Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

your views

‘This is offensive’: Readers say France’s baby push misses the real pressures facing women

Our community said France’s push for young women to have children before it is ‘too late’ is insulting and out of touch

Many feel discussions about fertility and birth rates are transforming The Handmaid's Tale from fantasy into fact
Many feel discussions about fertility and birth rates are transforming The Handmaid's Tale from fantasy into fact (Hulu)

The French government’s push to remind young women to have children has prompted a strong reaction from Independent readers.

France plans to send a letter to all 29-year-olds urging them to have children before it’s “too late.” The health ministry says it will give thousands of young people clear, science-based information on sexual and reproductive health to prevent regrets later.

For many, the letters felt insulting and out of touch. Commenters pointed to the huge pressures women already face – including high childcare costs and the challenges of balancing work and family.

They argued governments should focus on practical support like tax breaks, flexible work, and affordable childcare, rather than sending reminders to procreate.

Some readers , however, acknowledged the demographic worries. Falling birth rates and an ageing population pose real economic challenges, from funding pensions to maintaining the workforce.

Others stressed the importance of personal choice, emphasising that choosing not to have children is perfectly valid, and no one should be shamed for that decision.

Here’s what you had to say:

Economic pressure on young women

This is offensive to young women who are already under massive pressure, both economic and psychological, for having children while at the same time working full-time to make ends meet.

If governments are serious about helping them have children, they should:

  1. Massively reduce taxes paid by women until their children are of school age,
  2. Issue legislation allowing them more childcare time and support without fear of consequences in terms of losing their jobs,
  3. Facilitate their return to work once the children are old enough.

The whole situation is just absolutely bonkers. Stop importing people, divert resources from the old generation to the young, and give young families the support they need to have children.

AgeOfStoopid

A blunt instrument

Single mothers (ditto those on welfare) are often castigated and viewed as a resource drain on society … you can't have it both ways.

Treatment meted out to single mothers reminds me a bit of that joke in the movie Cabaret about the 'right type of girls' when states should welcome all and be inclusive.

An important issue would seem to me to be the insane cost of having kids (childcare, daycare, etc.), reliance on grandparents' help, and the implications for the mother's career path and pension impact. Maybe more flexible support would be better than a message that is anchored in FOMO (fear of missing out).

I recognise falling birth rates is an issue – in my online work, Japanese clients tell me how terrified their society is due to the severe decline there, but this approach does seem to be a rather blunt instrument.

TeacherSean

This is about awareness

This isn't about forcing women in France to get pregnant immediately. It is about making them aware of a facility which could make it easier, or possible, for them to have children later in life IF THEY WANT TO.

Infertility in France is a rising issue, and this is a reminder of a public service to help people have children if they want, and when they want to. With France having far more support for mothers and parents through generous maternity leave, child benefits, and affordable childcare, enabling more people to have children when older through egg freezing just sounds sensible. This is particularly true at a time when other ways of increasing the working population appear politically unappealing.

JustgoingtocallyououtonyourBS

Cost of raising children today

I had two children in the 1970s. We were buying our house, and I could afford to give up work. We were not well off, but we ate well if frugally. Old car, camping holidays, not many new clothes, but it was doable for nearly 10 years.

Fast forward, and younger women could not afford to give up work primarily because mortgage rates had shot up. Since then, I’ve met very few women who were stay-at-home mums. Costs have risen hugely. Staying home with children has long-term costs in career and pension. Governments need to deal with all that, please.

Indi

Consequences of declining birth rates

My kids might just live until 2100, when they will be pensioners.

Replacement rate is 2.1; we are managing 1.4 in Britain. Without immigration, Britain's population will fall to maybe 55 million.

But the birth rate continues to decline, as does male sperm count. If it falls to 1.0, we get a population of maybe 30 million.

There are huge consequences. We won't be able to pay any state pensions. We won't have enough working-age taxpayers to fund any kind of first-world economy. We will have decades of economic decline, skills shortages, reducing GDP. It's not pretty, even if getting a council house is easier.

France is right to highlight the issue. It's not going away, and it does not get nearly enough discussion.

SteveHill

Better than future corrective measures

The French government is justified in encouraging people to consider having children because demographic decline affects things like pensions and healthcare, not to mention economic stability. Such encouragement is far more sensible than having to take future corrective measures such as putting up taxes or reducing pensions.

It may be possible to reduce the extent to which it is necessary to impose such measures. The UK should learn from the approach.

Musil

Personal choice

Women – and men – have every right not to have children.

But that decision creates consequences for both the individual and society.

There is no point trying to blame-shift responsibility onto “Peter Pans” who won’t take responsibility for helping women raise a family, or onto women who choose a career over a relationship. People have a right to make their own choices.

But this doesn’t in any way absolve them of the consequences of those choices. Half of young men no longer approach women for dates, while thousands of older women now realise Mr Right isn’t going to suddenly want to marry them, so they are freezing their eggs.

Call it the doctrine of unforeseen consequences.

FinnSmith

Rejecting societal expectations

Certain sections of society, especially the religious, expect us to be brood mares to outbreed the competitors. I'm 70, in a same-sex relationship, and never wanted children. I never wanted to ruin my body, bank balance, career, or social life either.

Götterdämmerung

Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.

Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.

Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment, click here.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in