Survey links fertility choices to culture, not just money

A new joint report from the Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute examines how social norms, family influence and public figures shape fertility intentions across the U.S. and more than a dozen other countries. The findings suggest pronatal attitudes, religiosity and encouragement from close networks matter more than many policymakers assume.

Why it matters: - Fertility rates differ sharply across groups living in the same economic conditions, which suggests money and childcare costs do not explain the full story. - The report argues that cultural signals from family, friends, religious communities and admired public figures can shape whether people want children. - The findings could affect how policymakers, faith leaders and family advocates think about birth-rate declines.

What happened: - The Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute released a joint report, Baby Nudges: How Social Influences Shape Fertility Choices, on October 20, 2026. - The report uses survey data from 10,000 people in the U.S. and more than a dozen other countries. - Researchers Dr. Lyman Stone, Dr. Jason Carroll and Peter Foreshaw Brookes examined how celebrities, religious leaders, public figures, peer networks, parents, cultural norms and personal values relate to fertility.

The details: - Parental encouragement was associated with a 30% higher likelihood that a person would intend to have another child. - Believing friends would celebrate another child was associated with a 20% higher likelihood of intending to have another child. - Admiration for public figures with large families was associated with a 14% increase in the likelihood of having another child. - Believing children are the greatest joy in life was associated with a 30% higher likelihood of intending to have more children. - Respondents in the top third of religiosity were 9% more likely to have children, want more children and intend to have more children. - Belief that most people have a moral obligation to have children did not significantly predict intent to have a child. - Division of household labor did not have a large impact on fertility. - A willingness to take risks and optimism about the future both predicted intentions to have children and the number of children a respondent already had. - The report says these findings offer a first-of-its-kind look at the values and behaviors that affect fertility in the U.S. and elsewhere. - The report includes an interactive tool that complements the final report. - Baby Nudges concludes with recommendations for prospective grandparents, religious leaders, communities and policymakers.

Between the lines: - The report pushes back on the idea that fertility policy should focus mainly on affordability and household economics. - Dr. Jason Carroll said differences in birth rates are partly a function of cultural norms and values, not just childcare costs or household income. - Dr. Lyman Stone said policymakers may need to focus on friends, family and famous people as much as finances. - Peter Foreshaw Brookes said the survey found no strong evidence linking housework division or beliefs about a moral duty to have children with fertility intentions, and said policymakers should look elsewhere, such as social support systems. - The report frames fertility as a social choice shaped by visible cues about what a family should look like.

What's next: - The report says its recommendations are aimed at people who want to create a more pro-family cultural environment. - Researchers and advocates can use the report's interactive tool to explore the survey findings further. - The Institute for Family Studies and the Wheatley Institute may use the research to shape future pronatal discussions and public education efforts.

The bottom line: - The report's core message is that fertility decisions are influenced by culture as much as cash, and that social approval can move birth intentions in measurable ways.