Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A newly released study by personal finance website WalletHub has revealed which states are the best and worst to have a baby—with Massachusetts, North Dakota, and Minnesota leading the nation.
How It Was Calculated
WalletHub ranked the best and worst states to have a baby by evaluating all 50 states and the District of Columbia across four categories—cost, health care, baby-friendliness, and family-friendliness—using 31 weighted metrics scored on a 100-point scale. Each state's overall score reflected a weighted average of those factors.
The dataset used by WalletHub in its calculations ranged from hospital conventional-delivery charges to annual average infant-care costs to pediatricians per capita.
What To Know
Massachusetts claimed the top spot in WalletHub's overall rankings, buoyed by its first-place health care score and top-tier performance in baby- and family-friendliness.
The Bay State boasts the third-lowest infant mortality rate, the eighth-lowest maternal mortality rate, and among the best neonatal hospitals in the nation for premature births or babies with health problems, the report said. It also leads the country in paid leave policy and access to Medicaid-covered parenting programs.
North Dakota ranked second, driven largely by its affordability. It offers the lowest cost for conventional deliveries without complications—just $7,500 compared to as much as $27,000 in more expensive states, according to WalletHub.
The Peace Garden State was also found to have the third-lowest hourly rate for babysitters, and ranked among the top ten in childcare access and mom support groups.
Minnesota came in third, offering the second-lowest health insurance premiums and ranking highly for medical staff availability. With one of the lowest maternal mortality rates and a high number of pediatric professionals per capita, WalletHub said it provides ample healthcare options for new parents. Additionally, the North Star State was found to have the fourth-highest share of nationally accredited childcare centers.
Rounding out the top 10 best states to have a baby include: New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Iowa, the District of Columbia.
At the other end of the spectrum, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, Arkansas, New Mexico, Georgia, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, and Mississippi were ranked as the bottom 10.
What People Are Saying
WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report: "The best states for having a baby minimize costs while providing top-notch care for both newborns and their mothers. They also continue to be good environments for parents even long after the birth, with high-quality pediatric care, affordable and accessible child care, and a strong economic environment that makes providing for a child easier."
What Happens Next?
WalletHub releases its "Best & Worst States to Have a Baby" report annually.
Newsweek previously mapped the states with the best—and worst—school systems based on a separate, recent report from WalletHub.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
5 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Millions of Americans Told To Monitor Palpitations, Unusual Fatigue
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Millions of Americans have been advised to monitor palpitations and unusual fatigue amid concerns over high air pollution levels. Air quality alerts have issued on Monday across large swathes of Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Delaware, Texas and Colorado, according to the National Weather Service (NWS). The warnings mean ground-level ozone concentrations are forecast to reach dangerous levels. Why It Matters The NWS warned that both sensitive groups—such as children, seniors, and individuals with preexisting respiratory or heart conditions—and the general public might experience health effects linked to poor air quality in the affected regions. In some areas, the pollution comes from drifting smoke from wildfires. People play rugby amid hazy weather conditions in New York in July. People play rugby amid hazy weather conditions in New York in July. Liao Pan/China News Service/VCG/AP What To Know The agency said in its alert notices: "It is recommended that, when possible, you avoid strenuous outdoor activities, especially those with heart disease and respiratory diseases like asthma. "Symptoms such as palpitations, shortness of breath, or unusual fatigue may indicate a serious problem. If you have any of these, contact your health care provider." It added: "People with asthma should follow their asthma action plans and keep quick relief medicine handy." In Michigan, the Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy (EGLE) has declared an Air Quality Advisory for elevated levels of fine particulates across the state. Pollutants are expected to be in the "unhealthy for sensitive group" range across most parts, and will reach the "unhealthy" category in certain regions, meaning that some members of the general public may also experience health effects. Maine's Department of Environmental Protection has issued a statewide Air Quality Alert for particle pollution until 11 p.m. "A cold front will slowly push that smoke plume south through Maine on Monday. The front will likely concentrate smoke ahead of it," the department said. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation have both issued air quality alerts for fine particulates until midnight across the majority of both states. Code Orange air quality alerts have also been issued across Wisconsin, large swathes of Vermont, northern Pennsylvania and parts of Delaware including Wilmington. A Code Orange means that air pollution concentrations may become unhealthy for sensitive groups. Meanwhile, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has issued an Ozone Action Day Alert for the Front Range Urban Corridor, including cities such as Denver and Boulder. "On Monday, hot temperatures, light winds, and abundant sunshine will allow ozone to reach concentrations that are unhealthy for sensitive groups. The highest concentrations are expected along the Front Range and foothills, from western Denver northward to Fort Collins," it said. It added: "Smoke from the Grease Fire and the Elk Fire in central and southeastern Rio Blanco County, and the Coulter Creek Fire in southeastern Garfield County will produce areas of moderate to heavy smoke Sunday evening and Monday morning." The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has also issued an Ozone Action Day for the Houston, Galveston, and Brazoria area. What People Are Saying EGLE said in the NWS alert: "Reduce or eliminate activities that contribute to air pollution, such as: outdoor burning; use of residential wood burning devices. "Tips for households: Keep windows closed overnight to prevent smoke from getting indoors and, if possible, run central air conditioning with MERV-13 or higher-rated filters." TCEQ said: "Atmospheric conditions are expected to be favorable for producing high levels of ozone pollution in the Houston, Galveston, and surrounding areas on Monday. You can help prevent ozone pollution by sharing a ride, walking, riding a bicycle, taking your lunch to work, avoiding drive through lanes, conserving energy and keeping your vehicle properly tuned." Jonathan Grigg, a professor of pediatric respiratory and environmental medicine at Queen Mary University of London, previously told Newsweek that there are "very clear links" between inhaling particles and earlier death from both respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. He added: "There are vulnerable groups and classically they are children because they've got an extra issue to do with their lungs developing, whereas our lungs are not developing as adults." What Happens Next The air quality alerts are currently set to remain in force until late Monday evening. Regular updates regarding air pollution levels are issued on the NWS website and on the Environmental Protection Agency's AirNow interactive map.
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A newly released study by personal finance website WalletHub has revealed which states are the best and worst to have a baby—with Massachusetts, North Dakota, and Minnesota leading the nation. How It Was Calculated WalletHub ranked the best and worst states to have a baby by evaluating all 50 states and the District of Columbia across four categories—cost, health care, baby-friendliness, and family-friendliness—using 31 weighted metrics scored on a 100-point scale. Each state's overall score reflected a weighted average of those factors. The dataset used by WalletHub in its calculations ranged from hospital conventional-delivery charges to annual average infant-care costs to pediatricians per capita. What To Know Massachusetts claimed the top spot in WalletHub's overall rankings, buoyed by its first-place health care score and top-tier performance in baby- and family-friendliness. The Bay State boasts the third-lowest infant mortality rate, the eighth-lowest maternal mortality rate, and among the best neonatal hospitals in the nation for premature births or babies with health problems, the report said. It also leads the country in paid leave policy and access to Medicaid-covered parenting programs. North Dakota ranked second, driven largely by its affordability. It offers the lowest cost for conventional deliveries without complications—just $7,500 compared to as much as $27,000 in more expensive states, according to WalletHub. The Peace Garden State was also found to have the third-lowest hourly rate for babysitters, and ranked among the top ten in childcare access and mom support groups. Minnesota came in third, offering the second-lowest health insurance premiums and ranking highly for medical staff availability. With one of the lowest maternal mortality rates and a high number of pediatric professionals per capita, WalletHub said it provides ample healthcare options for new parents. Additionally, the North Star State was found to have the fourth-highest share of nationally accredited childcare centers. Rounding out the top 10 best states to have a baby include: New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Iowa, the District of Columbia. At the other end of the spectrum, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, Arkansas, New Mexico, Georgia, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, and Mississippi were ranked as the bottom 10. What People Are Saying WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report: "The best states for having a baby minimize costs while providing top-notch care for both newborns and their mothers. They also continue to be good environments for parents even long after the birth, with high-quality pediatric care, affordable and accessible child care, and a strong economic environment that makes providing for a child easier." What Happens Next? WalletHub releases its "Best & Worst States to Have a Baby" report annually. Newsweek previously mapped the states with the best—and worst—school systems based on a separate, recent report from WalletHub.
CBS News
4 hours ago
- CBS News
New Medicaid federal work requirements mean less leeway for states
When President Trump signed a law adding work requirements for some Medicaid recipients, he may have undercut lawmakers in at least 14 states who were designing their own plans, according to health industry observers. Georgia is the only state with a work requirement in place for Medicaid, but several states have been pursuing such a policy for years, only to be blocked by courts or, most recently, the Biden administration. Some seek state-specific touches to the new rules. Others aim to implement work requirements before the federal law takes effect at the end of 2026. These states' moves and Mr. Trump's massive tax-and-spending law share one demand: To keep their Medicaid health coverage, adults who can work must prove they're logging a minimum number of hours at a job or school, or else qualify for one of the few exemptions. But now, states that jumped ahead need to ensure their proposals, which require federal approval, don't stray too far from Mr. Trump's law. "The statute sets both the floor and ceiling" for work requirements, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law and policy professor with George Washington University. South Dakota, for example, announced in July that it would not submit an application for work requirements as previously planned amid concerns that the state's laxer rules would not be allowed under the new federal law. The state's Department of Social Services secretary had warned that working on a state proposal while the federal rules are being hashed out could be "an exercise in futility." Arkansas' plan, on the other hand, is more stringent than the federal law. There are no exemptions to its work requirements in the application, which is pending with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Arizona's proposal also includes something that's not in the federal law: a ban on "able-bodied adults" receiving Medicaid benefits for longer than five years total in their lives. Arkansas and Arizona government officials said they were working with federal officials to square their plans with the new standards. Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the department is analyzing how the new federal standards interact with state waivers. The federal health department must release rules by next June that outline how states are to implement work requirements, according to Elizabeth Hinton, who has been tracking such waivers as part of the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. "We don't exactly know what that will cover," Hinton said. It's unclear how federal officials will respond to the states' requests, she added, but "we are aware that some folks think there is no wiggle room here." States can tweak their Medicaid programs through what are known as demonstration waivers, which are subject to federal approval. The waivers are designed to test new ideas in policy gray areas. The states that have filed or plan to file such applications with work requirements include Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah. Congressional Republicans who passed the budget reconciliation bill left room for states to use waivers to fast-track the national standards. Tara Sklar, a professor leading the University of Arizona's Health Law & Policy Program, said she expects states seeking certain stricter requirements to have a chance of approval, while more lenient ones may face denials. Federal officials may look favorably on Arizona's plan, Sklar said, as a five-year lifetime Medicaid limit is different from work requirements. Even if the federal government greenlights stricter work requirements than the federal law calls for, those programs are likely to face legal challenges, she added. The federal law includes an 80-hour-per-month minimum for work or education, with exemptions for certain adults, including people who are medically frail and parents with young, dependent children. Montana is the first state to draft a waiver application since Congress finalized national work requirements. State lawmakers first approved work requirements — called "community engagement" standards under the state plan — in 2019, but the state's application stalled through the end of the first Trump term and the Biden administration. After Mr. Trump was elected again, Montana lawmakers lifted the 2025 expiration date of its Medicaid expansion program, making permanent the program that covered more than 76,000 adults in April, with the expectation that the Trump administration would approve work requirements. In mid-July, state officials released their draft plan to make that a reality "as soon as is practicable." The Montana plan largely aligns with the federal law, but it would create additional exemptions, including for people who are homeless or fleeing domestic violence. Republican state Sen. Gayle Lammers said work requirements that also protect such people who need Medicaid were a big part of persuading legislators to keep the expansion program. At the time, officials didn't know where the federal government would land on work requirements. And now, Lammers said, it makes sense for Montana to stick to its plan. "The state should have a say," Lammers said. "We're very independent, and everyone is different." In South Carolina, state officials are seeking to roll out work requirements for a limited number of newly eligible Medicaid beneficiaries. South Carolina is one of 10 states that has not expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act, and yet the state submitted a request with the federal government in June for a partial Medicaid expansion that includes a work requirement component that largely reflects the new federal standards. In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, a Republican, called South Carolina's proposal "a state-specific solution." The only state with an active work requirement program now wants to scale it back and awaits federal approval to do so. "Georgia Pathways to Coverage" expires at the end of September unless CMS greenlights an extension of the program with a key change: requiring enrollees to document once a year that they're working, not monthly. That's a pivot away from the program's initial design but also differs from the new federal rules, which call for checks every six months. Fiona Roberts, a spokesperson for Georgia's Medicaid agency, said the state is still waiting to hear whether it needs to alter its plan. So Georgia is among the states in limbo, awaiting guidance from the federal government. KFF Health News correspondents Sam Whitehead and Lauren Sausser contributed to this report. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
