The other side of the coin with regards to high childcare costs is that childcare workers get paid almost nothing, and in many cases don't receive any benefits (health insurance, retirement, etc)! I worked at a preschool for a year and a half and was paid $13/hour with no benefits (this was in 2022-2023). I realize that the tuition goes to more than just worker pay, but there has got to be some way to keep costs down for parents while also paying the people who care for our children a decent wage.
"Of course, an additional reason is that when families have children and child care costs are high, a lot of women are forced out of the job market. Unless Mom is a highly paid professional, it may make more sense for her to stay home and care for the kids than to keep working. That makes her financially beholden to her husband and helps keep everyone in their nice little traditional roles of breadwinner and homemaker."
My husband and I (mid-40s now) ultimately chose not to have children for multiple reasons, a choice that for multiple reasons I'm glad we made. Money was absolutely one of those reasons. My husband is happily underemployed; I make decent money for my field but my field is a lower-paying one. (We also won't be able to retire.)
We're both self-employed and able to be so because of the ACA but our monthly premiums are hundreds of dollars more than our mortgage (including taxes + insurance). We wouldn't have been able to afford healthcare for a child, much less childcare, much less all our other bills if either of us didn't work.
My wife and I were DINKs, now retired. No cost for kids, no opportunity costs for kids, plus two people who believed in putting aside the money for retirement first. We're comfortable, we travel (some), and we're on track for moving into a 2BR apartment in a retirement home when available (always hoping that the local real estate market doesn't tank when we need to cash in on our house).
We have no clue how couples just starting can afford a family. Meanwhile, the governments (state and federal) that claim to want more babies do nothing to help pay for them.
We just hope that robot medical assistants become cheap enough in ten years to take care of us, because there certainly won't be enough young people.
Your article reflects something I see in the Bay Area, a VHCOL area . I know of many families where if the parents decide to have children, they either only have one child or have their kids spaced out by 4+ years so only one child is left in daycare. And unless one parent earns an insanely high salary, both parents must work to comfortably take care of their kids.
The cost is unreal. I honestly don't know how people do it.
When I used daycare for my daughter, I paid my next door neighbor $2 per hour. To make it work, I sometimes took her to work with me after hours or worked from home, because I was only earning $6 per hour myself.
I remember my mom dropped me off at her neighbor’s when I was a kid. I just get this sense that even though my parents at times financially struggled, they were still able to support their kids on a modest income. I just think doing so now is so much harder because everything is expensive.
Well, now we all have to pay the "Oligarch Tax." We pay it in the form of very high rent or expensive houses, inflated healthcare costs and many other things. We pay it so that others can have yachts.
As a millennial, I’ve felt these pressures you so perfectly described and now that having a child is financially in reach, I’m basically aging out of doing without fertility treatments. It’s heartbreaking and I’ve been paralyzed weighing my long term security against my desire to be a mother. I think Republicans are desperate for us to have more babies for economic reasons. Our GDP and growth is dependent on population growth and increasing (unsustainable) consumption. Look at Japan, Italy and other nations where the population inversion is already hitting. Not enough people of working age to take care of the elderly or keep the economy afloat. Denying abortions and birth control to low income women is probably more aimed at creating fodder for military recruitment as for many who can’t afford or are not ready for college due to our terrible schools, it might be a ticket out. Funding not for profit trade schools and our national community college system and making them free or heavily subsidized would be a better way to fuel that growth imo.
I hope you are able to find the choice that's right for you. I am still kicking myself for not having a third baby ... but even with hindsight, I do not know how I could have brought that baby into the world without plunging us into poverty. It's terrible that it's so difficult.
This article really made me think about how different things are now when it comes to having kids. It’s wild how something so natural has become such a financial burden. Do you think it’s possible for things to change or is this just the new reality for most families?
I think the only way to fight this is to make radically different choices. We could organize with friends and family, for example — buy a big house or duplex and agree to raise your children together. Not an easy thing to set up, though. We’d rather spend a fortune being independent than to agree to compromise and cooperate. You can imagine the conflicts that would come up.
That's an interesting perspective, Michelle. Shared living could definitely lighten the financial load, but getting people to prioritize community over independence would be the real challenge.
Seeing the economic impact of marriage (and divorce) on women in my family permanently put me off SAHM and getting hitched. My rules for my partners: no rings and no living expenses above our lowest individual salaries (my miserliness earned me that nickname, “Nickels” lol.) I am lucky enough to have a career that could support having two kids, and I feel awful that many will never have the choice.
I too, was a SAHM for several years and have no regrets. However, you are right; it ultimately hurts our SS record and influences retirement benefits. I had no idea about this, but probably would have been unconcerned even if I knew. In later years, I managed to recoup those employment pay gaps. My profession does not pay very well either, so in the long run, those years I spent focused on my child were definitely worth it. I'm now retired and my benefits are 60% of the highest paid year that I worked.
I had only one child mainly because the labor was brutal and I eventually needed a C-section. But another factor in my decision was the cost of daycare. For working families with kids it has got to be so hard to stay afloat these days.
Medicaid pays a fraction to birth centers and midwives that it pays to hospitals. And I agree, having a baby and surviving the pregnancy is a small part of the financial investment/cost of being a parent.
Back in the late 90s I had a friend who was a flight attendant whose husband was a plumber. She said they chose not to have kids because of the cost. She would've wanted to have taken enough time of to raise her child without sending it to daycare and there was no way they could do that the way they wanted to on their incomes. I can't imagine how much more difficult that would be now.
In a song about the Roaring Twenties, an alternate verse to Ain’t We Got Fun changed from ‘the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’ to ‘the rich get richer and the poor have children’.
The other side of the coin with regards to high childcare costs is that childcare workers get paid almost nothing, and in many cases don't receive any benefits (health insurance, retirement, etc)! I worked at a preschool for a year and a half and was paid $13/hour with no benefits (this was in 2022-2023). I realize that the tuition goes to more than just worker pay, but there has got to be some way to keep costs down for parents while also paying the people who care for our children a decent wage.
Very true.
This needs to be subsidized.
It's this, exactly:
"Of course, an additional reason is that when families have children and child care costs are high, a lot of women are forced out of the job market. Unless Mom is a highly paid professional, it may make more sense for her to stay home and care for the kids than to keep working. That makes her financially beholden to her husband and helps keep everyone in their nice little traditional roles of breadwinner and homemaker."
My husband and I (mid-40s now) ultimately chose not to have children for multiple reasons, a choice that for multiple reasons I'm glad we made. Money was absolutely one of those reasons. My husband is happily underemployed; I make decent money for my field but my field is a lower-paying one. (We also won't be able to retire.)
We're both self-employed and able to be so because of the ACA but our monthly premiums are hundreds of dollars more than our mortgage (including taxes + insurance). We wouldn't have been able to afford healthcare for a child, much less childcare, much less all our other bills if either of us didn't work.
My wife and I were DINKs, now retired. No cost for kids, no opportunity costs for kids, plus two people who believed in putting aside the money for retirement first. We're comfortable, we travel (some), and we're on track for moving into a 2BR apartment in a retirement home when available (always hoping that the local real estate market doesn't tank when we need to cash in on our house).
We have no clue how couples just starting can afford a family. Meanwhile, the governments (state and federal) that claim to want more babies do nothing to help pay for them.
We just hope that robot medical assistants become cheap enough in ten years to take care of us, because there certainly won't be enough young people.
Your article reflects something I see in the Bay Area, a VHCOL area . I know of many families where if the parents decide to have children, they either only have one child or have their kids spaced out by 4+ years so only one child is left in daycare. And unless one parent earns an insanely high salary, both parents must work to comfortably take care of their kids.
The cost is unreal. I honestly don't know how people do it.
When I used daycare for my daughter, I paid my next door neighbor $2 per hour. To make it work, I sometimes took her to work with me after hours or worked from home, because I was only earning $6 per hour myself.
I remember my mom dropped me off at her neighbor’s when I was a kid. I just get this sense that even though my parents at times financially struggled, they were still able to support their kids on a modest income. I just think doing so now is so much harder because everything is expensive.
Well, now we all have to pay the "Oligarch Tax." We pay it in the form of very high rent or expensive houses, inflated healthcare costs and many other things. We pay it so that others can have yachts.
...Googling VHCOL... Got it! Thank you! 😊
As a millennial, I’ve felt these pressures you so perfectly described and now that having a child is financially in reach, I’m basically aging out of doing without fertility treatments. It’s heartbreaking and I’ve been paralyzed weighing my long term security against my desire to be a mother. I think Republicans are desperate for us to have more babies for economic reasons. Our GDP and growth is dependent on population growth and increasing (unsustainable) consumption. Look at Japan, Italy and other nations where the population inversion is already hitting. Not enough people of working age to take care of the elderly or keep the economy afloat. Denying abortions and birth control to low income women is probably more aimed at creating fodder for military recruitment as for many who can’t afford or are not ready for college due to our terrible schools, it might be a ticket out. Funding not for profit trade schools and our national community college system and making them free or heavily subsidized would be a better way to fuel that growth imo.
I hope you are able to find the choice that's right for you. I am still kicking myself for not having a third baby ... but even with hindsight, I do not know how I could have brought that baby into the world without plunging us into poverty. It's terrible that it's so difficult.
The Red states, that consider women broodmares, are least likely to support any kind of help for families with children!
I’ve never understood that!
This article really made me think about how different things are now when it comes to having kids. It’s wild how something so natural has become such a financial burden. Do you think it’s possible for things to change or is this just the new reality for most families?
I think the only way to fight this is to make radically different choices. We could organize with friends and family, for example — buy a big house or duplex and agree to raise your children together. Not an easy thing to set up, though. We’d rather spend a fortune being independent than to agree to compromise and cooperate. You can imagine the conflicts that would come up.
That's an interesting perspective, Michelle. Shared living could definitely lighten the financial load, but getting people to prioritize community over independence would be the real challenge.
Seeing the economic impact of marriage (and divorce) on women in my family permanently put me off SAHM and getting hitched. My rules for my partners: no rings and no living expenses above our lowest individual salaries (my miserliness earned me that nickname, “Nickels” lol.) I am lucky enough to have a career that could support having two kids, and I feel awful that many will never have the choice.
I too, was a SAHM for several years and have no regrets. However, you are right; it ultimately hurts our SS record and influences retirement benefits. I had no idea about this, but probably would have been unconcerned even if I knew. In later years, I managed to recoup those employment pay gaps. My profession does not pay very well either, so in the long run, those years I spent focused on my child were definitely worth it. I'm now retired and my benefits are 60% of the highest paid year that I worked.
I had only one child mainly because the labor was brutal and I eventually needed a C-section. But another factor in my decision was the cost of daycare. For working families with kids it has got to be so hard to stay afloat these days.
Medicaid pays a fraction to birth centers and midwives that it pays to hospitals. And I agree, having a baby and surviving the pregnancy is a small part of the financial investment/cost of being a parent.
Back in the late 90s I had a friend who was a flight attendant whose husband was a plumber. She said they chose not to have kids because of the cost. She would've wanted to have taken enough time of to raise her child without sending it to daycare and there was no way they could do that the way they wanted to on their incomes. I can't imagine how much more difficult that would be now.
*off
In a song about the Roaring Twenties, an alternate verse to Ain’t We Got Fun changed from ‘the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’ to ‘the rich get richer and the poor have children’.