Natalism (also called pronatalism or the pro-birth position) is an ideology that promotes the
reproduction of
human life as an important objective of being human and advocates high
birthrate.[1] According to the
Merriam-Webster dictionary, the term, as it relates to the belief itself, dates from 1971 and comes from
French: nataliste, formed from
French: natalité, birthrate.[2]
Natalism promotes
child-bearing and
parenthood as desirable for social reasons and to ensure the continuance of humanity. Some philosophers have noted that if humans fail to have children, humans would become extinct.[3][4] While many reproductive rights advocates and environmentalists see it as a driver of reproductive injustice, population growth, and
ecological overshoot.[5][6][7][8][9][10] Natalism in
public policy typically seeks to create financial and social incentives for populations to reproduce, such as providing tax incentives that reward having and supporting children.[6] Those who adhere to more strict natalism may seek to limit access to
abortion and
contraception, as well[11]. The opposite of natalism is
antinatalism; however most feminists and reproductive rights advocates challenge natalism in order to elevate procreative freedom, and do not align with antinatalism.[12][6]
An intention to have children is a substantial
fertility factor in actually ending up doing so, but childless individuals who intend to have children immediately or within two or three years are generally more likely to succeed than those who intend to have children in the long term.[24]
There are many determinants of the intention to have children, including:
the preference of family size, which influences that of the children through early adulthood.[25] Likewise, the
extended family influences fertility intentions, with increased numbers of nephews and nieces increasing the preferred number of children.[24][8]
social pressure from kin and friends to have another child.[24][6][8]
social support. However, a study from
West Germany came to the result that both men receiving no support at all and men receiving support from many different people have a lower probability of intending to have another child, with the latter probably related to coordination problems.[24]
happiness, with happier people tending to want more children.[24] However, other research has shown that the social acceptability of the choice to have or not have children plays a significant factor in reproductive decisions.[26][6][10][27][28] The social stigma, marginalization, and even domestic violence that accompanies those without children, by choice or chance, is a significant factor in their feelings of happiness or belonging within their communities.[6][5][10][29]
The 1968
encyclicalHumanae Vitae criticized artificial contraception and advocated for a natalist position.[31]
According to the
UN, the share of countries with pronatalist policies had grown from 20% in 2005 to 28% in 2019.[32]
Some countries with
population decline offer incentives to the people to have large families as a means of
national efforts to reverse declining populations. Incentives may include a one-time
baby bonus, or ongoing
child benefit payments or tax reductions. Some impose penalties or
taxes on those with fewer children[7][8]. Some nations, such as
Japan[33],
Singapore,[34] and
South Korea,[35] have implemented, or tried to implement, interventionist natalist policies, creating incentives for larger families among native stock. Immigrants are generally not part of natalist policies.
Paid
maternity and paternity leave policies can also be used as an incentive. For example,
Sweden has generous parental leave wherein parents are entitled to share 16 months' paid leave per child, the cost divided between both employer and
state. Unfortunately, it appears not to work as desired.[36][37]
Natalist thinking was common during the Soviet times. After a brief adherence to the strict Communist doctrine in 1920s and attempts to raise children communally, coupled with the government-provided healthcare, the Soviet government switched to
neo-traditionalism, promoting family values and sobriety, banning abortions and making divorces harder to obtain, advancing natalist ideals that made mockery of irresponsible parents. The expanded opportunities for female employment caused a population crisis in 1930s, government had expanded access to child care starting at age of two.[40] After the
Great Patriotic war the skewed ratio of men to women prompted additional financial assistance to women that had children or were pregnant. Despite the promotion and long maternity leave with maintenance of the employment and salary modernization still caused the birthrates to continue to unfortunately slide into the 1970's.[41]
The end of
USSR in 1991 was accompanied by a large drop in fertility.[41] In 2006,
Vladimir Putin made the demographics an important issue,[42] instituting a two-prong approach of direct financial rewards and socio-cultural policies. The notable example of the former is the maternal-capital program where the woman is provided with subsidies that can be spent only on improved housing or the education of a child (and can also be saved for the retirement). [43]
Hungary
The Hungarian government of
Viktor Orbán in 2019 announced pecuniary incentives (including eliminating taxes for mothers with more than three children, and reducing credit payments and easier access to loans), and expanding day care and kindergarten access.[44]
See also
Look up natalism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
^
Compare:
McKeown, John (2014).
"1: Natalism: A Popular Use of the Bible". God's Babies: Natalism and Bible Interpretation in Modern America. Cambridge: Open Books. p. 2.
ISBN9781783740529. Retrieved 2018-12-08. Natalism is an ideology that advocates a high birth rate within a community.[...] The central message is that parents should have additional children.
^
abcdCarroll, Laura (2012-05-17). The Baby Matrix: Why Freeing Our Minds From Outmoded Thinking About Parenthood & Reproduction Will Create a Better World. United States: LiveTrue Books.
ISBN978-0615642994.{{
cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
^Hedberg, Trevor (2021-12-13). The Environmental Impact of Overpopulation: The Ethics of Procreation (1st ed.). United States: Routledge. pp. 110–135.
ISBN978-1032236766.{{
cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (
link)
^"Do Muslims Have More Children Than Other Women in Western Europe? – Population Reference Bureau". Retrieved 2023-12-12. Women who report firm adherence to their religious beliefs and practices tend to have higher fertility than less religious women, whether Christian or Muslim. But religiousness does not always mean higher fertility. [...] The study confirms the perception that Muslim women have more children than non-Muslims in Western Europe, but shows that the gap is not as large as many believe. And, similar to other immigrants in other countries, Muslim fertility rates tend to fall over time, narrowing the gap with the non-Muslims who make up the vast majority of the European population now, and for the foreseeable future.
^Saini, Angela; Bajaj, Nandita; Ware, Alan (2024-02-06).
"The Patriarchs: How Men Came to Rule". The Overpopulation Podcast by Population Balance. Retrieved 2024-04-18.