The latest effect of the recession?  Fewer babies.  That's right.  The number of U.S. births has risen since 2002, but in 2008, the rate of births dropped, especially in California and Florida.  According to CafeMom:


That might not seem so significant, especially since more babies were born in 2007 than any other year in U.S. history. But experts say the drop breaks an unusual trend.

And according to the New York Times, 80% of layoffs were of men, which results in:


“...a lot of families where a maternity leave would mean that no income at all was coming in.”


This trend fits historically with the lowest birth rates recorded in the United States: during the Great Depression and the late 1970s, two economic lows.  After all, kids are expensive.


So have you put off having a child until the economy rights itself?




Showing the Latest of 2 Comments

bwankel
3 yearss ago
Oh yeah. We were going to try for #2 this fall. Not so much anymore. We'll have to wait until things improve with our stocks before we can even *think* of taking on something as expensive as another child.
 
sara lou who.
3 yearss ago
I was working as an ex-pat in the Netherlands and it seemed like the recession was something that showed up in my conversations with friends back home or inbox courtesy of the NY Times. It seemed like a far off concept. It didn't show up on my doorstep until just after my daughter was born. While having more money certainly makes having kids easier, I wouldn't have waited to have my daughter. There are so many aspects of timing that need to be correct for a person to be "ready" that I think if you wait for every single star to align that you may miss your window of opportunity all together. But, that said, I am very lucky because my husband and myself are able to live on one income if needed. Which is a luxury I am aware not everyone has.