Why Would Gen Z Bring Kids into a World They Don’t Want to be in?

Birth rates are declining globally, with the average fertility rate halving from roughly 5 births per woman in 1950 to 2.2 in 2021. Over half of all countries and territories are now below the replacement level of 2.1. This long-term trend is leading to aging populations and widespread population decline.

Sociologists and psychologists are currently studying the link between suicide rates and the declining birth rates. While there isn’t one single study that definitively links suicide rates to birth rates in a simple “A causes B” way, there is a massive body of research on “Eco-anxiety,” “Doomscrolling,” and “Generational Hopelessness” that explains it.

Note: Some of the feelings and opinion of Gen Z apply to older adults that have also decided to not have children.

The “Moral” Hesitation (Eco-Anxiety)

One of the most direct links is a landmark 2021 study published in The Lancet Planetary Health. They surveyed 10,000 young people (ages 16–25) across 10 countries:

• 45% said climate anxiety affects their daily lives.
• 39% reported they are hesitant to have children because of the climate crisis.
• The common sentiment wasn’t just “it’s too hot outside,” but rather a moral dilemma: Is it ethical to bring someone into a world that I believe is failing?

The Mental Health “Safety First” Approach

Gen Z is often called the most “therapy-literate” generation. Studies by organizations like Gallup and Walton Family Foundation show that Gen Z prioritizes mental stability over traditional milestones.

• If a young person is struggling with suicidal ideation or severe depression, they often view parenthood not as a “goal,” but as a high-risk stressor they aren’t equipped for.
• The “Cycle-Breaking” Mentality: Many Gen Zers report that they don’t want to pass down their trauma or mental health struggles to a new generation, especially in a society they perceive as increasingly lonely or economically hostile.

Economic Hopelessness

A 2025 study on economic hardship and suicidal ideation found a strong correlation between financial instability and despair.

• For Gen Z, the “standard” path—get a degree, buy a house, have 2 kids—feels mathematically impossible.
• When the “world they live in” feels like a treadmill of debt and high rent, the idea of adding a child (which costs roughly $300,000 USD to raise) feels less like a joy and more like a “financial death sentence.”

The Trend

The Impact of Social Media

While earlier generations used social media to share highlights, for Gen Z, it has become a primary lens through which they view the world—and often, that lens is filtered for maximum distress.

Recent studies from 2025 and 2026 have started to define a specific phenomenon: The “Doom-Loop” of Modern Parenting. Here is how social media is directly influencing the decision to remain childless and the rise in mental health struggles.

The “Doomscrolling” Effect

Research published in Frontiers in Sociology shows that Gen Z uses “doomscrolling”—the compulsive consumption of negative news—as a coping mechanism for loneliness. However, this creates an existential threat cycle:

• Algorithms prioritize content about climate collapse, political instability, and economic “doom.”
• When young people spend 5+ hours a day (the current average for Gen Z) seeing a world on fire, the idea of introducing a child to that “burning house” feels like an act of cruelty rather than an act of hope.

The Rise of “Antinatalist” Content

Social media has given a massive platform to Antinatalism (the philosophical position that having children is morally wrong).

• On platforms like TikTok and Instagram, there is a surge of content highlighting the “luxury and freedom” of being childless versus “regretful parenting” videos.
• Content that highlights the brutal, unglamorous side of parenting—postpartum depression, financial ruin, and loss of identity—goes viral more often than “idealized” family life. This creates a skewed data set for young people trying to decide their future.

Comparison and “Lifestyle Dysmorphia”

Social media creates a high bar for what a “successful” life looks like.

• The “Perfect Parent” Trap: Gen Z sees hyper-curated “aesthetic” parenting and realizes they can never afford or achieve that level of perfection.
• Economic Comparison: Seeing peers travel or live “soft lives” makes the $300,000 cost of raising a child feel like a social and financial “suicide” for their own quality of life.

Mental Health and Social Feedback

Recent data from The World Happiness Report notes that social media is harming adolescents at a “population level.”

• Suicidal Ideation: The 2-3x increase in suicidal thoughts linked to social media addiction isn’t just about cyberbullying; it’s about digital isolation.
• If a person feels that their own life is barely sustainable due to the mental toll of digital life, they often conclude they shouldn’t be responsible for another life.

It’s a feedback loop where the digital world makes the physical world look so uninviting that many Gen Zers are essentially “opting out” of the future.

Fixing The “Loneliness Paradox”.

Gen Z is the most digitally connected generation in history, yet they report the highest levels of social isolation.

Sociologists often point to the disappearance of “Third Places”—physical spaces that aren’t home (the first place) or work/school (the second place)—as the root of the problem. When parks, community centers, and affordable “hangouts” disappear or become too expensive, social media becomes the only “free” place to gather.

To fix this, research from 2025 and 2026 suggests we need a three-tier intervention:

Reclaiming “Third Places”

We have to rebuild the physical infrastructure for spontaneous connection.

• The “Unstructured” Hangout: Governments and urban planners are being urged to invest in “loitering-friendly” zones—public parks with Wi-Fi, affordable cafes, and community hobby hubs where you don’t have to pay $20 just to sit down.
• Intergenerational Living: Some European models are testing “Generation-Bridging” housing, where students live with the elderly. This cures the loneliness of the old and the “unmoored” feeling of the young, providing a surrogate family structure.

“Friction” as a Feature, not a Bug

Social media is designed to be “frictionless”—you don’t have to put on pants or risk being awkward to use it. Real community requires friction.

• Micro-Communities: Instead of “Global” social media, the shift is toward hyper-local groups (like neighborhood book clubs or sports leagues).
• The “Inertia” Break: Stanford researchers suggest “social rituals”—scheduled, recurring events (e.g., “Tuesday Night Board Games”) that remove the stress of having to “plan” a hangout every time.

Reform of Digital Environments

Since we can’t delete the internet, we have to change how it operates.

• From “Algorithmic” to “Relational”: Tech ethicists are pushing for platforms that prioritize local connection over viral content. Imagine an app that doesn’t show you a celebrity in LA, but tells you there are three people in your building who also like 90s movies or music.
• Digital Literacy Curricula: Schools are beginning to teach “Emotional Resilience” in 2026, helping students recognize when they are using a screen to avoid the “risk” of a real conversation.

If we fix community, we likely fix the birth rate issue. People are more willing to have children when they feel they have a “Village” to help them. Right now, Gen Z looks at parenting and sees “isolation with a toddler.” If they saw “parenting within a supportive neighborhood,” the fear would significantly decrease.

The “Small Step” Approach: On an individual level, experts recommend “Ritualizing Friendships.” Don’t say “we should hang out sometime.” Say, “Every first Sunday, we are getting coffee at the same spot, no matter what.”