4 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
John Hall's avatar

"But my obvious-once-you-think-about mechanism implies an extra point of leverage: undermine the norm against students having babies."

Or, undermine the norm that having a lot of education is needed for most people in the labor market.

Expand full comment
zb's avatar

Or undermine the norm that your career needs to start at age 23, rather than at age 30-35 when your youngest kid starts kindergarten.

Expand full comment
Star-Crowned Ariadne's avatar

Yeah, I kind of did that (only kind of. Because I struggled through an MSc then two years of a career before doing that). Had my first child at 28. Third and probably final child at 31. I still have time to start my career. What I did (3 kids in 3 years) definitely isn’t advisable from a maternal or indeed neonatal health perspective. I made out like a bandit in that gamble. I recovered very well, and my children are without the side effects closely spaced births. Now this seems like the thing I should have done, but even earlier. If a woman wanted to have it all, this seems like the clearly superior strategy. You can peak in your career a lot later than your fertility.

Expand full comment
zb's avatar

For this to work govt would need to find a way to help support young moms, who would otherwise be paying off student loans while surviving on spouse’s sole income and trying to raise kids. There are possibilities: student loan deferment, more generous child tax credit, “abundance “ policies to lower cost of housing.

Expand full comment