First, I want the reader’s sympathy. Before I wrote this column, I ploughed through the jargon-ridden and statistics-laden pages of a recent study on “Trends and Determinants of Fertility Rates in OECD Countries: The Role of Public Policy.” Once upon a time I read such things with something strangely approaching pleasure. Now they make my head spin, and I find myself less and less convinced that anything can be accomplished by policy wonks.
Mostly, we learn what we already knew: that throughout the “developed” countries, fertility rates have flatlined. Even where they are at the high end (such as in the United States), they are barely at replacement levels, and even where they are lowest (in, for instance, the heart of the dark continent of Europe), the reality is worse than appears. For one may mentally subtract what the report is too politically correct to highlight: The large proportion of the few births goes to immigrant parents from “non-traditional sources,” chiefly Muslims from North Africa and the Middle East.
Without question, the heirs of Christendom in Europe are dying off, and any recovery at all in the birthrates appears to be thanks to ruinously expensive state policies. These grant big tax breaks for child-rearing, while providing extravagant public daycare and other facilities and writing generous maternity leaves into labor law.
From an economic view, “The demand for children is a function of their costs and of individuals’ preferences, for a given income level. Underlying this model is the idea that children are a special type of capital good, i.e. a long-lived asset that produce a flow of services that enter the utility function of parents.” My reader will guess that this quote does not quite capture the traditional Catholic analysis.
A more candid, purely economic view would allow that children are a dead loss, for they squander household resources, adding to food, clothing, education, and housing costs. They also impose indirect, or opportunity, costs—overwhelmingly on the mother, according to the OECD’s research. For she must often quit her job, or cut back her hours, or otherwise sacrifice career advancement just to take care of the little monsters. And how many of them will repay the investment when they grow up?
By strict economic criteria, it’s completely irrational that believing Christians and Muslims and others on the fringes of the soon-to-be-extinct mainstream Western society would persist in the old-fashioned habit of bearing children. Powerful as the biological urge may be, it seems to have been swamped by state policies that mandate two-income families—by imposing taxation at levels so high that, in most OECD countries, one income must be devoted to supporting a family, and the other to supporting the government.
And if the state tries to “kick-start fertility” by subsidizing child-rearing in an environment where, it is revealed, the care of two small children typically absorbs 40 percent of an average worker’s income, the state can only pile taxes on top of taxes. Verily, I am convinced birthrates are sustained at the American level only by the comparatively lower rate of American taxes (more like a third, rather than half, of the average income). This difference is what creates the “breathing space” for families to exist.
Against the background sketched above, a foreground proposition begins to resolve itself. It is that motherhood is the key to fighting Catholic in secular trenches. The “key,” because we really do have the secret to saving the West from extinction. It is our job to directly challenge the economic, ideological, and bureaucratic assumptions that have turned motherhood from the glory and achievement of a woman’s being into a grim economic proposition.

David Warren


David Warren is a Canadian journalist who writes mostly on international affairs. His Web site is

Crisis Magazine Comments Policy

This is a Catholic forum. As such:

  1. All comments must directly address the article. “I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter.” (Matthew 12:36)
  2. No profanity, ad hominems, hot tempers, or racial or religious invectives. “And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” (Ephesians 4:32)
  3. We will not tolerate heresy, calumny, or attacks upon our Holy Mother Church or Holy Father. “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18)
  4. Keep it brief. No lengthy rants or block quotes. “For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes.” (James 4:14)
  5. If you see a comment that doesn’t meet our standards, please flag it so a moderator may remove it. “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness.” (Galatians 6:1)
  6. All comments may be removed at the moderators’ discretion. “But of that day and hour no one knows…” (Matthew 24:36)
  7. Crisis isn’t responsible for the content of the comments box. Comments do not represent the views of Crisis magazine, its editors, authors, or publishers. “Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God… So each of us shall give account of himself to God.” (Romans 14:10, 12)