Book contents
- Optimizing the Management of Fertility in Women over 40
- Optimizing the Management of Fertility in Women over 40
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Section 1 Demographic Trends
- Chapter 1 Is 40 the New 30? Increasing Reproductive Intentions and Fertility Rates beyond Age 40
- Section 2 Biological Basis of Female Reproductive Aging: What Happens to the Ovaries and the Uterus as they Age?
- Section 3 Lifestyle, Environment, and Optimizing Reproduction in the 40s
- Section 4 Rethinking and Redefining “Family Planning” for the Twenty-First Century
- Section 5 Optimal Deployment of ART beyond 40
- Section 6 Obstetric Management beyond 40
- Section 7 Children of Older Parents
- Section 8 What Are Realistic Alternatives to Conceiving with Autologous Eggs?
- Section 9 New Technologies
- Section 10 Ethics
- Index
- References
Chapter 1 - Is 40 the New 30? Increasing Reproductive Intentions and Fertility Rates beyond Age 40
from Section 1 - Demographic Trends
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 September 2022
Book contents
- Optimizing the Management of Fertility in Women over 40
- Optimizing the Management of Fertility in Women over 40
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Section 1 Demographic Trends
- Chapter 1 Is 40 the New 30? Increasing Reproductive Intentions and Fertility Rates beyond Age 40
- Section 2 Biological Basis of Female Reproductive Aging: What Happens to the Ovaries and the Uterus as they Age?
- Section 3 Lifestyle, Environment, and Optimizing Reproduction in the 40s
- Section 4 Rethinking and Redefining “Family Planning” for the Twenty-First Century
- Section 5 Optimal Deployment of ART beyond 40
- Section 6 Obstetric Management beyond 40
- Section 7 Children of Older Parents
- Section 8 What Are Realistic Alternatives to Conceiving with Autologous Eggs?
- Section 9 New Technologies
- Section 10 Ethics
- Index
- References
Summary
A long-term trend of delayed childbearing in the highly developed countries has resulted in a rising number of women having children at advanced reproductive ages. We draw on vital statistics, register and survey data for European countries to outline the main trends in late reproduction, focusing on fertility plans and actual fertility rates among women past age 40. We pay special attention to education differences in late fertility. We document a rapid increase in late childbearing across Europe, fuelled especially by rising first and second birth rates. The share of women planning their first or second child in their late 30s or early 40s has increased rapidly as well, signalling that many women aim to become mothers at an age when they are likely to face infertility or pregnancy complications. We discuss the role medically assisted reproduction plays in this trend. In conclusion, we argue that trends in late childbearing will become one of the critical factors determining the future of fertility and reproduction.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Kohler, H-P, Billari, FC, Ortega, JA. The emergence of lowest-low fertility in Europe during the 1990s. Popul Dev Rev 2002;28(4):641–80. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2002.00641.xGoogle Scholar
Sobotka, T, Beaujouan, É. Late motherhood in low-fertility countries: reproductive intentions, trends and consequences. In: Stoop, D, ed., Preventing age related fertility loss (Switzerland:Springer International Publishing, 2018) pp. 11–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaujouan, É. Latest-late fertility? Decline and resurgence of late parenthood across the low-fertility countries. Popul Dev Rev 2020;46(2):219–47. DOI https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/padr.12334Google Scholar
Mills, MC, Rindfuss, RR, Mcdonald, P, Velde, ET, Force ERST. Why do people postpone parenthood? Reasons and social policy incentives. Hum Reprod Update 2011;17(6):848–60.Google Scholar
Sobotka, T, Beaujouan, É. Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Popul Dev Rev 2014;40(3):391–419. DOI http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1728-4457.2014.00691.x/abstractGoogle Scholar
Frejka, T. Parity distribution and completed family size in Europe: Incipient decline of the two-child family model? Demogr Res (Special Collect 7) 2008;19(4):47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habbema, JDF, Eijkemans, MJC, Leridon, H, te Velde, ER. Realizing a desired family size: When should couples start? Hum Reprod 2015;30(9):2215–21. DOI http://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev148CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beaujouan, É, Toulemon, L. European countries with delayed childbearing are not those with lower fertility. Genus 2021;77(2).Google Scholar
Menken, JA, Trussell, J, Larsen, U. Age and infertility. Science 1986;233(4771):1389–93.Google Scholar
Schmidt, L, Sobotka, T, Bentzen, JG, Nyboe Andersen, A-M. Demographic and medical consequences of the postponement of parenthood. Hum Reprod Update 2012;18(1):29–43. DOI http://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr040CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ní Bhrolcháin, M, Beaujouan, É. Fertility postponement is largely due to rising educational enrolment. Popul Stud (NY) 2012;66(3):311–27. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2012.697569Google ScholarPubMed
Nicoletti, C, Tanturri, ML. Differences in delaying motherhood across European countries: Empirical evidence from the ECHP. Eur J Popul / Rev Eur Démographie 2008;24(2):157–83.Google Scholar
Beaujouan, É, Brzozowska, Z, Zeman, K. The limited effect of increasing educational attainment on childlessness trends in twentieth-century Europe, women born 1916–65. Popul Stud (NY) 2016;70(3):275–91. DOI https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00324728.2016.1206210Google Scholar
Jalovaara, M, Neyer, G, Andersson, G, Dahlberg, J, Dommermuth, L, Fallesen, P, et al. Education, gender, and cohort fertility in the Nordic countries. Eur J Popul 2019;35:563–86. DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-018-9492-2Google Scholar
Jalovaara, M, Andersson, L, Miettinen, A. Parity disparity: Educational differences in Nordic fertility across parities and number of reproductive partners. Popul Stud (Camb) 2021; DOI http://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2021.1887506Google Scholar
Prioux, F. Late fertility in Europe: some comparative and historical data. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2005;53 Spec No 2:3–12.Google Scholar
Billari, FC, Kohler, H-P, Andersson, G, Lundström, H. Approaching the limit: Long-term trends in late and very late fertility. Popul Dev Rev 2007;33(1):149–70.Google Scholar
Sobotka, T. Postponement of childbearing and low fertility in Europe. PhD thesis, University of Groningen. (Amsterdam: Dutch University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
Goldin, C. The quiet revolution that transformed women’s employment, education, and family. Am Econ Rev 2006;96(2):1–21.Google Scholar
Guzzo, KB, Hayford, SR. Pathways to parenthood in social and family contexts: decade in review, 2020. J Marriage Fam 2020;82(1):117–44.Google Scholar
Neels, K, Murphy, M, Ní Bhrolcháin, M, Beaujouan, É. Rising educational participation and the trend to later childbearing. Popul Dev Rev 2017;43(4):667–93. DOI http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/padr.12112Google Scholar
Blossfeld, H, Huinink, J. Human capital investments or norms of role transition? How women’s schooling and career affect the process of family formation. Am J Sociol 1991;97(1):143–68.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Education at a glance 2020. 2020; DOI https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-enGoogle Scholar
Adserà, A. Education and fertility in the context of rising inequality. Vienna Yearb Popul Res 2017;15:63–92.Google Scholar
Rahman, F, Tomlinson, D. (2018). Cross countries: international comparisons of intergenerational trends. Resolution Foundation. www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/cross-countries-international-comparisons-of-intergenerational-trends/Google Scholar
Clark, WAV. Do women delay family formation in expensive housing markets? Demogr Res 2012;27(1):1–24.Google Scholar
Eurostat. (2020). Statistics on young people neither in employment nor in education or training. Eurostat. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Statistics_on_young_people_neither_in_employment_nor_in_education_or_trainingGoogle Scholar
Lesthaeghe, RJ. The unfolding story of the second demographic transition. Popul Dev Rev 2010;36(2):211–51.Google Scholar
Mikolai, J. Partnership histories and the transition to motherhood in later reproductive ages in Europe. Population 2017;72(1):123–54.Google Scholar
Wagner, M, Huinink, J, Liefbroer, AC. Running out of time? Understanding the consequences of the biological clock for the dynamics of fertility intentions and union formation. emogr Res 2019;40:1–26. DOI 10.4054/DemRes.2019.40.1Google Scholar
Raymo, JM, Park, H, Xie, Y, Yeung, WJ. Marriage and family in East Asia: continuity and change. Annu Rev Sociol 2015;41:471–92. DOI http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073014-112428Google Scholar
Cheng, YA. Ultra-low fertility in East Asia : Confucianism and its discontents. Vienna Yearb Popul Res 2020;18: 83–120. DOI http://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2020.rev01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotkirch, A. The wish for a child. Vienna Yearb Popul Res 2020;18:49–61. DOI http://doi.org/10.1553/populationyearbook2020.deb05Google Scholar
Buber-Ennser, I, Fliegenschnee, K. Being ready for a child: a mixed-methods investigation of fertility intentions. Fam Sci 2013;4(1):139–47. DOI www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19424620.2013.871739Google Scholar
Liefbroer, AC, Billari, FC. Bringing norms back in: a theoretical and empirical discussion of their importance for understanding demographic behaviour. Popul Sp Place 2010;16(4):287–305.Google Scholar
Mynarska, M. Deadline for Parenthood: Fertility Postponement and Age Norms in Poland. Eur J Popul / Rev Eur Démographie 2009;26(3):351–73. DOI http://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-009-9194-xGoogle Scholar
Thévenon, O, Gauthier, AH. Family policies in developed countries: A “fertility-booster” with side-effects. Community Work Fam 2011;14(2):197–216.Google Scholar
Präg, P, Mills, MC. Cultural determinants influence assisted reproduction usage in Europe more than economic and demographic factors. Hum Reprod 2017;32(11):2305–14.Google Scholar
Eurostat. (2021). Eurostat online database. Eurostat. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/databaseGoogle Scholar
Rendall, MS, Aracil, E, Bagavos, C, Couet, C, De Rose, A, Di Giulio, P, et al. Increasingly heterogeneous ages at first birth by education in Southern European and Anglo-American family-policy regimes: a seven-country comparison by birth cohort. Popul Stud (NY) 2010;64(3):209–27. DOI http://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2010.512392Google Scholar
Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research (Germany) and Vienna Institute of Demography (Austria). (2021) Human Fertility Database; www.humanfertility.orgGoogle Scholar
Beaujouan, É, Ní Bhrolcháin, M, Berrington, A, Falkingham, J. (2015). Centre for Population Change General Household Survey Database, 1979–2009: Special Licence Access. UK Data Service. http://discover.ukdataservice.ac.uk/catalogue?sn=7666Google Scholar
Beaujouan, É, Brown, JJ, Ní Bhrolcháin, M. Reweighting the General Household Survey 1979–2007. Popul Trends 2011;145:115–41. DOI http://doi.org/10.1057/pt.2011.21Google Scholar
Frejka, T, Sardon, J-P. First birth trends in developed countries: persistent parenthood postponement. Demogr Res 2006;15:147–80.Google Scholar
INSEE. (2011) Survey on family and housing. INSEE. www.insee.fr/en/metadonnees/source/serie/s1233Google Scholar
Gnoth, C, Maxrath, B, Skonieczny, T, Friol, K, Godehardt, E, Tigges, J. Final ART success rates: a 10 years survey. Hum Reprod 2011;26(8):2239–46.Google Scholar
Luke, B, Brown, MB, Wantman, E, Lederman, A, Gibbons, W, Schattman, GL, et al. Cumulative birth rates with linked assisted reproductive technology cycles. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2483–91.Google Scholar
Becker, G. The elusive embryo: how women and men approach new reproductive technologies. (Berkeley: University of California Press; 2000).Google Scholar
Friese, C, Becker, G, Nachtigall, RD. Rethinking the biological clock: eleventh-hour moms, miracle moms and meanings of age-related infertility. Soc Sci Med 2006;63(6):1550–60.Google Scholar
Präg, P, Mills, MC, Tanturri, ML, Monden, C, Pison, G. The demographic consequences of assisted reproductive technologies. SocArXiv 2017; DOI http://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/su49vGoogle Scholar
Wyns, C, Bergh, C, Calhaz-Jorge, C, De Geyter, C, Kupka, MS, Motrenko, T, et al. ART in Europe, 2016: results generated from European registries by ESHRE. Hum Reprod Open 2021;3:hoab026. DOI http://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoab026Google Scholar
Beaujouan, É, Sobotka, T. Late childbearing continues to increase in developed countries. Popul Soc 2019;562(1):1–4.Google Scholar
Beaujouan, É, Reimondos, A, Gray, E, Evans, A, Sobotka, T. Declining realisation of reproductive intentions with age. Hum Reprod 2019;34(10):1906–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez150/5575324Google Scholar
Leridon, H. Can assisted reproduction technology compensate for the natural decline in fertility with age? A model assessment. Hum Reprod 2004;19(7):1548–53. DOI http://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh304.Google Scholar
Frank, O, Bianchi, PG, Campana, A. The end of fertility – age, fecundity and fecundability in women. J Biosoc Sci 1994;26(3):349–68.Google Scholar
Towner, MC, Nenko, I, Walton, SE. Why do women stop reproducing before menopause? A life-history approach to age at last birth. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 2016;371(1692):20150147.Google Scholar
Settersten, RA, Hägestag, GO. What’s the latest? Cultural age deadlines for family transitions. Gerontologist 1996;36(2):178–88.Google Scholar
Beaujouan, É. Late fertility intentions and fertility in Austria. Vienna Institute of Demography Working Papers, No. 06/2018 (Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW), Vienna Institute of Demography (VID), 2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.1553/0x003ccd3cGoogle Scholar
Billari, FC, Goisis, A, Liefbroer, AC, Settersten, RA, Aassve, A, Hagestad, GO, et al. Social age deadlines for the childbearing of women and men. Hum Reprod 2011;26(3):616–22. DOI http://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq360.Google Scholar
Wyndham, N, Marin Figueira, PG, Patrizio, P. A persistent misperception: assisted reproductive technology can reverse the “aged biological clock. Fertil Steril 2012;97(5):1044–7. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.02.015Google Scholar
Hellstrand, J, Nisén, J, Miranda, V, Fallesen, P, Dommermuth, L, Myrskylä, M. Not just later, but fewer: novel trends in cohort fertility in the Nordic countries. MPIDR Working Paper 2020;WP 2020–007. https://doi.org/10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2020-007Google Scholar
Verweij, R, Mills, M, Snieder, H, Stulp, G. Three facets of planning and postponement of parenthood in the Netherlands. Demogr Res 2020;43(September):659–72.Google Scholar
Miller, AR. The effects of motherhood timing on career path. J Popul Econ 2011;24(3):1071–100.Google Scholar
Bratti, M, Cavalli, L. Delayed first birth and new mothers’ labor market outcomes: evidence from biological fertility shocks. Eur J Popul 2014;30(1):35–63.Google Scholar
Sobotka, T. Shifting parenthood to advanced reproductive ages: trends, causes and consequences. In: A young generation under pressure? (Springer Berlin / Heidelberg; 2010) pp. 129–54.Google Scholar
HFEA. (2020) Information on Fertility treatments 2018: trends and figures. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. www.hfea.gov.uk/about-us/publications/research-and-data/fertility-treatment-2018-trends-and-figures/Google Scholar
- 4
- Cited by