United States Total Fertility Rate Increases
- Bryson and Grandpa
Born in the U.S.A.
Recently I wrote about The Falling Fertility of Europe. Now it is the turn of the United States. The U.S. has one of the highest fertility rates in the West. The most recently available fertility statistics from the government are for 2006. Take a look at the table below and then join me in a discussion of what some of the numbers may mean. In the table below Birth rate refers to live births per 1,000 population. Teen birth rate is live births to women aged 15-19 per 1,000 of women aged 15-19 in the population. Fertility rate is live births per 1,000 women aged 15-44 years. The TFR (Total Fertility Rate) of a population is the average number of children that would be born to a woman over her lifetime. Bear in mind that the replacement fertility rate is roughly 2.1 births per woman for most industrialized countries.
Highs and Lows
By sorting the TFR column we can see that 25 states have a Total Fertility Rate of 2.1 or higher. This is the replacement rate of the population. Of course because of immigration the population is increasing. Through the sort we can also see that Vermont has the lowest TFR and Utah the highest. Why is this? In Utah the high birth rate is undoubtedly due to the high percentage of Mormons in the state, who tend to have larger families. Vermont’s low birth rate is attributed to its racial homogeneity and high education levels among women — factors not easily changed by government intervention. Hispanic women, who comprise less than one percent of the state’s population, statistically have higher birth rates.
The Problem of Low Birth Rates
Consider what the Vermont Governor Douglas has to say:
Employers cite adequacy of the workforce as one major concern for future success here. We have employers who have created good jobs and want to create more, but they need a qualified workforce to take those jobs.
In the last year the number of people in Vermont’s workforce fell by 2,000. The low birth rate is a component of a much bigger problem. The median age of Vermont’s workforce, at 42.3 years old, is the highest in the nation. In the next twenty years the workforce is expected to shrink annually as those wage-earners reach retirement age. Because surrounding states also have low birth rates the competition for a shrinking pool of workers will become intense.
United States 2006 Fertility Rates by State
Click on the column headers to sort.
| State | Birth rate | Teen birth rate | Fertility rate | TFR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 14.1 | 41.4 | 68.4 | 2.10 |
| Alabama | 13.7 | 53.5 | 67.0 | 2.03 |
| Alaska | 16.4 | 44.3 | 76.7 | 2.32 |
| Arizona | 16.6 | 62.0 | 81.6 | 2.44 |
| Arkansas | 14.6 | 62.3 | 72.2 | 2.18 |
| California | 15.4 | 39.9 | 71.8 | 2.18 |
| Colorado | 14.9 | 43.8 | 70.2 | 2.11 |
| Connecticut | 11.9 | 23.5 | 58.8 | 1.90 |
| Delaware | 14.0 | 41.9 | 67.3 | 2.09 |
| District of Columbia | 14.7 | 48.4 | 58.4 | 1.70 |
| Florida | 13.1 | 45.2 | 67.3 | 2.09 |
| Georgia | 15.9 | 54.2 | 72.4 | 2.23 |
| Hawaii | 14.8 | 40.5 | 73.9 | 2.23 |
| Idaho | 16.5 | 39.2 | 80.9 | 2.42 |
| Illinois | 14.1 | 39.5 | 66.8 | 2.03 |
| Indiana | 14.0 | 43.5 | 68.3 | 2.08 |
| Iowa | 13.6 | 32.9 | 69.1 | 2.14 |
| Kansas | 14.8 | 42.0 | 73.3 | 2.23 |
| Kentucky | 13.8 | 54.6 | 67.1 | 2.05 |
| Louisiana | 14.8 | 53.9 | 70.6 | 2.11 |
| Maine | 10.7 | 25.8 | 54.5 | 1.77 |
| Maryland | 13.8 | 33.6 | 64.2 | 2.01 |
| Massachusetts | 12.1 | 21.3 | 56.9 | 1.78 |
| Michigan | 12.6 | 33.8 | 61.7 | 1.93 |
| Minnesota | 14.2 | 27.9 | 68.7 | 2.14 |
| Mississippi | 15.8 | 68.4 | 75.7 | 2.26 |
| Missouri | 13.9 | 45.7 | 67.9 | 2.06 |
| Montana | 13.2 | 39.6 | 69.5 | 2.13 |
| Nebraska | 15.1 | 33.4 | 75.1 | 2.29 |
| Nevada | 16.0 | 55.8 | 77.9 | 2.36 |
| New Hampshire | 10.9 | 18.7 | 53.4 | 1.75 |
| New Jersey | 13.2 | 24.9 | 64.5 | 2.05 |
| New Mexico | 15.3 | 64.1 | 74.7 | 2.23 |
| New York | 13.0 | 25.7 | 61.1 | 1.89 |
| North Carolina | 14.4 | 49.7 | 69.0 | 2.13 |
| North Dakota | 13.6 | 26.5 | 68.7 | 2.14 |
| Ohio | 13.1 | 40.0 | 64.7 | 1.99 |
| Oklahoma | 15.1 | 59.6 | 74.7 | 2.20 |
| Oregon | 13.2 | 35.7 | 65.4 | 1.96 |
| Pennsylvania | 12.0 | 31.0 | 60.6 | 1.93 |
| Rhode Island | 11.6 | 27.8 | 54.6 | 1.72 |
| South Carolina | 14.4 | 53.0 | 69.6 | 2.14 |
| South Dakota | 15.2 | 40.2 | 78.5 | 2.40 |
| Tennessee | 14.0 | 54.7 | 67.5 | 2.07 |
| Texas | 17.0 | 63.1 | 78.8 | 2.36 |
| Utah | 21.0 | 34.0 | 94.1 | 2.63 |
| Vermont | 10.4 | 20.8 | 52.2 | 1.69 |
| Virginia | 14.1 | 35.2 | 66.3 | 2.05 |
| Washington | 13.6 | 33.4 | 65.2 | 1.98 |
| West Virginia | 11.5 | 44.9 | 59.4 | 1.82 |
| Wisconsin | 13.0 | 30.9 | 64.0 | 2.01 |
| Wyoming | 14.9 | 47.3 | 75.9 | 2.24 |
.
Higher Teen Birth Rates
2006 saw significant increases of teen birth rates in 26 states. My table doesn’t show previous year’s statistics but an article in USA Today has a useful map comparing 2005 with 2006. Some blame the increase on a more sexualized culture and greater acceptance of births to unmarried women. Others say abstinence-only sex education and a possible de-emphasis on birth control may play a part. According to USA Today, Sarah Brown, CEO of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, says she is less inclined to believe abortion is driving higher teen birth rates and suggests that increases in high-profile unmarried births in Hollywood, movies and even politics is a significant factor for impressionable teens. Sarah says:
In the last couple of years, we had Jamie Lynn Spears. We had Juno and we had Bristol Palin. Those three were in 2007 and 2008 and not in 2005 to 2006, but they point to that phenomenon.
Total Fertility Rate Details
The TFR was 2.1 births per woman in 2006, a two percent increase compared with 2005 (2.05) and the highest reported since 1971 (2.27). This is the first year the U.S. TFR has been above replacement since 1971. From 1990 to 1997, the TFR decreased substantially (from 2.08 to 1.97), but has generally increased since 1998. The increase in the TFR in 2006 reflects the increase in birth rates for nearly all age groups, especially for those women aged 15–19 and 20–24 years. The TFR also increased for nearly all race and Hispanic origin groups between 2005 and 2006 with the rate increasing 1 percent for non-Hispanic white, 3 percent for Hispanic, and 5 percent for non-Hispanic black women. (Source: National Center for Health Statistics PDF)
Summary
If not for immigration, the U.S. population would merely be replacing itself. In future years the birth rates will likely be declining, along with world birth rates in general. Because many have been indoctrinated with the “population explosion” myth it will be difficult to convince sufficient numbers that there is even a problem with low birth rates. What is required is an emphasis on family and the preciousness of children. Governments need to be friendly towards traditional marriage and encourage all to support family life.
Related Articles
Report: U.S. births hit all-time high
3 Utah metro areas among fastest growing in U.S.
Birthrate drops in multiple states.
Demographics and Deflation: an unpleasant comparison.
The Family: The Hope for the Future of Nations.
Related posts (auto generated)
- World Total Fertility Rate Declines In the last few decades there have been significant decreases...
- Google Plots Fertility Rate Google recently added the World Bank's World Development Indicators to...
- The Falling Fertility of Europe Not only in Europe but world-wide there are declining birthrates....
- If Utah Was A Country If Utah was a country it would have a GDP...
Loading ...
It is interesting to note that even though Utah has the highest TFR, it is 34th in Teen Birth Rates. Also note that States that have lower Teen Birth Rates than Utah are all East Coast States.
Have you seen “Demographic Winter”? It is truly chilling. I suffer with infertility, but have always wished to have a large family. With all my heart I wish it. People with working ovaries have no idea what a blessing that is. I cannot imagine self imposed infertility.
Beetlebabee, It is always an honor to have you comment on my blog. No, I haven’t seen Demographic Winter. I have a link to the website in my “The Falling Fertility of Europe” post and I have watched the trailer. Just looking at the numbers (or lack of) in Europe is enough to know there is a problem. People just haven’t figured out yet that population declines can be really serious. Governments have already looked over the numbers and figured out there is a problem years ago. That’s why deductions and tax credits for children keep increasing in a belated attempt to fix all the over-population propaganda that was spewed out for decades. Sorry about your infertility. However, you seem to be putting your time to good use with your excellent blogging.
Thanks for the interesting post! As I am inquiring correlations of religion & demography, I was looking for some new studies on Mormon fertility. Here in Germany, there is an ensuing debate whether religiosity is correlated with higher reproductive success (which would mean a lot from the perspective of biology!). Thus, I linked your blog-post from my (German) science blog. And if you’d know about any scientific paper on the topic to add to the Web Resources on Religion & Reproduction, that would be great!
Thanks from across the ocean!
Dr. Blume,
Thank you for your comment. I do not know of any new studies on Mormon fertility but if I come across any I will contact you. Living in the heart of Utah it is obvious through observation that people of faith generally have more children. I wish you well in your endeavors.
Beetlebabee, perhaps you should consider adopting one of the many children who have been abandoned to a foster home in America. My mom was one of those children, and she certainly appreciated it back in the day.
It is interesting that the population of wealthier countries, like the United States, would have to be sustained by immigration. Here is an interesting article on the same subject – what the possible economic consequences are for such population growth: https://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/Global-Economics/Population-Relations/sl35291137bp410cpp10pn1.html
Jim,
It is indeed interesting that fertility falls off. In your link the backwards J that is discussed is not something all demographers agree on. For example, see http://demographymatters.blogspot.com/2009/08/more-on-fertility-and-hdi.html
And of course with half the world’s population having a lower than replacement fertility not all nations will be able to attract all the immigrants they need.
It’s amazing how many people have fertility problems in the U.S.
I think one of the biggest factors causing fertility is chemicals such as pesticides, plasticizers (bisphenol A and phthalates), surfectants (alkylphenols), artificial fragrances, and flame retardants (PBDEs).
Some of these chemicals can cause trouble even at 2,000 times less than what the EPA regulated amounts says. Also about 2,000 new chemicals enter the product lines every year, yet there is no adequate testing, and these ‘newly introduced’ chemicals aren’t even listed as active ingredients.
But yeah, It’s amazing what is happening. If I would have to guess, the future of this world is going to be almost like the movie “Children of Men”, that is, if the government doesn’t start doing something to monitor things that harm reproductive organs.
It hadn’t occurred to me that chemicals could be a problem. Thank you for the information. How many people do you think it affects?
Chemicals do play a huge role. Just from our drinking water along we are getting microscopic specs of different chemicals we shouldn’t. These include things such as Vicodin, ibuprofen, birth control, etcetera, which is flushed down the toilet.
I really wish I could find that article, it was in the nytimes, if I ever do I’ll post it.
Is this the article?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/opinion/08kristof.html
To those who wish they could become pregnant but can’t, I have to say I can sympathize with them. My husband and I tried for several years to get me pregnant, but to no avail. Then I learned that what your body is telling you is that you’re not healthy enough to carry a baby. I discovered a holistic method to treat the whole body and conceived our first child in 2 1/2 months. Its worth a try and cost a heck of a lot less than pills, drugs, and surgeries.
You are right it is worth a try and it did work for you. If nothing else one would be more healthy than before. Thank you for your comment and congratulations on your baby.
I am also an advocate of a natural approach to trying to get pregnant. I have written an article on getting pregnant after miscarriage that you may find interesting and helpful. It is great news to see that so many are now getting involved. The environment, nutrition, and general health are factors in fertility.