Comments on: The Myrdals and feminist natalism

By: eastern european brides

eastern european brides — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:32:20 +0000

eastern european brides…

[...]The Myrdals and feminist natalism | afoe | A Fistful of Euros | European Opinion[...]…

By: eastern european countries

eastern european countries — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:30:25 +0000

eastern european countries…

[...]The Myrdals and feminist natalism | afoe | A Fistful of Euros | European Opinion[...]…

By: Matthew Yglesias » Paternal Leave in Sweden

Matthew Yglesias » Paternal Leave in Sweden — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:32:04 +0000

[...] by how common it was there. In general Swedish family policy is driven by an interesting form of feminist natalism that’s pretty alien to American political culture, but the result is an unusually high female [...]

By: M.S.

M.S. — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 05:51:54 +0000

“Fewer Turks/Pakistanis? Fewer refugees?”

Compared to Sweden, definitely. But then Germany, too, is AFAIK suffering from an anemic birth rate, and they have a sizeable immigrant minority.

What I’m aiming at is that there’s probably more at work here than mere policy differences, which in any case seem to be rather small between countries such as Sweden and (at least northern) Germany. I have a second flat in Berlin and spend some considerable time there, and at least from what I’ve heard and seen their Kita (i.e. daycare) system is _very_ similar to the one we have here in Scandinavia – and this, AFAIK, applies to state subsidies and parental benefits too.

So if there really is a big difference between the Myrdalian model and the German one, well, I at least can’t see it myself!

By: Peter Lund

Peter Lund — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:11:10 +0000

“But then the Finnish birth rate has declined maybe the _worst_ EU-wise, and we have essentially the same policy than Sweden in this regard. How do you explain that?”

Fewer Turks/Pakistanis? Fewer refugees?

By: M.S.

M.S. — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 05:18:02 +0000

“That Sweden’s birth rates haven’t declined to the same extent as Germany’s is then the outcome of conscious policies.”

But then the Finnish birth rate has declined maybe the _worst_ EU-wise, and we have essentially the same policy than Sweden in this regard. How do you explain that?

By: Tord Steiro

Tord Steiro — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 21:14:05 +0000

For some interesting perspectives on demography and fertility in the US:

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2009/10/religion-teen-birthrate-relation.php

And yes, the studies cited obviously have some weaknesses, but they all do, right? It’s interesting anyhow!

By: LV

LV — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:53:12 +0000

@ Barro

US had 2,1 child per women. True. “American” women, e. i. women born in US have only 1.8 child per women and even this number is so high thanks second generation Hispanic women Without them it is 1,6 children per women. I remember that I talk about children with some USians and they told me repeatedly. We do not have children, they are to expensive.

By: LV

LV — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 10:47:00 +0000

I agree it is about economy. Look the CEE numbers. Women had ca 1,8 – 2,1 children average (1990)
1992 the reform hit the fan. This numbers went down on 1,2. Why? The benefits went down. The creches were closed. Families must be responsible for the children alone. Women stated be discriminated on the labour market against more than in the past.
If you want have a child, you have possibilities
a) to stay with the child at home, which you cannot afford (one of my classmate hat to change his job, his wife was on maternity leave with second child and their were on the poverty level. He was earning 1,7 of country average)
b) to pay baby sitting, which you cannot afford (80 – 150% of you income)
c) to put your children in some state institute, which is badly run and has no places (Czechoslovakia had places for 20% of children in 1990, today for a 1%)

Estonia decided that women must be given the chance to have both the work and children. They have places for 20% of children and 1,55 child per women (higher in post communist EU)

By: Tord Steiro

Tord Steiro — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:39:46 +0000

@ Barro

I think the major problem is that it is economically totally infeasible to have children before you have access to the welfare benefits. Remembe that the alternative costs for these women is a well paid job and of course future career moves.

Most of the high-fertile american women are women whose alternative costs to having kids are either very low paid jobs, or simply unemployment. I think that is an important aspect of the story that you miss.

Many immigrant women in Europe have very many kids. Typically, these are immigrant women from countries where women enjoy very few opportunities outside the kitchen and where women in general have an skill level that effectively prevents them from ever entering the labourmarkets of Western Europe in a meaningful way (and this, of course, also reinforces certain values that are often embedded in the culture of the womans family).