentive.
Both hosts agree that the modern fear of "failing" as a parent often stems from internalized, non-historical norms rather than actual developmental risks.
Rob notes that while he enjoys physical play (chasing, swinging), he lacks interest in "imaginative play," contrasting with the cultural pressure to be an "entertainer" for the child.
Louisa expresses that her "feminist rage" is fueled by the lack of medical solutions for pregnancy suffering, viewing it as a systemic failure to value women's health.
The hosts identify a collective action problem where no individual has the incentive to bear the massive costs of raising a child to solve macro-level population decline.