upworthy

Leah Groth

More

The US birth rate is at an all-time low. But maybe that's a good thing.

The National Centers for Health Statistics at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a report this week that shows the fertility rate and number of births in American are continuing to decline. Fertility has dropped to an unprecedented low and the birth rate has plummeted to its lowest point in over three decades.

There were 1,728 births per 1,000 women, signifying a two percent decrease from 2017 and a record low for the nation. The report points out that the low fertility rate is below the level needed for the population to replace itself, 2,100 per 1,000 women, a trend that has been continuing since 1971.

However, there is an interesting, less negative-sounding statistic hidden in this report. While the birth rate continues to decline for almost every age group of women under 35, it has actually increased for women in their late 30s and early 40s.

So it’s not a total birth decline across the board. And some of the decline is actually a good thing.

For example, Brady Hamilton, lead author of the new report, told Time that a 7% decline in teen pregnancies is “welcome news” for public health, as most of these pregnancies are “mistimed” or “unwanted.” It also insinuates that more teens are using contraception.

Teen pregnancies are also proven to have a negative impact on the national economy. Teenage parents are less likely to graduate from high school or college and often enter the child welfare system, relying on taxpayers for medical and economic support.

What’s more, Hamilton says the report is only a snapshot in time — in this case, the year 2018 — and may not represent “births foregone." It’s simply births that have been postponed. He points out that “women generally do have, in the end, two children”— they might just be doing it later in life.

So people aren’t rushing to become parents, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Parents who welcome children later in life are more likely to be financially stable and children are more likely to thrive.

That said, if the overall population is truly slipping, Social Security and Medicaid could be threatened.

The idea behind these social program is that the working population pays into the fund with income taxes in order to support the aging population who once fulfilled the same duty. The mechanism only works if the fund continues to be fully replenished by each generation.

Experts are concerned that a staggering population will put a financial strain on the programs because there will be less tax-paying individuals to support the aging populations.

“All past projections of the proportion of the U.S. population that will be elderly, and eligible for Medicare and Social Security, have assumed that the previous higher birth rates remained constant,” John Rowe, Julius B. Richmond Professor of health policy and aging health policy and management, explained to FOX Business. “As rates have fallen, and fewer young people ultimately enter the labor force and pay into the Social Security and Medicare Trust funds, the solvency of these funds is threatened.”

It could also threaten the job market.

In recent years, the United States economy and job market have experienced much-needed growth, but the declining birth rate could signify a turnaround as demographers point out there will be fewer young people joining the working population.

Dowell Myers, a demographer at the University of Southern California, called the situation a “national problem.”

He explains that initially, experts believed the falling birthrate was due to the recession, but now think it has more to do with the fact that young people aren’t optimistic about the future. "Not a whole lot of things are going good," he says, "and that's haunting young people in particular, more than old people."

Clearly there are many uncertainties when it comes to population growth and its impact on social programs, the job market and the economy overall. The silver lining is that if parents are being more mindful about how and when they have children, they will likely be better parents. And that alone could ultimately have a positive impact on future generations in every aspect.

Family

Should school nurses be able to send unvaccinated kids home? Many parents say 'yes.'

In Philadelphia, PA, nurses used to have the right to keep an unvaccinated child out of school — until now.

Lincoln High School nurse Peg Devine explained to the Philadelphia Inquirer that, in her experience, exclusion — preventing a child from attending school until they are up to date on required vaccinations — “proved powerful.” In her 26 years on the job she kept only 15 students out of school and none of them ended up missing more than two days before proving immunization.

However, now her right to intervene has been taken away by the school district, which she finds especially concerning due to the local outbreak of mumps (so far, over 100 Temple University students have contracted the disease) and the measles outbreak in New York — less than two hours from Philadelphia.

“It’s very dangerous that you’ve got kids who are not immunized, and you have medically fragile kids,” Devine said. “It’s unprecedented.”

About 10% of children in the Philadelphia school district remain unvaccinated.

The Philadelphia Inquirer interviewed several nurses from within the school district who all believe it should be their discretionary right to exclude students who were not properly vaccinated.

Colleen Quinn, the nurse at the High School for Creative and Performing Arts, points out that two students at her school are receiving chemotherapy, and there are others whose immune systems are compromised, including young teachers who are pregnant. Of the 750 students at the school 42 are either unvaccinated or partially vaccinated. She has attempted to educate parents but often gets the “runaround.”

“If you were a parent, and you had a child in the school setting who was recovering from cancer, or recently had an organ transplant — and these are not hypothetical cases, most of us have had these cases — would you want your children in a building with students who were not immunized?” said Strawberry Mansion High School nurse Judith Cocking, who claims she has 28 non-compliant students.

The school district now says nurses can only exclude unvaccinated children on a case-by-case basis, meaning it’s no longer up to the nurses’ discretion.

[rebelmouse-image 19534861 dam="1" original_size="640x425" caption="David Haygarth/Flickr." expand=1]David Haygarth/Flickr.

Karyn Lynch, chief of student support services for the district explained that the recent shift was an attempt to standardize procedures “so that across the city, everyone is following the same process. To inequitably implement across the district would be inappropriate."

She explains that if an unvaccinated student is thought to have come into contact with someone who has an infectious disease, they will deal with it accordingly, but excluding all kids who are unvaccinated could have repercussions.

Parents in the district are less than pleased by this development. In fact, many are shocked and outraged that so many unvaccinated children are walking the halls of their children’s schools.

“I must say I was unaware and completely shocked that [vaccination] was not a compulsory requirement in the Philadelphia School District,” says Neha Ghaisas, whose son, Advik, attends Kindergarten at General George A. McCall School. “I feel that the school district should have the right to keep students away until all the vaccine requirements are fulfilled.”

Shiya Furstenau, whose son Jackson will be entering Kindergarten in the fall at William M. Meredith School, dubs the policy “unreasonable.” “I wouldn’t take my kids to a doctor’s office if they allowed patients that weren’t up to date on their vaccines,” she says. “It puts everyone at risk, especially those who are immunocompromised and our babies who haven’t been able to get vaccinated yet.”

Nicola Espie, who has one child at Chester Arthur School and another entering in the fall, points out that the mumps outbreak at Temple University, as well as the measles outbreak in New York, is proof that “we aren’t talking about a remote hypothetical.”

“People have the right to make medical decisions for their children, of course, but that right should not extend to affecting the public health and putting vulnerable populations at risk and the school district must do its part to protect our children,” she adds.

For Valentyna Abraimova, whose son attends Meredith and whose daughter will enter in the fall, the situation isn’t so black and white.

She explains that vaccinating her children wasn’t “an easy decision,” but because of the crowded classrooms in the public school system as well as the recent outbreaks, she sees the importance of it and hopes “most parents will too.”

She says that getting a nudge from the school nurse, as well as facing the threat of exclusion, is effective. Her son, Gabby, was missing his second dose of MMR. The nurse hinted that he might be suspended, and he got the shot two days later. “It might work for other families, who maybe just missed a couple of appointments or, like myself, are hesitant about vaccines and need an extra push.”

[rebelmouse-image 19534862 dam="1" original_size="725x479" caption="Photo via Pixnio" expand=1]Photo via Pixnio

However, another mother of a child whose daughter attends McCall who wishes to remain anonymous agrees with the school district’s stance: she doesn’t believe that unvaccinated children are putting those who are vaccinated at risk. “For a school of 800, there are roughly 80 who aren’t properly vaccinated, and there is a good chance they wouldn’t come into contact with one another,” she says. She also points out that the vaccinations these students haven’t gotten could be “low-risk viruses, such as the chicken pox or the flu.”

For mom Miranda Hall, the issue isn’t about vaccination itself. “The government should never be given the power to dictate someone’s medical condition as a norm. The occasional extreme, maybe, but that should be determined case-by-case. Choosing alternative immune support methods is not an extreme situation.”

As a parent myself whose child will be entering the Philadelphia school district in the fall, I firmly believe school nurses should be able to exclude students who aren’t vaccinated.

When I was attending school, nurses had the right to send home a child for any reason pertaining to health, because they were considered the school’s medical expert. Nurses, not administrators, go to school to learn about medicine, and we rely on them to take care of our children’s health needs. Why should district officials, with limited to no medical background, get to override that?

If school nurses aren’t given the opportunity to use their medical background and trained judgement to make that call on their own — especially in situations when there is an outbreak going on — the health of our children will be compromised. And if that practice becomes more widely adopted, the health of everyone in this country will be impacted, especially now that we’re dealing with more and more serious outbreaks.

From Your Site Articles
Most Shared

A high school principal created a dress code for parents. It's being called racist and sexist.

Parents whose children attend James Madison High School were taken aback when they received a letter from Principal Carlotta Outley Brown outlining a strict dress code they needed to adhere to while on school grounds.

“We are preparing your child for a prosperous future,” Brown wrote. “We want them to know what is appropriate and what is not appropriate for any setting they may be in.”

The list of banned items was pretty extensive. It included satin caps, bonnets, shower caps, hair rollers, pajamas or any pajama-looking attire, jeans “torn from your buttocks to all the way down showing lots of skin,” leggings “showing your bottom and where your body is not covered from the front or back,” very low cut or revealing tops, sagging pants, shorts or jeans, Daisy Dukes, low rider shorts, undershirts on men and dresses that are “up to your behind.”

According to reports, the letter was provoked after a mother was kicked off the school campus by an administrator for her ensemble.

Joselyn Lewis was unable to register her daughter for school, after showing up on campus wearing a Marilyn Monroe t-shirt dress and headscarf — an item commonly worn by black women to protect their hair.

“[Principal Brown] went on to say that she still couldn’t let me on the premises because I was not in dress code and I still didn’t understand what that meant,” Lewis told Click 2 Houston. “She said that my headscarf was out of dress code and my dress was too short.”

Lewis said she was in the headscarf because she was in the process of getting her hair done, but pointed out that there are other reasons people might wear them.

“I’m not saying that it’s a part of my religion, but it could have been, but I just wanted to have it up. Who are you to say that I can’t wear my hair up? In a scarf? Who are you to tell me how to dress?” she continued.

Many people, including Zeph Capo, president of the Houston Federation of Teachers, can understand why racy clothing should be banned from schools. However, he finds this particular policy “a little classist” in nature.

"Having body parts exposed is one thing. Turning someone away because their hair's in rollers ... is a little ridiculous," he told CNN. "This is an issue of a principal issuing a dictatorial edict rather than having substantive conversation."

Social media, as well as mass media, has been on fire debating the issue. Some claim that imposing these specific dress code violations is racist (note that the principal herself is black) while others deem it sexist, as most of the dress code restrictions are targeted at women. Several also point out that the school should be focusing on education rather than policing parents on dress code.

One woman, a PhD, noted that white women are rarely banned for wearing tight yoga pants to pick-up and drop-off.

This isn’t the first time a dress code has been deemed racist or sexist in nature.

Back in 2017, Chicago restaurant and bar, Bottled Blonde, came under fire for issuing a dress code policy that many felt targeted black people. “No excessively Baggie [sic], Sagging, Ripped, Dirty, Frayed, Overly Flashy, or Bright clothing,” “No plain white tees, long tees, denim, flannel (not even around one’s waist)” “No gang attire...no camouflage,” and “shorts must be no longer than one inch past your knees,” were just a few of the items that ignited controversy.

And in 2016, three girls at a North Carolina private school revolted against a dress code requiring them to wear skirts to school or risk punishment. After creating and circulating a petition, the rules were overturned when a judge found the dress code unconstitutional.

“The skirts requirement causes the girls to suffer a burden the boys do not, simply because they are female,” wrote US District Judge Malcolm Harris on March 28 in response to the 2016 ACLU lawsuit against the Charter Day School in Leland.

Thankfully, there’s organization working to create a model school dress code that’s meant to be entirely inclusive.

In February 2016, Oregon NOW (National Organization of Women) created a dress code that wouldn’t marginalize or oppress any group based on gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, household income, gender identity or cultural observance.

The basic principle is that certain body parts should be covered — genitals, buttocks and nipples — but that cleavage is okay. Most clothing is allowed, however items banned include anything with words or images promoting violence, drugs and alcohol, hate speech, profanity or pornography, or anything promoting a hostile environment. Visible underwear, bathing suits and helmets that obscure the face are also prohibited.

“Oregon NOW created this Model Dress Code to help school districts update and improve their student dress code policies and enforcement processes,” policymakers explained.

“Student dress codes should support equitable educational access and should not reinforce gender stereotypes. Student dress codes and administrative enforcement should not reinforce or increase marginalization or oppression of any group based on race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, household income, gender identity or cultural observance.”

From Your Site Articles
More

This mom's tweet thread about playground racism went viral because parents need to hear it.

Writer slash mom Mathangi Subramanian recently witnessed some playground discrimination. Even more disturbing than the words that were thrown around by the children is the fact that their parents turned a blind eye to it.

“Still processing this, but two days ago, two blonde girls at the playground told my daughter she couldn't play with them because she doesn't have blonde hair,” Subramanian explained in a multi-tweet post. “The girls' parents did not intervene. You better believe I did.”

Her message to the children was blunt and to the point, yet totally reasonable. She didn’t attempt to “school them,” but carefully explained that excluding others is never cool. “I told the blonde kids at the playground that they can't exclude people,” she continued. “I did it calmly and politely, while their parents watched.” Um, yeah. They just watched. And said nothing.

After the incident, Subramanian had a heart-to-heart with her daughter about race and discrimination, revealing on Twitter that this was sadly not the first time her little girl had experienced exclusion because of her skin color. She points out that it isn’t really fair that she is forced to have these sorts of conversations all of the time while white parents have the privilege of avoiding it.

“Parents of color talk about race with our kids all the time. We have no choice. It’s there, everywhere, and can’t avoid it.”

The bottom line is that as a parent, your job is to, well, parent. By promptly addressing the situation, the blonde moms could have taught their children an important lesson. “They should've said something. ‘My daughter was watching. Their daughters were watching,’” she tweeted. “White parents: TALK TO YOUR KIDS ABOUT RACE. I know it's uncomfortable. But the rest of us do it all the time. We need you to do it too.”

Kids are not colorblind, but it is our responsibility to raise them with the understanding that skin tone doesn’t really matter.

As a mother, I have occasionally found myself in the position where I knew I needed to address race with my children. Despite the fact that we live in Philadelphia, one of the most racially diverse cities in the country, and that my kids have friends of every skin shade imaginable, they still say things that make me cringe a bit. They notice that other people don’t look the same as them — whether that has to do with skin color or missing body parts or if they have a penis or vagina. They are just figuring things out, and since kids rarely have a filter, that means they say what they’re thinking. Out loud.

When they’ve unknowingly said things that could come across as ignorant, I have immediately corrected them. Because that is my job. “You treat people equally, no matter what,” I have explained. “Never exclude others.”

The bottom line is: whether we are talking about race, nutrition, manners or hygiene, we can’t expect kids to just “know better.” It is our job to teach them right from wrong. It is our job to explain why differences aren’t a reason to treat people differently. If we, as parents, don’t guide them through social and racial awareness, how can we ever expect racism to dissolve for good?

From Your Site Articles
Trending Stories