The Brief

When Sarah and Ben Brewington got married and moved to Los Angeles, they expected their next life step would be having kids. It just seemed like the natural thing to do. Instead, they kept delaying their first child, focusing on their careers, enjoying travel and spending time with friends.

"I started thinking, 'What do I want?'" Sarah Brewington said. Gradually, they reached a decision: "It's a resounding no. It's not something I'm interested in or want," she said.

"This life we're building together didn't need this other element in it," agreed her husband, Ben Brewington. "I don't feel guilty at all about it now to say I don't want kids."

The Brewingtons, both age 35, say they understand they are part of a wider trend. Far more people in the U.S. and around the world are choosing to have significantly fewer children or opting out of parenthood altogether.

A framed photo of Ben and Sarah Brewington sits on the mantel. They both agreed that parenthood wasn't right for their future.

(

Grace Widyatmadja for NPR

)

"I think it probably should be a concern for the government, the declining birth rate," Sarah Brewington told NPR. "There is going to come a time when everyone is retiring and there's not going to be a workforce."

Many researchers believe this accelerating global shift is being driven in large part by a positive reality. Young couples, and women in particular, have far more freedom and economic independence. They're weighing their options and appear to be making very different choices about the role of children in their lives.

"It's not that people don't like kids as much as they used to," said Melissa Kearney, an economist who studies fertility and population trends at the University of Notre Dame. "There's just a lot of other available options. They can invest in their careers, take more leisure time — it's much more socially acceptable."

This change in decision-making and behavior appears to be accelerating. New research from the United Nations found that the number of children born to the average woman worldwide has reached the lowest point ever recorded. In nearly every country and culture, women are having fewer children. Worldwide, the number of children born to each woman has dropped from five in 1960 to an average of 2.2, according to the latest United Nations report.

"Especially in high-income countries, the birth rate has very quickly plummeted in a sustained way," Kearney said. "We're actually really facing the question of depopulation."

Many women are choosing fewer children — or no children at all

In the U.S., this shift is driven in part by a growing number of women deciding against motherhood. According to Kearney, half of American women now reach age 30 without having at least one child. That's a dramatic increase from two decades ago, when only about a third of American women didn't have a child by that age. Many families are also choosing to have significantly fewer children.

"I remember at one point I was like, 'I definitely want three kids.' I was like, 'That's gonna be great.' That's what my mom had. That's what I want to have," Lusely Martinez, age 35, told NPR.

Martinez said she loves being a mother. "We get to watch our little heart walk around and learn and discover things. It's just so incredible." But after a lot of discussion, she and her husband decided that sticking to one child is best for their family.

"Having a child is extremely expensive," she said. "We're stopping and we're thinking, 'Is this actually smart for ourselves?'"

Lusely Martinez, 35, prepares dinner for her family while her daughter draws. Martinez previously wanted to have three children, but she and her husband decided that one child was best for their family.

(

Nickolai Hammar

/

NPR

)

One relatively simple way to track the scale of this shift in human behavior is what's known as the "total fertility rate." It's a measure that predicts how many children a woman will have during her lifetime.

To maintain a stable population — no growth, no decline — the average woman needs to have roughly 2.1 kids. In the U.S., total fertility began dipping below that 2.1 threshold decades ago, and then after 2007, fertility rates plunged rapidly to a record low of roughly 1.6.

"I don't have a number in mind where if we hit it, I'm going to start freaking out," said Kearney, the economist at the University of Notre Dame. "But I already look around and see so many young people are finding themselves childless, and I worry we're doing something wrong as a society."

The population bomb that fizzled

The world's rapid pivot toward declining birth rates and older, smaller populations can seem dizzying, especially after decades of warnings about the environmental harms and quality-of-life impacts of rising populations.

In the 1960s and 1970s, scientist Paul Ehrlich popularized the idea that the Earth was being threatened by what he described as a population bomb.

"No intelligent, patriotic American family should have more than two children, and preferably only one," Ehrlich said in a 1970 interview with WOI-TV, warning that crowded U.S. cities faced a "fatal disease — it's called overpopulation."

Most demographers now say the population bomb has largely fizzled, and some predict that the long-term trend toward a smaller global population, with fewer consumers and a smaller human footprint on the planet, could benefit the environment.

There appear to be other upsides to declining fertility. Along with growing individual freedom and economic empowerment of women, the U.N. study also found a rapid drop in the number of girls and teenagers giving birth.

"The decline of the adolescent birth rates has been, I would say, one of the major success stories in global population health over the past three decades," said Vladimíra Kantorová, the U.N.'s chief population scientist.

But as more women and couples delay parenthood, have fewer babies or don't have children altogether, a growing number of nations around the world — more than 1 in 10 countries — have plunged to levels of childbearing so low that many scientists are worried.

"There's just, relatively speaking, no children being born in South Korea," said economist Phillip Levine at Wellesley College. According to U.N. data, by midcentury, 40% of South Korea's population is expected to be age 65 or older.

"Nobody expected that fertility would go to these low levels," said the U.N.'s Kantorová. "We don't have experience with this prolonged decline. This is something new."

In part because people are living so much longer, the global population is expected to keep rising for decades before these trends take hold, triggering a decline by the end of this century.

But many countries, including China, Italy, Japan, Russia and South Korea, have already seen populations begin to shrink. China alone is expected to lose more than 780 million people, more than half its population, by 2100.

An elderly woman holding leafy vegetables and a cane walks past street vendors selling farm produce and traditional goods under an overpass in Chongqing, China. Amid rising concerns about the aging population and the growing cost of living, many elderly citizens continue to rely on informal street markets and small-scale farming to supplement their income and maintain community ties.

(

Cheng Xin

/

Getty Images

)

"It's difficult to predict whether these very fast declines, to very low fertility levels, will be happening all over the world," Kantorová said.

How will the U.S. navigate far lower fertility?

So far, the U.S. population is relatively stable despite record-low fertility, but new data from the U.S. Census Bureau shows the nation's fabric is already changing. Older people, those age 65 or above, now outnumber children in 11 states. That has risen sharply from just three states five years ago.

"Children still outnumber older adults in the United States, despite a decline in births this decade," said Lauren Bowers, chief of the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Branch, in a statement. "However, the gap is narrowing as baby boomers continue to age into their retirement years."

A 2023 study by the Brookings Institution, meanwhile, found that without significant numbers of immigrants coming to the U.S. in the future, the country's population would plunge by more than 100 million people this century.

"We would be losing about a third of our population between now and 2100 if there were no immigration to the United States," said the study's author, William Frey.

"What is our labor force going to be going forward? What is our productivity going forward?" Frey said. "We're going to have lots of jobs, and there's going to be nobody there to take those jobs. I think there's going to be a lot of pressure to increase immigration into the U.S."

Responding to these shifts, however, some politicians, researchers and activists in the U.S., especially on the right, have begun to champion ideas and policies — known as pronatalism — designed to encourage higher fertility and birth rates among Americans.

Lyman Stone, who leads the Pronatalism Initiative at the conservative-leaning Institute for Family Studies, says the U.S. needs to do more to help families prioritize children, in part by making parenting more affordable. He supports child tax credits and policies allowing parents to work from home.

Stone believes many young people would like to have more children but are struggling to achieve the milestones they believe are necessary to begin having children.

"They're not marrying in time. They're not getting a house in time," Lyman said. "They're not getting a stable job in time. So what's really happening is people are involuntarily falling short of their desired fertility."

Emma Waters, with the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, agrees it's time for a national conversation about birth rates and the choices families are making. "We're going to have more adults than we have children to replace them, and that will heavily impact things like our military readiness, GDP and economic growth in the United States."

One major concern in the U.S. will be the viability of Social Security, the nation's most important safety-net program for older adults. The ratio of young workers to elderly retirees is already dropping to levels that alarm some economists.

Some leading American conservatives argue that declining birth rates could be catastrophic. "Let me say very simply, I want more babies in the United States of America," said Vice President Vance during a speech at the March for Life, an annual anti-abortion rally in Washington, D.C., earlier this year.

The billionaire Elon Musk, who has fathered at least 14 children, was one of the first high-profile figures to argue that declining birth rates, in the U.S. and around the world, are a threat to civilization: "People who have kids do need to have 3 kids to make up for those who have 0 or 1 kid or population will collapse," Musk wrote on X last month.

But Kantorová, Levine, Kearney and others said these "crisis" narratives about population decline are exaggerated and misleading. In most countries, demographic shifts are expected to play out over decades. Some nations, including France, have managed to stabilize declining fertility, albeit at relatively low levels.

Some progressives — as well as many population experts — also view conservative pronatalist policies, including opposition to reproductive rights and calls for a return to "traditional" family structures, as a threat to women.

"Some of these measures and policies can be deeply harmful, especially those related to sexual and reproductive health and choices and women's empowerment — and that's worrying," said the U.N.'s Kantorová.

But many of those same experts agree that declining birth rates are a real and pressing issue that should be addressed by thinkers and policymakers across the political spectrum.

"This demographic issue is poised to potentially remake so much of our society in ways that people just don't seem to be thinking about," said Kearney, the University of Notre Dame economist. "This should not be ideological."

While scientists and politicians grapple with the declining number of children, many of the couples and women interviewed by NPR said this issue is deeply personal, private and often difficult.

Ryan Holley, 37, and Annie Platt, 31, are on the fence about whether to have children.

(

Kayla Renie for NPR

)

Annie Platt, age 31, who lives in South Carolina, said she and her husband, Ryan Holley, 37, have struggled with a choice that would redefine the rest of their lives.

"We've always kind of been on the fence like, 'Oh, it'd be cool to have kids, and this is what their names would be,'" Platt said. "Then in more recent years, it's been like more leaning towards no."

Platt and other women said they see little role for the government in trying to encourage or incentivize their choices about parenthood.

"I think it's gross," Platt told NPR. "I feel very icked out, I guess, when I hear people like JD Vance, Elon Musk, talk about their family values and, like, incentivizing having a child."

Platt added that she is suspicious of right-wing political leaders' motives. "I think they just want to use women to have babies, and maybe that would also distract the mothers, or the mothers-to-be, from pursuing other things in life, maybe other career goals," Platt said.

Ben and Sarah Brewington are comfortable with their decision to not have children but acknowledge that others may perceive their choice as selfish.

(

Grace Widyatmadja for NPR

)

Sarah Brewington had similar feelings: "It feels unethical to tell people to go through a grueling process because you want to have another baby in the world."

"Trusting individuals to make those decisions is kind of what it comes down to," said Ben Brewington.

Lusely Martinez, who told NPR she and her husband decided to have only one child, said she doesn't believe the U.S. will embrace the kinds of changes — from affordable housing and health care to day care and paid family leave — that families need in order to make their lives easier.

"My biggest concern is like what is the big focus on us having children when you're not necessarily focused on how the rest of the life of a person is?" Martinez said.

Lusely Martinez doesn't believe the U.S. will embrace the things that families need in order to make their lives easier.

(

Nickolai Hammar

/

NPR

)

Activists and scientists across the political spectrum, including those who view population decline as a grave concern, agree it will be difficult and costly to create a culture and environment where Americans return to having significantly more children.

"Absent a very dedicated response, I absolutely think it is not just possible but likely that fertility rates will keep falling," said Kearney. "I'm a bit more worried about where we are than some other people, who are waiting to reach, let's say, a point of no return."

NPR producer Liz Baker contributed reporting for this story from Los Angeles.
Copyright 2025 NPR

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Since 1977, Richard Santillan has been to every Opening Day game at Dodger Stadium. 

“The tradition goes from my father, to me, to my children and grandchildren. Some of my best memories are with my father and children here at Dodger Stadium,” Santillan told The LA Local, smiling under the shade of palm trees near the entrance to the ballpark Wednesday morning. He was there to protest the team less than 24 hours before Opening Day.

Santillan, like countless other loyal Dodgers fans, is grappling with his fan identity over the team’s decision to accept an invitation to the White House and owner Mark Walter’s ties to ICE detention facilities.

More than 30 people joined Santillan on Wednesday morning for a press conference held near 1000 Vin Scully Drive to convey a message directly to the team. 

“We are demanding the Dodgers stop participating in funding of inhumane treatment of families and do not go to the White House to celebrate with the criminal in chief,” Evelyn Escatiola told the crowd. “Together, we have the power to make a change.”

Escatiola, a former dean of East Los Angeles College and longtime community organizer, urged fans to flex their economic power by “letting the Dodgers know that we do not support repression.”

Jorge “Coqui” Rodriguez, a lifelong Dodgers fan, spoke to the crowd and called on Dodgers ownership to divest from immigration detention centers owned and operated by GEO Group and CoreCivic.

Jorge Coqui H Rodriguez speaks at a press conference outside Dodger Stadium on March 25, 2026, to demand the Dodgers not to visit the White House following their 2025 World Series win.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

In a phone interview a day before the protest, Rodriguez told The LA Local he did not want the Dodgers using his “cheve” or beer money to fund detention centers. 

“They can’t take our parking money, our cacahuate money, our cheve money, our Dodger Dog money and invest those funds into corporations that are imprisoning people. It’s wrong,” Rodriguez said. 

Rodriguez considers the Dodgers one of the most racially diverse teams and said the players need to support fans at a time when heightened immigration enforcement has become more common across L.A.

The team’s 2025’s visit to the White House drew ire from the largely Latino fan base, citing the Trump administration’s ongoing attacks on immigrants. 

In June, the team came under further scrutiny when rumors swirled online that federal immigration agents were using the stadium’s parking, which immigration authorities later denied in statements posted on social media accounts.

The team again came under fire after not releasing a statement on the impacts of ICE raids on its mostly Latino fan base at the height of immigration enforcement last summer. The team later agreed to invest $1 million to support families affected by immigration enforcement.

When he learned the Dodgers were pledging only $1 million to families in need, Rodriguez called the amount a  “slap in the face.” 

“These guys just bought the Lakers for billions of dollars and they give a million dollars to fight for legal services? That’s a joke,” Rodriguez said. “They need to have a moral backbone and not be investing in those companies.”

According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, former Dodgers pitcher Clayton Kershawsaid last week that he is looking forward to the trip.

“I went when President [Joe] Biden was in office. I’m going to go when President [Donald] Trump is in office,” Kershaw said. “To me, it’s just about getting to go to the White House. You don’t get that opportunity every day, so I’m excited to go.”

The Dodgers have yet to announce when their planned visit will take place. 

Santillan sometimes laments his decision to give up his season tickets in protest of the team. His connection to the stadium and the memories he has made there with family and friends will last a lifetime, he said. On Thursday, he will uphold his tradition and be there for the first pitch of the season, but with a heavy heart.

“It’s a family tradition, but the Dodgers have a lot of work to do,” he said.

A local favorite mom-and-pop bookshop in Eagle Rock is facing displacement due to a steep rent hike. The owners say theirs is just one of several small businesses along Eagle Rock Boulevard struggling to keep up with lease increases.

Over the past 19 years, many in the neighborhood have come to love READ Books for its eclectic collection of used titles and shop dog Florence.

Co-owner Jeremy Kaplan said it’s been a delight to grow with the community over the years.

“Like seeing kids come back in, who were in grade school and now they’re in college,” Kaplan said.

But the building where Kaplan and wife Debbie rent was recently sold, and the rent increased by more than 130% to $2,805 a month, Kaplan said. He told LAist it was an increase his small business simply could not absorb.

Kaplan said he originally was given 30 days notice of the rent increase. After some research, assistance from Councilmember Ysabel Jurado’s office and some pro-bono legal help, Kaplan said he pushed back and got the 90-day notice he’s afforded by state law.

California Senate Bill 1103 requires landlords to give businesses with five or less employees 90 days’ notice for rent increases exceeding 10%, among other protections.

Systems Real Estate, the property management company, did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment.

What can small businesses do? 

Nadia Segura, directing attorney of the Small Business Program at pro bono legal aid non-profit Bet Tzedek said California law does not currently allow for rent control for commercial tenancies.

Outside of the protections under SB 1103, Segura said small businesses like READ Books don’t have much other recourse. And even then, commercial landlords are not required to inform their tenants of their protections under the law.

“There’s still a lot of people that don’t know about SB 1103. And then it’s very sad that they tell them they have these rent increases and within a month they have to leave,” Segura said.

She said her group is seeing steep rent hikes like this for commercial tenants across the city.

“We are seeing this even more with the World Cup coming up, the Olympics coming up. And I will say it was very sad to see that also after the wildfires,” Segura said.

Part of Bet Tzedek’s ongoing work is to advocate for small businesses, working with landlords who are increasing rents to see if they are willing to give business owners longer leases that lock in rents.

What’s next 

After READ Books posted about their situation on social media, commenters chimed in to express their outrage and love for the little shop.

While he looks for a new spot, Kaplan says he’s forming a coalition of local businesses and activist groups to see what can be done to help other small businesses facing similar displacement. He wants to address the displacement issue for businesses like his, which have made Eagle Rock the distinctive neighborhood that it is today.

Owl Talk, a longtime Eagle Rock staple selling clothing and accessories in a unit in the same building as READ Books, is facing a “more than double” rent increase, according to a post on their Instagram account.

Kaplan said he’s been in touch with the office of state Assemblywoman Jessica Caloza and wants to explore the possibility of introducing legislation to set up protections for small businesses like his, including rent-control measures or a vacancy tax for landlords. Kaplan said he also reached out to the office of state Sen. Maria Durazo.

By his count, Kaplan said there are about a dozen businesses within surrounding blocks that are at risk of closing their doors or have shuttered due to rent increases or other struggles.

When READ Books was founded during the Great Recession, Kaplan said he knew it was a longshot to open a bookstore at the same time so many were struggling to stay in business.

“It was kind of interesting to be doing something that neighborhoods needed. That was important to me growing up, that was important to my children, that was important to my wife growing up,” Kaplan said.

“And then somebody comes in and says, ‘We’re gonna over double your rent.”

Topline:

Frozen budget: Most of the city’s Bureau of Street Lighting budget comes from an assessment that people who own property illuminated by lights pay on their county property tax bill. The amount people pay depends on the kind of property they own and how much they benefit from lighting. A typical single-family home currently pays $53 annually, and in total, the assessments bring in about $45 million annually for the city to repair and maintain streetlights. Changing the amount the Bureau of Street Lighting gets from the assessment requires a vote among property owners who benefit from the lights.

Ballots: L.A. City Council’s vote gives city staff the green light to prepare and send out those ballots. Miguel Sangalang, who oversees the bureau, said at a committee meeting earlier this month that he expects to send out ballots by April 17. Notices about the ballots will be sent out prior to the ballots themselves.

Near unanimous vote: L.A. City Councilmember Monica Rodriguez was the only “No” vote Tuesday, saying she wanted to see a more current strategic plan for the bureau. Sangalang said the bureau developed a plan in 2022 that lays out how money will be spent. Councilmember Imelda Padilla was absent for the vote.

Vote count: Votes will be weighted according to the assessment amount. Basically, the more you’re asked to pay yearly to maintain streetlights, the more your vote will count. Ballots received before June 2 will be tabulated by the L.A. City Clerk.

How much more money: According to a report, the amount needed in assessments from property owners to meet the repair and maintenance needs of the city’s streetlighting in the next fiscal year is nearly $112 million.

Use of the money: Sangalang said at a March 11 committee meeting that the extra funds would be used to double the number of staff to handle repairs and procure solar streetlights, which don’t face the threat of copper wire theft. That would all potentially reduce the time it takes to repair simple fixes down to a week. Currently, city residents wait for months to see broken streetlights repaired. The assessment would come with a three-year auditing mechanism.