We are told that we need to convince today's child-bearing generation to have children, at least three of them, instead of adopting cats and dogs. While it may come across as patronising to impose such a life-altering decision, there are broader sociological dimensions to consider on various facets of the argument-both regarding the declining choice to have children in an already overpopulated society and the increasing preference for adopting "fur babies".
We must first acknowledge the growing neoliberal emphasis on prioritising the economy and market-driven policies as the primary indicators of societal success. Neoliberalism regards labour primarily as a resource to be optimised, with jobs increasingly tied to market demands and workers expected to adapt to ever-changing economic landscapes. Individuals are compelled to compete, "work for the economy" to demonstrate productivity and further contribute to economic growth. Even the decision to increase the birth rate is economically driven, primarily influenced by concerns over the looming pension crisis. The neoliberal ethos redefines individuals and institutions as economic agents, compelling individuals to conform to economic models with little regard for their other roles, including the crucial role of being parents. For instance, proposals to remodel school hours, potentially extending them to accommodate increased work demands, exemplify how institutional frameworks are based on economic necessities.
Within this framework, neoliberalism shifts the burden onto the individual-in this case, the parent-who is blamed for struggling to manage time, meet financial obligations, for 'parking' children at school and fulfilling the demanding role of an all-encompassing parent in the life of their children. Women, more than men, are often unfairly blamed for choosing to work. Albeit the economic necessity and pressures to work, it is crucial to also note that, in most cases, employment serves as a vital source of personal validation and growth, autonomy, identity and a meaningful contribution to society. Most women want to work and be financial independent, however this is perceived to conflict with expectations of caregiving and motherhood.
Instead of placing blame on the child-bearing generation and instilling guilt, it is crucial to understand the growing responsibilities and pressures surrounding child-rearing. Raising children today comes at a high stake, with an ever-increasing emphasis on intensive parenting that prioritises involvement in education, extracurricular activities, and every aspect of a child's life. Added to these demands are significant financial pressures, including securing housing, managing the rising cost of living, and ensuring the child's overall well-being-all of which come at a steep price. In a society where wage gaps persist and living wages are barely sufficient, having even one child, let alone multiple, is an immense financial undertaking.
For many, particularly women, careful consideration of whether to have children is a rational and responsible decision. This choice is not merely a reflection of women's increased opportunities for education, work, and financial independence but also an acknowledgment of systemic shortcomings. Women are often expected to work as though they do not have a family and to parent as though they do not work. They are acutely aware of the "double or triple shifts" they often face: balancing paid employment, parenting responsibilities, and domestic labour. These overlapping demands exacerbate the pressures of child-rearing and contribute to a more deliberate decision-making process about parenthood. Despite progress, family-friendly policies and structures that support a work-life balance remain inadequate.
Grants to encourage having more children, increased access to free childcare, and possibly extending school hours are not true solutions to the underlying problem-they are merely painkillers, temporarily dulling the symptoms of the ill of society and its market-driven economy. The issue is not rooted in the choices of one generation but in a systemic failure to create a truly child-friendly society. Without addressing the structural challenges that prioritize economic productivity over family well-being, such measures serve only to mask the deeper societal and economic pressures that discourage parenthood.
Let's turn our attention to pets now. Pet ownership offers flexibility that parenthood doesn't. Broader societal shifts and economic structures have their impact on individuals' nurturing tendencies and emotional fulfilment. The perception and treatment of pets had undergone significant transformations in recent years, with increased 'humanisation of pets' often viewed as an alternative to children. Pets are increasingly perceived as family members, pampered, dressed and treated like little dependable children. Various sociological and psychological research look into the role of pets as reducing stress, alleviating loneliness and improving mental health. The growth of pet adoption was significantly felt during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a surge of pet adopting for comfort and companionship.
As a mother myself (below the suggested quota), I want to clarify that I personally do not assume pets as a replacement for children. As both a mother of two and a pet owner, I would not place them on equal footing. However, I do recognise that pets provide for some, uncomplicated, unconditional love and companionship. I am not in a position to argue that those who humanise their pets should instead have children. I fully recognise the quality time and attention that children rightfully deserve from their parents. The decision to have children is deeply personal and life-altering, and it is one that should remain an individual choice.
It is central to emphasise that the blame for declining birth rates or shifting generational preferences does not rest on the child-bearing generation. Instead, it lies with systemic barriers that make a child-friendly future increasingly difficult to achieve. Criticizing individuals-particularly women-for needing and/or wanting to work, and for navigating working conditions that fail to accommodate parenthood while enabling meaningful engagement with children is inapt. Creating a more equitable work-life balance that enables individuals to fulfill multiple roles effectively is one potential solution. Such an approach would require systemic changes to workplace policies, including flexible working hours, remote work options, and parental leave policies.
Prof. Valerie Visanich is an Associate Professor in Sociology