• Article Tools
• Print
• RSS

Extinction of the American Sibling: Part 2 of 2

by Margaret Datiles 

Part 1 of this column discussed Time magazine’s recent article, “One and Done,” by Lauren Sandler.   The Time article promotes the one-child family as the new American model, and recommends an eradication of Christianity from American society as a necessary step to achieve this ideal.  Having a second child, Sandler argues, is contrary to marital happiness and fulfillment, and can be devastating to family life.  

Time’s dream of a society without siblings presents a host of problems.  In addition to a tragic loss of religion, a change in the definition of marriage, and a de-valuation of children as goods in themselves, achieving Time’s proposed ideal will also result in a dramatic decrease in birthrates.  This extreme change in demographics will put America in serious economic trouble, and may also jeopardize its national security. 

Demographers have tracked a severe decline in birthrates worldwide.  Since 1979, birthrates have dropped worldwide by over 50%.  By 2050, the birthrate will have dropped so far that, in developed nations, there will be two elderly for every child. 

In order for a society to maintain its population and for generations to replace themselves, there must be an average birthrate of 2.13.  The United Nations Population Division has stated that worldwide fertility rates could fall below replacement level for the first time in history by 2030.  

The greatest documented decline in fertility rates and population has been seen in Europe.  In recognition of this fact, the Time article stated: “On a continent where the fertility rate is well below two, these questions arise: Who will make up the work force?  Who will care for the disproportionate number of elderly citizens?” 

Who indeed. 

Since time immemorial, it has been known that the strength and power of a country relies in large part on the size of its population.  It is impossible for a society or nation to prosper without an adequately-sized population. 

In order for a nation’s economy to thrive, people are needed to work on farms, harvest natural resources, manufacture goods, participate in the market, and develop new technology.  In addition, armies of people are needed to defend a nation from being taken over by invaders.  For all these reasons, it is evident that steep declines in fertility rates and a negative population growth will have dangerous effects on a nation. 

The European Union has acknowledged this issue, and found that by 2030 there will be a shortage of 20 million workers.  This comes as no surprise, as the birthrates of all European countries are below replacement-level.  

Indeed, nine out of the ten countries in the world with the lowest birthrates are in Europe.  In Italy and Spain, half of the population will disappear with every new generation.  In Russia, there are more documented abortions than live births per year. 

The plummeting birthrates and negative population growth in Europe are direct results of Europe’s increasing acceptance of the one-child society and cultural changes that are being promoted by the Time article.  It is clear that not only is Time’s proposal a call for an eradication of Christianity and large families, it is also an ill-thought and dangerous economic plan. 

Interestingly enough, Sandler never provided an answer or even a discussion of her question, “Who will make up the work force?”  She presented an important issue and then left it totally unaddressed.  The reason for this is simple: it is impossible to address the issue of falling fertility rates and negative population growth without exposing the economic dangers of a one-child society. 

In conclusion, if Time magazine’s proposal is followed, it will inevitably bring about disastrous economic consequences for our country – far, far short of anyone’s idea of what is truly ideal for America. 

Sources: “Demographic Winter: The Decline of the Human Family,” available at www.demographicwinter.com

---

(The views expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Headline Bistro or the Knights of Columbus.)