logo
More Gen Z Delay Having Kids Than Millennials Amid Birth Rate Decline Fears

More Gen Z Delay Having Kids Than Millennials Amid Birth Rate Decline Fears

Newsweek06-06-2025
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.
Gen Z Americans are more likely to delay having kids due to economic conditions than millennials, according to a new report from AI platform Pearl.com.
It's what analysts say could be a concerning trend as the birth rate continues to decline, creating larger implications for the economy, workforce and global politics.
Why It Matters
The CDC recorded a "historic low" for the U.S. general fertility rate in 2023, aligning with global trends seen in several developed countries. The Congressional Budget Office projected that U.S. fertility will remain below replacement for decades to come.
A newborn baby girl is reunited with her mother straight after birth in a hospital environment.
A newborn baby girl is reunited with her mother straight after birth in a hospital environment.
Tim Clayton/Corbis via Getty Images
What To Know
In a new report from Pearl.com, Gen Z, which consists of those born between 1997 and 2012, was slightly more likely to delay having children than their elder millennial counterparts.
Roughly 39 percent of Gen Z said they had delayed having a child because of the current economic climate, while only 36 percent of millennials said the same.
Katie Trowbridge, a multi-generational workplace strategist and CEO of Curiosity 2 Create, said the younger generations' decision to forgo parenthood has many reasons beyond just the economics of it, though.
"This isn't about apathy. It's about discernment. I see a generation leaning into curiosity, creative and critical thinking, and seeking connection and meaning," Trowbridge told Newsweek. "They're not just putting off parenthood, they're rethinking, redefining, and reimaging what it means entirely."
Thoai Ngo, a professor of population and family health at the Columbia School of Public Health, said Gen Z is prioritizing self-growth and career development before starting a family. They've also grown up in a world shaped by climate crisis and economic instability, he said.
"Rising costs—student debt, housing, childcare—make financial stability an uphill battle," Ngo told Newsweek. "Climate anxiety and shifting social norms mean that Gen Z doesn't view marriage and children as inevitable milestones."
Economic concerns are delaying other major life decisions as well, with 36 percent of Gen Z-ers in the survey saying they've given up on the idea of ever owning a home.
Worries over their financial situations have driven 33 percent of Gen Z-ers and 40 percent of millennials to turn to artificial intelligence for personal budgeting, Pearl found, but the larger issue of it being too expensive to have a baby could have significant effects for the already declining birth rate.
Declining Birth Rates and Demographic Shifts
Research shows that those choosing not to have children—the "child-free"—are an increasingly visible identity group. Demographic breakdowns reveal higher proportions of white, urban, and employed individuals, with younger respondents more often uncertain or undecided about potential parenthood.
Concerns over population decline have prompted legislative efforts, such as Ohio's proposed "Natural Family Month" bill to promote marriage and child-rearing.
Policymakers and public figures, including President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, have advocated for policies aimed at increasing the birth rate. Meanwhile, discussions about climate change, reproductive rights, and economic factors remain central to the choices facing younger adults.
"Ultimately, Gen Z is rethinking commitment and stability in a deeply uncertain future. If we don't address the structural barriers—economic insecurity, lack of family supports, climate threats—we'll see continued delays and declines in family formation, with broad impacts on our social and economic systems in the decades to come," Ngo said.
Child-free Americans cite various reasons for forgoing parenthood.
A significant subset of young adults, 23 percent, said having children was irresponsible due to climate change, according to a recent Newsweek/Independent Center poll.
The same Newsweek report found one in three Gen Zers and millennials do not have and do not want to have children.
What People Are Saying
Moira Corcoran, a CPA and finance expert on Pearl, said in the report: "This data tells us that Americans, particularly younger generations, are feeling a sense of hopelessness when it comes to their financial outlook. With so many saying saving feels futile at this point, many are looking to make drastic changes to their lives in a way that's reminiscent of the 2008 recession."
"Between postponing major life decisions like having a child or owning a home to cutting back on summer travel, it is clear consumers are approaching a state of panic – they need ways to access affordable, professional financial advice to navigate these ever-changing economic conditions."
Katie Trowbridge, a multi-generational workplace strategist and CEO of Curiosity 2 Create, told Newsweek: "Gen Z isn't just delaying parenthood because of the economy. They're questioning the world they're inheriting. From climate anxiety and student debt to unstable jobs and rising costs, they're asking big questions like: Can I afford to raise a child in a world that doesn't feel built for thriving?"
Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "It shows that in today's economy, it often takes both parents working full-time just to stay afloat. With prices rising and housing becoming less affordable, there's less room — and frankly, less patience — for adding more financial weight. We also saw birthrates start to decline decades ago as more women entered the workforce and opportunities expanded — and that trend is only continuing."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "Not only do inflationary pressures continue to way on the cost of living, but this generation that is newer to the workplace will more than likely be hit harder by many of the layoffs announced over the last six months."
"And while the decision to not have children right away because of economic factors may not be fun, it is the right call. Having children is more expensive than ever, and having the maturity to understand it would be impossible to assume the role of parent under one's current income is pivotal for long-term financial growth."
What Happens Next
There are serious implications if the birth rate continues to decline as recent years would suggest, but these concerns tend to revolve around the workforce and national productivity.
"The real concern lies in who's worried — and that's often those viewing the issue purely from an economic lens: fewer workers, fewer contributors to GDP, and slower growth," Thompson said.
"Long-term, that could mean more economic stagnation. As populations age, we'll spend more on healthcare and social support and less on innovation and expansion. That's the deeper issue — not population size, but how the age imbalance affects productivity and prosperity."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Ghislaine Maxwell's meetings with Justice Department shrouded in secrecy
Ghislaine Maxwell's meetings with Justice Department shrouded in secrecy

NBC News

timean hour ago

  • NBC News

Ghislaine Maxwell's meetings with Justice Department shrouded in secrecy

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche completed nine hours of meetings over two days with Ghislaine Maxwell on Friday but made no public statements about what she said or the next steps in the Justice Department's much-criticized Jeffrey Epstein investigation. Former prosecutors said it was highly unusual — and potentially unprecedented — for a the department's No. 2 official to personally interview a witness. Secrecy in a criminal investigation is normal, but the prosecutors involved in the case would typically be included in questioning. 'I've never heard of a deputy attorney general doing anything like this before,' said a former senior Justice Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Victims of Epstein and Maxwell, who was convicted in 2021 of recruiting and grooming multiple teenage girls to be sexually abused by the late financier, questioned the lack of transparency as well. Jack Scarola, a lawyer representing roughly 20 Epstein victims, said he asked to attend the Maxwell interviews but was not included. Berit Berger, a former federal prosecutor in New York, said the interviews by Blanche, who worked as Trump's former defense lawyer, may be performative. 'It may be just a way of being able to say, 'Look, we dotted every I and crossed every T,'' she said. 'There's value to being able to say that we've tried to speak to everyone we possibly could, including the co-defendant.' Attorney General Pam Bondi, Blanche and President Donald Trump himself have struggled to quell the uproar since the DOJ and FBI announced on July 6 that an exhaustive Epstein case review had not uncovered evidence that justified investigating other individuals. FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino — who haveboth spread conspiracy theories about the Epstein case — backed those findings and a DOJ decision to release no other Epstein case documents. Catherine Christian, a former Manhattan assistant district attorney and an NBC News legal analyst, said the Maxwell interviews could also be an effort to protect Trump, who now faces one of the largest political crises of his second term in the furor over the Epstein investigation. Trump, like dozens of other wealthy Americans, socialized with Epstein. He is among hundreds of individuals whose names appear in 100,000 pages of Epstein case documents reviewed by the DOJ and the FBI. 'It's hard to believe this is anything but performative,' Christian said. 'Or Todd Blanche, just wanting to have her on the record saying, 'Yes, President Trump had nothing to do with any of this. He was not a client.'' What was Maxwell asked? Maxwell's lawyer, David Oscar Markus, is a top Florida criminal defense lawyer and a friend of Blanche's. Blanche appeared on Markus' podcast in 2024, where the host praised Blanche's legal skills. After Friday's meeting with Blanche and Maxwell, Markus told reporters that the deputy attorney general 'did an amazing job' and asked Maxwell thorough questions. 'She was asked maybe about 100 different people,' said Markus, who did not disclose which individuals Maxwell was questioned about. 'She answered questions about everybody, and she didn't hold anything back,' he said. 'They asked about every single, every possible thing you could imagine, everything.' A senior administration official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said that Maxwell was granted limited immunity by the Justice Department to answer questions about the Epstein case. Granting limited immunity is common in criminal cases and allows defendants to provide information without fear that it will be used against them in court. The immunity is 'limited' because it only applies if the defendant is telling the truth. If it is determined that a defendant lied during the interviews, then the agreement becomes void. Prosecutors can take into consideration a defendant's cooperation and recommend a plea deal or a reduced sentence. This is not expected in Maxwell's case, as she has already been convicted and sentenced to 20 years in federal prison. Maxwell's lawyer, Markus, has argued that Maxwell's trial was unfair and an appeal of her conviction is pending before the Supreme Court. Potential pardon or commutation Trump, like all presidents, has the power to pardon or commute the sentence of anyone convicted of a federal crime. Asked about Epstein's case on Friday morning, Trump said the focus should be on other people who socialized with Epstein, such as former President Bill Clinton and Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary and Harvard University president. 'You should focus on Clinton,' the president told reporters. 'You should focus on the president of Harvard, the former president of Harvard. You should focus on some of the hedge fund guys.' 'I'll give you a list. These guys lived with Jeffrey Epstein. I sure as hell didn't,' Trump said. Asked if he was considering granting Maxwell a pardon or commuting her sentence, Trump said, 'It's something I haven't thought about.' 'I'm allowed to do it,' he added. Mimi Rocah, a former federal prosecutor in New York, said she believes the recent firing of Maurene Comey, a lead prosecutor in the Maxwell case and the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, was an effort to give Trump appointees full control of the Maxwell case, limit transparency and silence dissent. 'That does not seem coincidental. It seems like they wanted Maurene not to be present in the Department of Justice,' Rocah said. 'To be able to say, 'What the heck, you can't go talk to my client or my defendant.'' Rocah, a Democrat who served as Westchester County district attorney from 2020 to 2024, criticized Blanche's meetings with Maxwell, saying his apparent failure to include a prosecutor with deep knowledge of her crimes was unfair to Epstein's victims. 'The head of that entire institution that is supposed to be about protecting victims is talking to her, giving her a platform to say God knows what, without much way to verify it or not,' Rocah said. 'The real people who could test her truth-telling are the people who worked on the case, not Todd.'

Amidst terrible tragedy in Texas, debates over misinformation cloud the truth
Amidst terrible tragedy in Texas, debates over misinformation cloud the truth

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

Amidst terrible tragedy in Texas, debates over misinformation cloud the truth

As search and rescue teams in Texas continue to search for those lost in extreme flash floods and communities try to piece together lives, claims quickly spread about what happened and who was to blame. Many on the left blamed the Trump administration 's cuts to the National Weather Service. On the right, keyboard warriors accused cloud seeding technologies of causing the devastating floods. Others in the community spread news of the miraculous survival of some of those caught in the flood. These claims and accusations have been called misinformation, commonly understood as 'false' or 'misleading' information. The floods in Texas have inundated news cycles with a broader discussion of what misinformation is, how it works, and the impacts it can have. It is not surprising that Americans are worried about misinformation. Recent polling by the Cato Institute shows that Americans believe misinformation is the greatest threat to their freedom. This finding is true for Republicans and Democrats, though they likely consider misinformation to be a threat for different reasons. Other polls have reported that 80 percent of Americans view misinformation as a major problem. And according to a 2023 Pew poll, 55 percent of Americans believe the U.S. government should take action to restrict false information, even if it limits freedom of information. Research on misinformation, though, shows that it is not as serious a threat as it is made out to be, and we must be careful that in our efforts to address it, we don't make matters worse. Misinformation is an incredibly subjective issue to which people respond to in complex ways. In fact, misinformation is most often adopted and spread by those who are already predisposed to believe it, as we can see clearly in the recent events in Texas. The cycle is familiar: Politically motivated actors spread false or misleading information that was too good to check because it reinforced their beliefs. Similarly, locals hoping for some good news shared and believed information that they desperately wanted to be true, but sadly, it was not. And as often happens during significant disasters, false or misleading information spreads because of the rapidly evolving nature of the tragedy — we often simply don't know what the truth is yet. So, while misinformation can be harmful, it is often more of a symptom than a disease. Research shows that misinformation itself often does not change the beliefs and actions of those who encounter it; rather, it tends to reinforce existing beliefs or behaviors. In that sense, misinformation does not have the powerful impact of which the media and political world commonly speak. Unfortunately, despite this evidence minimizing its impact and power, the clouds of misinformation loom large over our society today. Americans have been told for years now that we are in the midst of an 'infodemic' of powerful misinformation that infects our minds like a virus. For example, last year, the World Economic Forum's risk report labeled AI-powered misinformation and disinformation as the greatest threat facing the world in the next couple of years. The number of academic research, books, journalism and fact-checking resources has surged over the past decade. Rather than panicking about misinformation and opening the door to government censorship, the threat of misinformation must be addressed from the ground up rather than the top down. For tech companies, this means rebuilding user trust and helping users be better consumers of information. Tools like community notes — as being adopted or tested in some form by X, Meta, TikTok, YouTube and other platforms — are likely to be helpful in getting users to trust the fact-checks they are seeing. And efforts to 'pre-bunk' misinformation through better media literacy will help by empowering users. When the government begins funding counter-misinformation research, things tend to go awry. This may sound counterintuitive, but we often disagree about what misinformation is and tend to favor our political biases, as seen in the news around the Texas floods. So when the government doles out money to research misinformation, it is inevitably funding those biases, which over time contributes to polarization and a lack of trust in our institutions. Similarly, the U.S. government should limit what it deems 'foreign disinformation' to include only the most clear-cut and harmful cases. When not handled carefully, such efforts can and have turned into government attacks on Americans' speech and political views — see the intelligence experts getting the Hunter Biden laptop story wrong — further polarizing and degrading Americans' trust in their leaders. The flood waters are receding in Texas, but the storm of misinformation still rages within our society. Instead of doubling down on misplaced panic over misinformation, we must instead trust and help Americans discover the truth. More speech, more discussions — not less speech and more government control — are the way we sort through information and find a brighter tomorrow.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store