The Right Time: From Delayed Motherhood to Unplanned Childlessness

In modern society, young women face a stark dilemma: advancing their careers while racing against the biological clock. This essay examines the causes and consequences of delayed childbearing, clarifies the true constraints on female fertility, and evaluates how effectively reproductive technologies address this challenge.

20. May 2025 by Maria Eduarda Barbosa

Introduction

In humans, the live birth rate falls sharply as maternal age increases.^[1] Likewise, as a woman ages, her chances of finding a suitable partner also plummets.^[2] Despite these trends, women have steadily delayed motherhood since the late 20th century,^[3] citing financial independence, partner readiness, career goals, and—more recently—the desire to avoid the stigma of early motherhood.^[4]

Currently, young women overestimate both natural fertility and the success rates of infertility treatments, demonstrating the lack of proper education in this regard. ^[5] As a result, many who postpone childbearing face involuntary childlessness. ^[6]

Today, involuntary childlessness has reached crisis levels: it inflicts ongoing grief on women and undermines societal sustainability as populations age and workforces dwindle. Compounding the problem, antinatalist pressures—driven by climate-change and resource-scarcity concerns—discourage childbearing. ^[7]

To address this crisis, we must analyze fertility declines in the Western world, bridge the gap between expectations and biological reality, and consider the personal and societal repercussions of continuing to postpone motherhood.

The Plummeting of Fertility Rates: Did Families Get Smaller?

Many high-income countries now record fertility rates below replacement levels.^[8] In other words, the average woman births fewer than two children who survive to adulthood. This decline does not reflect smaller families—data show that the distribution of mothers with one, two, three, or four-plus children remains stable—but rather a surge in childlessness: in Italy, childless adults rose from one in thirty to two in five.^[9]

Since the 1970s, countries such as Japan and Italy have experienced these shifts, often following socio-economic crises like the oil shocks.^[9] Today, women identify financial instability and career ambitions as reasons to delay motherhood—even when they desire children. This would not necessarily be a problem if the decision was well informed, but that is not the case: women who consider their career success as very important tend to be unduly optimistic with regards to their fertility––and they are not alone. ^[10]

The knowledge gap: can freezing eggs freeze you in time?

Medical training requires years of study, placing female medical students at elevated risk for involuntary childlessness.^[11]. However, despite desiring children and being highly educated, these young women underestimate how acutely female fertility declines and overestimate egg-freezing as a safeguard.^[12]

Biologically, women’s fertility peaks around age 25 and falls gradually until age 35, after which it declines sharply.^[13] Yet a 2016 survey found that young adults believe fertility only slightly declines at 30 and steeply drops after 40—and they overestimated IVF success rates at over 70 %, when real rates were below 40 %.^[13]

The IVF conundrum does not stop there: a 2013 study revealed that just 6 % of women who froze eggs ever used them, and of those, only half achieved pregnancy.^[14] Paradoxically, while the effectiveness of this technology decreases with maternal age, its availability incentivises the postponement of childbearing.^[15] Even when conception is achieved, such postponement increases the risks of stillbirth, prematurity, birth anomalies, gestational diabetes and other complications. ^{[16] [17]}

Additionally, the main motivation for the freezing of eggs is the absence of a male partner when approaching the end of the woman’s reproductive years,^[18] which adds another layer to the time-sensitiveness of childbearing: the need of finding a suitable partner. For women, the success rates on that endeavor also declines with age, since men tend to pick younger women and women tend to pick older men in virtually all known human societies. ^[2]

There is, therefore, a need to seriously consider the wish for a family within the inherent time constraints of such endeavour when planning one’s life –because freezing your eggs cannot and will not freeze you in time.

A difficult conversation: do you know what you want?

Delaying motherhood can swiftly lead to permanent childlessness, forcing young women to choose not between childbearing in their twenties and childbearing after 35, but between having a child earlier or risking not having children at all. This reality prompts a crucial question: will your career deliver lifelong fulfillment? Evidence suggests it rarely does. Unlike men—who report satisfaction from demanding jobs—women working long hours often report lower happiness than housewives (likely because housewives were more likely to be in stable relationships).^[19] These findings do not argue that all women become housewives, but they do caution against sacrificing family aspirations for career advancement at any cost, especially given that women facing involuntary childlessness face low levels of life satisfaction and high rates of depression.^[20]

Women experiencing involuntary childlessness are now sharing their frustrations online to warn future generations. For example, Jody Day delivered a TED Talk about her own journey that has garnered over 200,000 views on YouTube and sparked more than 1,000 comments—many from women recounting similar hardships.^[21]

In this context, balancing work and family forces individuals to compromise in both areas. However, recent studies show that a motherhood-friendly environment can boost women’s labor-market participation. For example, Hungary introduced several natalist policies—such as exempting mothers of four children from income taxes—and has since seen a rise in the proportion of employed women.^[22] In other words: incentivizing childbearing does not push women away from the workplace –hence, promoting women’s careers and averting an unplanned childlessness-induced population collapse are compatible goals.

An underpopulated world

Adding to the misconceptions that promote delayed motherhood, there is currently a strong anti-natalist pressure based on another misconception: climate change is an existential threat caused by overpopulation.^[23]

Without entering the climate discussion per se, according to CNN, the United States, with roughly 310 million people, emits twice as many greenhouse gases as the European Union’s 448 million inhabitants.^{[24] [25] [26]} If climate change is caused by the excessive number of humans, why can a region with less people have twice the impact on climate change? Moreover, Western nations now face underpopulation: in Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom, each new worker entering the labor force must soon support more than two retirees. ^[9] Which is why Hungary and other European countries started to implement natalist policies.

Conclusion

Motherhood holds profound significance, and postponing it carries serious risks. When women delay childbearing based on misconceptions, they increase the likelihood of involuntary childlessness—inflicting personal hardship and societal strain.

To empower informed choice, we must correct fertility myths, adopt family-friendly workplace policies, and challenge antinatalist narratives. By aligning social norms with biological realities, we can enable women to choose the right time to conceive, preventing unplanned childlessness and the social and economic collapse of western society.