Misconceived fertility

Australia's ageing population has clear implications for future budgets. Of particular concern is the projected proportional decrease in the number of workers. In 2000, among those older than 15, there were 1.8 workers for every non-worker. On current trends, this will have fallen to 1.3 by 2040.

Unless we get more workers, or fewer dependants, governments will be unable to maintain services at current levels. Add to this the increasing health costs of an ageing Australia, and we have a burgeoning problem.

The solution most frequently canvassed has been to increase the birth rate. More babies today equal more workers tomorrow.

The implications of such a policy for women are chilling. Policies that encourage women to have more children can also take them out of the workforce.

Remember the 50s? The post-war era was one of great prosperity and stability – but it was also a time when women became stereotyped and their opportunities narrowed. The cheerful little woman cooked, washed, ironed, cleaned, looked after the children and waited on her husband.

If we return women to their homes as happy little breeders, as per the 1950s, we are in danger of creating a new generation of women who will spend the most productive years of their lives out of the workforce.

Clearly there are differences. In the 50s, women had few roles in the workforce outside those nurturing roles that mimicked motherhood - such as nurses, teachers and office assistants. Women now are running financial institutions, hospitals and political parties.

But the 50s came immediately after an era where women drove trucks, worked in factories and ran businesses. In the 40s, men were off at war and, responding to the need for labour at home, women took on the jobs that had been previously done by their husbands and brothers. When men came back from war, women went back into the home. Those women who had tasted independence, and liked it, found themselves isolated with limited career opportunities.

Social attitudes are surprisingly persuasive in directing behaviour. Support by our mothers and grandmothers for their apparent servitude was in the context of the prevailing social attitude where the joys of motherhood and housework were eulogised through magazines, newspapers, radio and of course, the greatest propaganda tool of all, movies.

Increasing the birth rate by itself need not drive women out of the workplace. But it is an inevitable outcome in a society where children and full time work are still not fully compatible. To be a good mother necessitates less time spent at the workplace, and to have a full time job necessitates less time spent with children.

If, in the current work climate, women have more children and continue to work they will suffer from anxiety over the welfare of their children, and they and their children will suffer because of the physical and mental burden of balancing family and work.

If mothers opt out of the work force, they will forgo the benefits of employment including social integration, social status, and financial independence.

Most older women in Australia do not work today because they were raised at a time when women stayed at home with their children. By the time their children had grown up, older mothers had neither the experience nor the skills to make a go of it in the paid workplace.

Betrayed by a society that had promised them respect, they were "only housewives", demeaned because they did not have paid work. Those who were also betrayed by their husbands abandoning them for the "new woman" - women with careers - found themselves in their 40s and 50s without a future, and without the skills or experience to forge one.

On the scrap heap, some got menial jobs, some lived off a pittance handed out by ex- hubby, and some queued up for employment at social security. And many ended up in the offices of their Federal MP in tears because they were in a world they didn't understand and where they didn’t have a role.

We may be in danger of heading this way again. Apart from the impact on women, there are other problems with increasing fertility. An increased birth rate will exacerbate the problems of a declining workforce, as more women of childbearing age leave their jobs.

Government revenue will decrease as more women opt out of the workforce and stop paying tax, and government outlays will increase as they accept the financial incentives to have children and, in many cases, move onto full benefits and pensions.

A more appropriate strategy would be to provide incentives to increase female participation in the workforce.

Proportionally, Australia has fewer women in the workforce than Canada, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and USA. Amongst older women the difference is stark. Only a third of Australian women over 55 are in the workforce, half the rate of U.S., Sweden, and Switzerland.

Statistics on part time work among women are even more telling. Despite relatively high education levels, the ratio of full to part time work amongst Australian women is half that of the U.S., and one of the lowest in the OECD.

A small increase of 10 per cent in the workforce participation of women would maintain the current ratio of workers to non-worker. This would mean that the ratio of women workers (over 15 years) to non-workers would have to increase from the current rate of 1.2 to 1.9, still considerably below the current male ratio of 2.61.

Not only would this proportional workforce participation of women swell the work force it would decrease the dependency rate. A study by R. G Gregory on Welfare and the Modern Women indicates a crisis in dependency amongst sole mothers. Having gone on the sole parent pension, a significant percentage remain dependant on welfare for the greater proportion of their lives. Perhaps instead of encouraging Australian women to have more babies, we should be looking at ways of making it easier for women with children to work.

What are the barriers? For women with children we lack a truly child friendly workplace. Financial assistance from the government has made childcare more affordable, but cost is only one consideration.

Women with babies and small children need childcare on site or close by. They need someone to call on when their children are sick, because whatever their job, women do not want to lessen their value to their employer by taking time off to watch little Jane or Johnnie sit in front of the TV with a runny nose.

Women also need to know that childcare is not harming their child’s intellectual or social development, as some recent studies have suggested. In the generational equity debate we need a much wider debate than a focus on fertility. There are opportunities to increase the Australian workforce through greater participation of older people and indigenous Australians, as well as through increased participation of women.

By swelling the workforce from those presently outside it, revenue from taxation will increase. With a corresponding drop in benefits and pensions, outlays will decrease. As a consequence there will be a better budget bottom line, but this will not be by itself enough to solve all the problems of an ageing population.

Unless we slow down the blow-out in government expenditure on health and pharmaceuticals, no addition to the working population, through childbirth or increased participation, will be able to keep government expenditure out of the red.