Most women want children – but half are unsure if they will. For some, they won’t be bothered if they remain childless:

The researchers used data from the National Survey of Family Growth, a federally funded survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, from 2002 to 2019. This included surveys of a nationally representative group of 41,492 women aged 15 to 44 about a broad range of fertility-related indicators.
Findings showed that there was little change during that time in the proportion of women who said they intended to have children. On average, 62% of women said they intended to have a child and 35% did not intend to, with only a small percentage saying they didn’t know.
But up to 50% of the women who intended to have children said they were only “somewhat sure” or “not at all sure” that they would actually realize their intention to have a child.
....
And it is not just the certainty that may be affecting the fertility rate. The intensity of the desire mattered, too.
The study found that up to 25% of childless women who intended to have children also said they would not be bothered if they ended up not having a child.
“This not being bothered was especially high among younger women, and it increased over time among those who were younger,” Hayford said.
“They are open to different pathways and different kinds of lives. If they don’t become parents for whatever reason, it doesn’t seem that upsetting to many of them.”
One possibility often discussed for the declining birth rate is that young people today are unsure about the future of the country and the world, and that is keeping them from having children.

***

Interesting nuanced article: “It Makes It More Real to You”: Abortion Attitudes Following Experience and Contact With Abortion (research done in UK).

(Okay, stating here that yay for the decriminalisation of women taking abortion pills this week but I have been saying for years - in fact I think the reformers were saying this in 67 but it was a trade-off to get medics on side - the 2 doctors provision in the current legislation is a fossil relic from the period when doctors reckoned that 'unlawful' in the relevant clause of the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act predicated 'lawful' and that meant docs with sound clinical reasons, but even so they made very very sure to get a second opinion. And this hardened into the situation after the Bourne judgement of 1938 where the doc who would operate would refer to a psychiatrist to get the 'threat to mental health' box ticked.)

***

Yes, I think this is creepy, though I also think there are other (more reliable than cycle-tracking) methods of contraception besides the Pill: TikTok is obsessed with the hormone-free birth control debate: why is everyone telling you to stop the pill?

While on the one hand yes, contraception should be part of general routine healthcare and the sort of thing that GPs provide. But on the other, back in the day, specialist clinics were prepared to work with women to discover what was best for them, and I'm not sure GPs have either the time or the training to do this. At a panel I was on some years ago people were claiming that there was one Pill formulation that was the go-to and it so did not suit every woman.

***

This is more in the realm of general demographic information, and I am sure my dearios are already aware of this: There Were Still Old People When Life Expectancy Was 35. (And the menopause is not some new-fangled unnatural thing, siiiiigh.)