I mentioned last time that you might be surprised at which European countries have the healthiest birthrates. Perhaps you thought of some of the “family-friendly” southern European countries like Italy, Greece and Spain. In fact, these nations have some of the lowest fertility rates in the world (about 1.3 children per couple).
However, childlessness is peculiarly high in Germany and Austria, too. Shorto cites a study that found that 27.8 percent of German women born in 1960 were childless. This rate is “far higher than in any other European country. (The rate in France, for example, was 10.7.) When European women age 18 to 34 were asked in another study to state their ideal number of children, 16.6 percent of those in Germany and 12.6 percent in Austria answered ‘none.’ (In Italy, by comparison, this figure was 3.8 percent.) The main reason seems to be a basic change in attitudes on the part of some women as to their ‘natural’ role.”
To modern, post-Christian Europeans, childlessness is emerging as an ideal lifestyle. Why is this?
The thinking of a nation or society can become, in the words of the Apostle Paul (Romans 1), “futile” and people’s hearts “darkened”. Eventually, the “truth of God” is exchanged for a lie, resulting in direct consequences in the relationship between man and woman. I suspect that the Western world in general - and Europe in particular - is farther along this road than any of us would like to imagine.
How does this play out?
Let’s start with the fact that the European countries with the healthiest birthrates are the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands; England and France are also relatively better off. Why would these countries - which would certainly be reckoned as some of the most “post-Christian” - be better off than the ostensibly more “religious” Roman Catholic south? Shorto points to a problem deeply rooted in the relationship between man and woman that is embedded in the “culture” of family life in the southern tier of Mediterranean nations, Germany and Austria. The problem is with the willingness of the fathers to be full partners in the home and in the raising of children.
Fathers in the nations with the healthiest birth rates are significantly more committed to a “partnership” model of marriage. Dutch fathers, for instance, “change more diapers, pick up more kids after soccer practice and clean up the living room more often than Italian fathers; therefore, relative to the population, there are more Dutch babies than Italian babies being born. As Mencarini said, ‘It’s about how much the man participates in child care.’”
Shorto argues that this is also the case in the United States, which enjoys the highest fertility rate of almost any developed country. In addition to the flexibility of U.S. society and the American job market, he points to “the relatively conservative and religiously oriented nature of American society, which both encourage larger families. It’s also true that mores have evolved in the U.S. to the point where not only is it socially acceptable for fathers to be active participants in raising children, but it’s also often socially unacceptable for them to do otherwise.”
Our good friends, Dave and Claudia Arp, who started their work of “Marriage Alive” in Europe, have being teaching a Biblically-based partnership model of marriage for years. It’s interesting that European social scientists are now uncovering empirical data that supports the direction of their teaching. (I’d encourage you to take a look at Dave and Claudia’s website .)
Shorto concludes his NY Times article with a dark glance at the future. He quotes Carl Haub of the Population Reference Bureau: “You can’t keep going with a completely upside-down age distribution, with the pyramid standing on its point. You can’t have a country where everybody lives in a nursing home.”
Please pray for Europe!
Comments? Questions?