Is the Decline in EU Birth Rates Politically Desired?

In view of the dramatic change in the age structure in the EU, it is worth asking why, despite the foreseeable problems, particularly in old-age provision with pensions, retirement benefits and care, there has been an increasing shortage of children in our society. What plays a role here? Are people of reproductive age becoming increasingly infertile or unwilling to bring children into the world?

Do environmental toxins in food, water or climate fear-mongering play a role? Are overly long academic training paths, career aspirations, a hedonistic life without children and stress about making arrangements decisive for childless life decisions? Why have we had an unusually high abortion rate of around 100 000 per year in Germany for example for decades? Do children still play any role in the life plans of young people? Or are the original wishes of having children no longer being realized to a large extent because family policy is anti-family-friendly and even destroys families?

One answer to this conundrum comes from a German constitutional lawyer Eva Marie von Münch: “The burden of old age has been collectivized, the burden of children remains a private matter. With this construction, the current pension law punishes the family and, within the family, particularly the mother who does not work or does not work full-time!”

“It cannot be that a married couple – where only one of them receives a salary or wage for their entire life – raises children and ends up with only one pension. On the other hand, two spouses earn two pensions. And the children of the couple who only receive one pension also earn both of these pensions. This is a blatant violation of the constitution,” according to Roman Herzog, President of the German Constitutional Court (1987–1994) and President (1994–1999).

On the other hand, the desire for children does seem to be great, as the booming demand from childless couples in fertility clinics suggests.

On closer inspection, however, it is often couples who have only postponed their desire to have children, for example because of their education, until the “biological clock” has run out. In this case, even the desire to have children is a consequence of the previous decision not to have children. In today’s discussion about designer babies and surrogacy, the welfare of children is not taken into account.

An average birth rate of 2.1 children per woman

Since there will always be couples with one child or no children at all, families with three or more children are necessary to increase the population. A lower rate leads to a decline in the population, a long-term shortage of workers and a pull for immigration from foreign cultures, which creates new problems. A higher rate on the other hand, overstretch existing resources and is also not desirable.

In the EU, the rate has been well below two for several decades. This means that the conditions for families to raise children have deteriorated considerably in society as a whole during this time.

The main reason is believed to be that social legislation has decoupled pension provision from the number of children and instead linked it to employment. The children of one generation finance the pensions and retirement benefits of all retirees and pensioners, with childless couples and single people benefiting greatly, but parents losing out.

It is inappropriate to give pension entitlements primarily to working people

It is inappropriate to tie pension entitlement primarily to gainful employment if pensions have to be financed exclusively by the children of pensioners. The inevitable consequence is then impoverishment of families, which is particularly evident in the case of parents with many children and single parents. This injustice must be abolished. The level of pension provision must either take the number of children into greater account or eliminate the financial burden of children by means of an appropriate burden sharing.

National and international studies have long since shown and proven that early childhood care by no means also means early childhood education, but that instead there are more and more children with disorders, including many with clinical relevance. The Covid measures have placed additional strain on families and especially school children and students. Eating disorders, depression and social withdrawal were often the consequences. Many young adults lost their courage to live and their joy for the future.

Without numerous healthy, safe and cheerful children, a society has no future, but the willingness of many parents to make sacrifices should not justify their exploitation.

This future of family and society is called into question when childcare work becomes a special burden for parents, making it increasingly attractive to forgo having children. The “work-life balance” is a current sham that makes equal rights for parents impossible, as parental family work is treated as a special burden for parents.

Balance between care for children and the elderly

The contract within families should be extended to the whole of society in order to achieve social security for all. It would serve as the basis of the statutory pension insurance with dynamic old-age pension, which, however, has to be justified by an equivalent dynamic protection for children.

But since the notion of “people always have children” has prevailed, this second part of the contract has never been taken seriously. This error prevented the realization of a generational contract that was fair to children as well as parents. We are still suffering from this today because the pension system that was implemented in many EU states has been tantamount to expropriation of parents, which continues to this day.

This system also places too much strain on the next generation because they have to co-finance the pensions of the growing number of childless pensioners.