> We show that laws mandating use of child car safety seats significantly reduce birth rates, as many cars cannot fit three child seats in the back seat.
Wouldn't the real cause of the depressed birthrates be the requirement to own a car in order to have children? If you aren't a slave to your vehicle there's no problem with the available space for car seats.
"Wouldn't the real cause of the depressed birthrates be the requirement to own a car in order to have children?"
Yes. The one-time setup costs for "properly" raising kids are probably around $30k. All the kids stuff is extra expensive (in the west) and for the kids seats you need a large car (in the west) and there's social stigma against kids sharing a room (in the west), so you also need a larger apartment.
It's definitely possible to put 3 car seats across in the back seat of pretty much any car available in the American market. The appropriate narrow seats just aren't very popular or well known...
The law in my state doesn't require car seats be in the back if it's full or not possible. IIRC they also aren't required if there's no more room. I put my kid up front in my truck that had zero back seats, only a couple people said anything and I told them to pound sand, it certainly wasn't illegal.
I had a Mazda 3 hatchback, fun little car with stick shift, when our second child arrived. It was not possible to fit in a second rear-facing car seat behind driver AND have the driver seat be in any acceptable position for me or my wife, there was just no space left in front. We researched the seats and ultimately it was easier to get a bigger car than mess with it, so we got a Volvo XC70 that had plenty of space. Once the kids could face forward, the typical Graco style seats were too wide and the middle rear passenger seat was not usable, so we invested into 2 narrow-profile seats that left the middle seat more useful. I can't remember the brand anymore, but it took a lot of research to find the narrow ones and they weren't cheap.
And none of this have contributed to us not wanting more than 2 children. That wasn't going to happen regardless of any car seats. People not wanting to have more than a 1 or 2 kids has so many other, more important reasons, I very much doubt that car seat size has much to do with it.
> People not wanting to have more than a 1 or 2 kids has so many other, more important reasons, I very much doubt that car seat size has much to do with it.
Yes and no. It is a bunch of little and big things that add up to that decision.
It is interesting to see how much the car seat issue adds to the decision making.
You're not really arguing against the paper; the study showed a lower birth probability of only 0.73% in places with car seat laws. That suggests that yes, sometimes it does deter parents from having a third kid, but most of the time it does not. And the paper doesn't say that the third car seat issue is the only consideration parents might use to dissuade them from a third child.
(Have 3yo and 1yo, another one the way, goal is 4)
I have often thought that car seats are one of the major drags of modern parenting. This study apparently (I don't have time to read it, too busy with kids lmao!) confirms my suspicions.
It is unfortunate that every policy change around them is trading some amount of convenience for every smaller risk eliminations. It is essentially impossible to say perfectly rational things like "I think children should be put in this slightly riskier type of car seat for convenience reasons."
Even if laws are relaxed, there is the peer/manufacturer pressure. As a real example, I think it is pretty annoying to have my three year old facing backwards. It would be somewhat more dangerous to have them facing forwards, but a substantial improvement in quality of life for me and for the child. The manufacturers compete based on max weight that they support/allow/claim for rear facing, something like 45 pounds. So a family member such as a spouse allegedly has decided that the child ABSOLUTELY needs to be rear facing until they reach that weight. That may not happen until age five! By this time there may be manufacturers inching up to 60 pounds rear facing.
The only possible relief I can envision is that computers become so proficient at driving our cars that there are essentially no accidents. Then we may be allowed to sit unbuckled holding our children!
>
The only possible relief I can envision is that computers become so proficient at driving our cars that there are essentially no accidents. Then we may be allowed to sit unbuckled holding our children!
Laws are about control[ling citizens]. Politicians are not willing to give up control.
I thought this was going to be about a car being uncomfortable to have sex in.
Such a car would make for a great product to sell to parents of teenagers, so you can lend them the car but at least make it difficult to fornicate without consent of the king.
As a parent of 2 a big reason we won’t have a third is the massive step up in transportation costs. Having to get a third car seat would require us to go from our Kia to a minivan. And then there is the cost of the car seat alone.
Then there is the time cost of wrangling kids in an out of them. My toddler can easily make it 15 minutes to buckle her in just on her own. A third would mean easily 5 minutes of to get everyone buckled in and only if they are cooperative.
Let’s just focus on how cars and car culture are reducing birth rates. Nobody wants to chuck their kids into the back seat without a carseat any more. Laws aren’t the problem.
It's just not cool to have kids. There are many more ways to have fun and status in society, so having kids is either coming as a social burden ("i am expected to by my spouse/relatives"), or a religious thing. Rationally, it's such a pain in the ass to have kids, while you can have some much more fun without them: travel the world, meet people, learn and explore! Clearly, having kids is net cost and suffering.
Yet, those who opt in do have a different opinion. We got two a decade ago, and then a couple years ago through of FOMO that when we are 45 we'd look back and regret missing the window of having another couple of kids. So we did. I'm 39, have four kids, had to get a bigger car, pay the airline tickets through the nose, spend a lot of time on kids' stuff, and love it. My family is the center of the universe and I'm the happiest and wisest dad alive. Everyone else is childish ;-P
> We estimate that these laws prevented fatalities of 57 children in car crashes in 2017 but reduced total births by 8,000 that year and have decreased the total by 145,000 since 1980.
I also think that modern car seats are one of the main factors driving the adoption of unnecessarily large cars, which have far worse safety outcomes in crashes for everybody except the people inside them.
When I was growing up in the 90s with 2 siblings we had a small hatch. When I had my second child we had to upgrade from a small hatch to an SUV because we simply couldn't fit a car seat behind the driver. Even now, I'm not sure if a third would fit.
Sure, the SUV itself and the extra padding on the car seats might make my children safe in collisions with other big cars, but if we were all still driving hatches then maybe none of that would be necessary.
Is this really true in 2026? Even 10 year old cars are simply big now, and not that expensive. I could believe it in 1990 maybe.
I have 3 babies (ages 0, 2, 4 when we started) in a 2016 Subaru Outback for 1.5 years now and it's been mostly fine. I have 2 "slim" seats from Clek, one is a booster, and it's really not a big deal. I cannot imagine deciding to give up a child because of a minor inconvenience like this.
Buying slim car seats is just not that expensive compared to buying a new car, so we did that. It's hard to believe that people who really want 3 children cannot make it work.
As mentioned it’s an attempt to note the pressure without doing direct interviews.
And not to disparage you or cast aspersions, but if you think about why you do not have a fourth kid it’s likely that “have to get new vehicle” could be part of it.
Of course, when you come around from the other end (fourth is on the way, what do) you then change the equation and work it out.
To test the theory presented in the study, we should issue minivans with car seats to new parents; since they have a vehicle large enough they should statistically have more kids than the median.
Without going into the specifics of car seats, I do think we overemphasize safety. The article mentions saving 57 children. How much are 57 lives worth? The answer is not infinite - a life has a numeric value, ask any insurance company.
Every safety regulation ought to pass a cold-blooded cost/benefit analysis. Few of them do.
Actually most federal agencies do conduct a cold-blooded cost/benefit analysis when considering new safety regulations. The statistical value of a human life is around $10M. The problem is that they don't consider second-order effects as a "cost" within that framework. And realistically there's no way for regulators to estimate those effects.
The Department of Health and Human Services releases a figure every year. Their current estimate ranges from $6.6 million to $21.5 million.
Note also, that we also often talk about statistically life years and statisicsl quality life years; both of which would value the lives of infants higher than an average life.
> We show that laws mandating use of child car safety seats significantly reduce birth rates, as many cars cannot fit three child seats in the back seat.
It's almost Darwinistic: Offspring has an increased potential of survival and faces less threats, so reproduction is organically adjusted to prevent overpopulation.
It’s this everywhere: the constant fear of not raising children perfectly in every aspect puts downward pressure on a family’s desire (and perceived ability) to have more children.
I don't think it is about raising children perfectly. I think people knowadays are more educated about negative psychological impact to children and therefore there is a change in parenting style which takes more effort. More quality time, no corporal punishment, more understanding and kindness and so on. The effort to raise children therefore has increased (fear based parentingis rather low effort). I think it is for the good. Those who are able to make that commitment raise the kids. (I dont say that negative styles don't exist, but society in general has improved on parenting styles)
I remember the day I measured my youngest, find they didn't need a seat anymore and drove it straight to the rubbish tip. It was pure elation. I could fold the seats down in 10 seconds to carry stuff. I could fold them back up and put a kid straight in. Awesome
My wife and I are DINKs. We drive a smallish CUV. Her cousin drove it, fell in love, and bought the same car.
It’s really a perfect allrounder - looks nice, is luxurious, more than enough space for us, even drives like a sports car (or at least as close to a CUV can hope to).
Then said cousin had a baby. People around him scolded him for not selling the car for something much bigger - like a Kia Telluride or a Honda Pilot. But he is doing just fine.
We had two kids (newborn and 3) in car seats and a Ford Focus. The other car was a Jetta.
The Focus even had a small aftermarket amp and sub in the trunk. Everybody and their things still fit, although the sub did come out for long trips for that extra cargo.
The Golf Wagon that came later still fit us and the dog. About 90lbs of her would fit in the back and she could drool all over the kids.
49 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 55.9 ms ] threadWouldn't the real cause of the depressed birthrates be the requirement to own a car in order to have children? If you aren't a slave to your vehicle there's no problem with the available space for car seats.
Yes. The one-time setup costs for "properly" raising kids are probably around $30k. All the kids stuff is extra expensive (in the west) and for the kids seats you need a large car (in the west) and there's social stigma against kids sharing a room (in the west), so you also need a larger apartment.
Maybe people just avoid 3 kids, because it’s hard enough raising one or two kids.
And none of this have contributed to us not wanting more than 2 children. That wasn't going to happen regardless of any car seats. People not wanting to have more than a 1 or 2 kids has so many other, more important reasons, I very much doubt that car seat size has much to do with it.
Yes and no. It is a bunch of little and big things that add up to that decision.
It is interesting to see how much the car seat issue adds to the decision making.
I have often thought that car seats are one of the major drags of modern parenting. This study apparently (I don't have time to read it, too busy with kids lmao!) confirms my suspicions.
It is unfortunate that every policy change around them is trading some amount of convenience for every smaller risk eliminations. It is essentially impossible to say perfectly rational things like "I think children should be put in this slightly riskier type of car seat for convenience reasons."
Even if laws are relaxed, there is the peer/manufacturer pressure. As a real example, I think it is pretty annoying to have my three year old facing backwards. It would be somewhat more dangerous to have them facing forwards, but a substantial improvement in quality of life for me and for the child. The manufacturers compete based on max weight that they support/allow/claim for rear facing, something like 45 pounds. So a family member such as a spouse allegedly has decided that the child ABSOLUTELY needs to be rear facing until they reach that weight. That may not happen until age five! By this time there may be manufacturers inching up to 60 pounds rear facing.
The only possible relief I can envision is that computers become so proficient at driving our cars that there are essentially no accidents. Then we may be allowed to sit unbuckled holding our children!
Laws are about control[ling citizens]. Politicians are not willing to give up control.
Such a car would make for a great product to sell to parents of teenagers, so you can lend them the car but at least make it difficult to fornicate without consent of the king.
5 kids in a car, held, seated, seatbelted, any-which-way. Like on a train.
Then there is the time cost of wrangling kids in an out of them. My toddler can easily make it 15 minutes to buckle her in just on her own. A third would mean easily 5 minutes of to get everyone buckled in and only if they are cooperative.
Yet, those who opt in do have a different opinion. We got two a decade ago, and then a couple years ago through of FOMO that when we are 45 we'd look back and regret missing the window of having another couple of kids. So we did. I'm 39, have four kids, had to get a bigger car, pay the airline tickets through the nose, spend a lot of time on kids' stuff, and love it. My family is the center of the universe and I'm the happiest and wisest dad alive. Everyone else is childish ;-P
145K is roughly the population of Syracuse, NY or Midland, TX. That is far more than the absolute number of US military deaths in World War I (116,516 per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualt...).
When I was growing up in the 90s with 2 siblings we had a small hatch. When I had my second child we had to upgrade from a small hatch to an SUV because we simply couldn't fit a car seat behind the driver. Even now, I'm not sure if a third would fit.
Sure, the SUV itself and the extra padding on the car seats might make my children safe in collisions with other big cars, but if we were all still driving hatches then maybe none of that would be necessary.
We are in the stupidest arms race.
I have 3 babies (ages 0, 2, 4 when we started) in a 2016 Subaru Outback for 1.5 years now and it's been mostly fine. I have 2 "slim" seats from Clek, one is a booster, and it's really not a big deal. I cannot imagine deciding to give up a child because of a minor inconvenience like this.
Buying slim car seats is just not that expensive compared to buying a new car, so we did that. It's hard to believe that people who really want 3 children cannot make it work.
And not to disparage you or cast aspersions, but if you think about why you do not have a fourth kid it’s likely that “have to get new vehicle” could be part of it.
Of course, when you come around from the other end (fourth is on the way, what do) you then change the equation and work it out.
To test the theory presented in the study, we should issue minivans with car seats to new parents; since they have a vehicle large enough they should statistically have more kids than the median.
Without going into the specifics of car seats, I do think we overemphasize safety. The article mentions saving 57 children. How much are 57 lives worth? The answer is not infinite - a life has a numeric value, ask any insurance company.
Every safety regulation ought to pass a cold-blooded cost/benefit analysis. Few of them do.
https://journalistsresource.org/economics/value-statistical-...
Note also, that we also often talk about statistically life years and statisicsl quality life years; both of which would value the lives of infants higher than an average life.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2d83af582...
It's almost Darwinistic: Offspring has an increased potential of survival and faces less threats, so reproduction is organically adjusted to prevent overpopulation.
It’s really a perfect allrounder - looks nice, is luxurious, more than enough space for us, even drives like a sports car (or at least as close to a CUV can hope to).
Then said cousin had a baby. People around him scolded him for not selling the car for something much bigger - like a Kia Telluride or a Honda Pilot. But he is doing just fine.
The Focus even had a small aftermarket amp and sub in the trunk. Everybody and their things still fit, although the sub did come out for long trips for that extra cargo.
The Golf Wagon that came later still fit us and the dog. About 90lbs of her would fit in the back and she could drool all over the kids.
Sometimes I wonder what I am missing.
Germany first introduced mandatory child car seat laws on April 1, 1993. [1]
That year, fertility was at 1.28 kids per woman. Since then, it has increased to 1.62.
[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindersitz
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/deu/ger...