2011 birth rate lowest since 1920
WASHINGTON — The birth rate plunged last year to a low, with the decline led by immigrant women hit hard by the recession, according to a study released on Thursday by the Pew Research Center.
The overall birth rate declined by 8 percent between 2007-10, with a decrease of 6 percent among U.S.-born women and 14 percent among foreign-born women. The decline for Mexican immigrant women was more extreme, at 23 percent.
The overall birth rate is now at its lowest since 1920 — the earliest year with reliable records.
The decline could have far-reaching implications for economic and social policy. A continuing decline would challenge long-held assumptions that births to immigrants will help maintain the population and provide the tax-paying work force to support the aging baby-boomer generation.
The birth rate — 63.2 births per 1,000 women of child-bearing age — has fallen to just over half of what it was at its peak in 1957. The rate among foreign-born women also has been declining in recent decades, according to the report, though more slowly.
Although the declining birth rate has not yet resulted in the stark imbalances in graying countries such as Japan or Italy, the drop should serve as a wake-up call for policymakers, said Roberto Suro, a professor of public policy at the University of Southern California.
“We've been assuming that when the baby-boomer population gets most expensive, that there are going to be immigrants and their children who are going to be paying into programs for the elderly, but in the wake of what's happened in the last five years, we have to re-examine those assumptions,” he said.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Congress considers dangers of driving high
- Law enforcement, intelligence agencies want to ‘like’ you on social media
- Boy’s body discovered on Air Force cargo jet that was on mission in Africa
- State Dept: ‘No American is proud’ of CIA tactics
- IRS calls right-wing Republicans ‘crazies’ in emails
- Witnesses added for Benghazi hearing
- Warrant issued in Calif. for tuberculosis patient
- N.Y. opera proposes mediation as lockout looms
- Appeals court upholds nation of origin labels for meat
- Rollout of health exchange draws flak from GAO official
- 6 narcotics officers charged with racketeering