The Baby Bust of 2009 in the United States

by Carl Haub, senior visiting scholar

The United States, long a target of envy by many European and East Asian industrialized countries for its “high” birth rate, has recently seen its own birth rate decline. The recession has been blamed and would seem to be a no-brainer as a cause, but one cannot assume cause and effect from births. Few demographic events cause as much interest as peaks and troughs in the birth rate. Nine months after events such as large power failures, snowy winters, and even the soccer World Cup, we get questions at PRB asking if there were a spike in births during these things. Couples spent more time at home, in the dark…you get the idea.

The U.S. National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) has released an interesting brief on who may have been most affected by the recent recession and where they might be.  Births fell from an all-time high in 2007 of 4,316,233 to 4,131,019 in 2009, a decline of 4 percent. But, of course, rates tell the story better than just numbers. The numbers, however, can be very meaningful if you happen to be in the baby formula or diaper service businesses.

In 2007, there were 69.5 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44 compared with 66.7 in 2009. This is referred to by NCHS as the fertility rate, but is also often called the general fertility rate (GFR). By age, the largest decline was among women ages 20 to 24. Childbearing fell from 106.3 births pr 1,000 women in that group in 2007 to 96.3 in 2009, a 9 percent decline. Does that reflect a lack of confidence in the outlook for jobs among women or couples “just starting out?” Fertility among the 25-to-29 age group, the next older, fell by 6 percent. That group, which has had the highest rate in recent years, dropped from 117.5 in 2007 to 110.5 in 2009.  The decline was far less, only 2 percent among women in their 30s and even rose among women in their 40s, although latter group has much lower rates.

By ethnic group, the largest decline by a good measure was among Hispanic women where the GFR dropped from 102.2 in 2007 to 93.3 in 2009.

Births per 1,000 Women of Childbearing Age, Ages 15-44, United States, by Race or Origin, 2007 and 2009

The smallest decrease was among Non-Hispanic white women, suggesting that groups who are generally better of economically have been less affected. There is also evidence in the data that first birth rates were less susceptible to the recession in that those declined by 3 percent but second and third birth rates dropped by 5 and 6 percent, respectively. Geographically, fertility fell the most in western and southeastern states, a development that seems related to ethnicity.

Looking beyond 2009, the decline in births continued into 2010. For the 12 months ending June 2010, there were 4,055,000 births, compared with 4,186,000 for the 12 months ending June 2009. And, for the first six months of 2010, there were 1,952,000 births, down from 2,034,000 in the first six months of 2009. Seems the recession hasn’t lost its bite, fertility-wise.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.