SINGAPORE: Sometimes I find myself wishing I was raising my kids in an earlier era. No, this is not a sop to simpler times gone by - with more gendered social scripts and much greater poverty. But, I wonder if there are ideas from the past we can revive and combine with our modern nous, if we are to be a society that not only desires children, but has them too. 

Fertility rates are dropping across most advanced economies, with Singapore’s resident total fertility rate (TFR) falling below 1 for the first time in 2023, to 0.97. A total fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman is needed to sustain a population.

In a poll conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), when we asked survey respondents what makes them not want to have kids, unsurprisingly, the expense and stress of having children were the top reasons.

This is despite the government deploying policy after policy over the last decade to make parenting more affordable. The new Budget introduces additional fee caps in government-supported preschools, with further reductions slated for 2026. The aim is to make preschool fees comparable to the combined fees of primary school and after-school care.

Nonetheless, parents understandably gripe that more should be done. We still do not have equal parental leave for mothers and fathers. And what we do have feels insufficient in terms of the crucial first 18 months of a child’s life and the context of dual careers. Free education and healthcare are also not features of our system.

Yet, despite significantly addressing all of the above and enjoying a reputation as a haven for pro-parenting policies, the Nordic region experienced a falling TFR over the last decade: Between 7 per cent in Denmark and 25 per cent in Finland. One possible response to this would be to question the point of these pro-family accommodations.

A more nuanced approach would acknowledge that sustaining increased birth rates is a mighty quandary. There is no way of knowing that fertility rates would not drop even more sharply without policy interventions. Yet, policies that alleviate the burdens of parenthood are not enough. We must develop both the financial accommodations and collective psyche for greater child-rearing.

A CONDUCIVE PSYCHE

The United States and Australia will be younger than most other rich countries in 2050, primarily because they rely heavily on immigration.

This, however, is a controversial policy instrument, requiring more open discussion of the role of immigration in Singapore’s demographic story. Beyond this, it appears that the government is signalling that parenting will be supported financially.

However, the psyche needed for having more children must be a sustained part of the national conversation. What would it take to convince people that raising kids is a meaningful and generative activity, valued at least as much as economic production?

What is a set of attitudes that would be conducive to having more children? How can we foster a pro-parenting psyche, without which, even robust policies of parental leave and economic incentives are likely to not bear much fruit?

MUST IT FEEL LIKE A DOGFIGHT?

People used to have children as a means to reduce uncertainty; now, they remain child-free to achieve that same end. As an ethnographer, I have talked to many young Singaporeans about parenthood. There is a broad perception amongst those with and without children that parenting in Singapore is riddled with anxiety.

This is fundamentally averse to encouraging child-rearing, especially in the younger and more fertile years, when couples feel less secure about taking on the seemingly risky business of parenting.

Putting aside the archetypal tiger parents who strategically buy property and volunteer time to get their children into elite schools, I have heard about the lengths some parents go to secure a spot in a “good enough school”.

Calling friends in influential positions to secure a spot in a feeder preschool that will get them access to a desired primary school, these parents are optimising their toddler’s future education five years in advance.

And everybody knows at least one pair of parents who are targeting their dream primary school for their kids, as opposed to the one down the road from their home. These stories carry considerable influence in shaping our perception of what parenting entails.

MOVING AWAY FROM A ZERO-SUM MINDSET

So, how do we move away from this zero-sum mindset that my child will lose out if I cannot procure enough opportunities for them?

Parents experience relative scarcity because of this logic, even if they have comfortable, financially secure lives. Those utilising the fee caps available at government-supported preschools worry that they should be like the parents spending more - perhaps S$1,800 per month to send their child to a private preschool.

Meanwhile the parents who already spend that much, in turn, worry that they should be sending their children to an elite S$3,000 per month preschool.

Similarly, the same loop of relative scarcity emerges in comparisons of what parents can do to secure spots in desirable primary schools. The only parents who avoid this arms race are parents who manage to “check out” of this zero-sum psyche altogether.

For everybody else, that is, most parents, the focus has been on convincing them that “every school is a good school”. But perhaps, a more powerful and believable motivator would be to convince parents that the playing field is broad, rather than level.

Immigrant populations tend to appreciate opportunities in unusual places. However, we seem to have traded that in for increased social stratification and systematisation.

When stories of non-path-dependent success are commonplace, people will believe the tides have changed. Will an appreciation for expansive opportunity make us feel less anxious to parent?

ASPIRING FOR EQUAL PARTNERSHIPS AT HOME

In the same IPS study, we found that women aged 21 to 34 are less likely to foresee themselves being married and less likely to hope to have children in the future as compared to their male peers. Many female participants mentioned patriarchal norms in familial labour as a reason for this.

Incredible strides have been made towards gender equality in education and employment, with women now making core contributions to our economic activity. In line with these shifts, they now seek equitable partnership and accountability on the home front.

If this seems unattainable, women are increasingly content to find meaning in alternative child-free paths instead.

This is a more modern feature of the collective psyche that must be seriously addressed to create conditions fundamental to child-rearing. Can we understand, with greater granularity, exactly what effort is needed in being the default parent and how mothers and fathers can more equitably share this sometimes invisible load?

BROADER SUPPORT

Merely convincing parents that an economy of support is available will not buoy fertility rates in the long term. However, this support is important as TFR may fall even more rapidly without it, and it can amplify the attitudinal shifts needed.

Ostensibly, making education and healthcare more affordable reduces uncertainty. Similarly, equalising parental leave across genders and incentivising men to get more involved speaks to the concerns women have that underlie the gendered divide in desires to marry and parent.

But in an environment where parents feel the constant burden to optimise their child’s experience for uncertain gains, parenthood will continue to feel like a sacrifice that one needs to be supremely fortified for. Public policy has a role to play in addressing both the economics and the collective psyche necessary for encouraging child-rearing.

Taking on the responsibility of raising a child in our complex and uncertain world is possibly the most undervalued, highly generative human endeavour. Without this, population renewal would require drastic social change, some of which would be unpalatable to even the most rugged citizens amongst us.



Dr Kalpana Vignehsa is a senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore.

This piece was first published in CNA on 1 March 2024.

Top photo from Pexels.