CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,082Family Dynamics and RelationshipsReproductive Health and ContraceptionGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives

Open access
Mills, Melinda, Rindfuss, Ronald R., McDonald, Peter, te Velde, Egbert, on behalf of the ESHRE Reproduction and Society Task Force·2011·Human Reproduction Update
DOI 10.1093/humupd/dmr026PMC PMC3529638
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Never before have parents in most Western societies had their first children as late as in recent decades. What are the central reasons for postponement? What is known about the link between the delay of childbearing and social policy incentives to counter these trends? This review engages in a systematic analysis of existing evidence to extract the maximum amount of knowledge about the reasons for birth postponement and the effectiveness of social policy incentives. METHODS: The review followed the PRISMA procedure, with literature searches conducted in relevant demographic, social science and medical science databases (SocINDEX, Econlit, PopLine, Medline) and located via other sources. The search focused on subjects related to childbearing behaviour, postponement and family policies. National, international and individual-level data sources were also used to present summary statistics. RESULTS: There is clear empirical evidence of the postponement of the first child. Central reasons are the rise of effective contraception, increases in women's education and labour market participation, value changes, gender equity, partnership changes, housing conditions, economic uncertainty and the absence of supportive family policies. Evidence shows that some social policies can be effective in countering postponement. CONCLUSIONS: The postponement of first births has implications on the ability of women to conceive and parents to produce additional offspring. Massive postponement is attributed to the clash between the optimal biological period for women to have children with obtaining additional education and building a career. A growing body of literature shows that female employment and childrearing can be combined when the reduction in work-family conflict is facilitated by policy intervention.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humupd/dmr026

Cites

160 of 160 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hoem JM, Neyer G, Andersson G. Educational attainment and childlessness: the relationship between educational field, educational level, and childlessness among Swedish women born in 1955 -59. Demo Res 2006;14:331-380.
  2. Spinelli A, Talamanca IF, Lauria L. Patterns of contraceptive use in 5 European countries. Am J Public Health 2000;90:1403-1408.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mills, M., Rindfuss, R. R., McDonald, P., te Velde, E., & on behalf of the ESHRE Reproduction and Society Task Force
Affiliations
  • University of Groningen (NL)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Department of Public Health, Erasmus UC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Corresponding author
Mills, Melinda
ORCID
Venue
Human Reproduction Update
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2011-06-07
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
848-860
ISSN
  • 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2369
DOI
10.1093/humupd/dmr026
PMC
PMC3529638
OpenAlex
W2141855179
Cited by
1,082
References
160
Citations by year
2026: 88 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 96 · 2023: 98 · 2022: 109 · 2021: 97 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 69 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 21
FWCI
12.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Reproduction Update (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (452-10-012)
  • National Institutes of Health (2r24hd050924-06)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24 HD-050924)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
birth postponement, delayed childbearing, family policy, contraception, women's education, female labour market participation, work-family conflict, gender equity, housing conditions, economic uncertainty, fertility trends
MeSH terms
Adult, Educational Status, Employment, Female, Fertility, Humans, Male, Maternal Age, Middle Aged, Motivation, Parents, Pregnancy, Public Policy, Family Planning Policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review