The case against babies
Elon Musk believes the collapsing birth rate is humanity’s biggest danger. But antinatalists argue having kids is little more than a procreational Ponzi scheme, and the risks are real. This is the case against babies.
By Bri Lee for ABC’s Long Read
Saturday 20 September
Elon Musk has said the collapsing birth rate is civilisation’s biggest danger “by far”, and he has fathered 14 children in response (as far as we know).
Vladimir Putin recently reinstated the Stalin-era “Mother Heroine” award for women who have 10 children in less than 10 years.
And China has completely reversed its “one-child” policy and now implements an aggressive fertility agenda that involves claims of human rights violations.
Ideas and policies that seek to encourage baby-making are often referred to as “pronatalist”. But over the past 20 years there’s also been a parallel rise in an opposing viewpoint: antinatalism.
It is important that antinatalism is not conflated with the childfree movement and the rise in maternal ambivalence. Both of those are important, but they still (usually) focus on whether or not people want to have kids.
An antinatalist is asking something different: Regardless of what we want, should we?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-21/antinatalism-child-free-climate-change-human-suffering-baby/105695328
