There’s an old saying that if you don’t have a solution, you’re part of the problem. Seems like Professor Sojung Lim has taken this to heart. She has just published a groundbreaking piece in the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, “The Necessary Paradigm Shift for South Korea’s Ultra-Low Fertility.” Her essay is worthy of quoting at length:
South Korea’s unprecedented ultra-low fertility requires a paradigm shift in the country’s approach to the family. The government should take bold steps to support children and their families while recognizing parenting as a public service.
Call it reprioritizing, spiritual awakening, or whatever. Paradigm shift will suffice.
Widespread pessimism and young people’s lack of confidence in the future [are] considered major drivers of falling marriage and fertility rates.
The acceleration of fertility decline in recent years indicates that existing systems are unsustainable and that a paradigm shift is required in South Korea’s approach to the family. South Korea’s current fertility policies are still based on the traditional paradigm that unconditionally relies on parents and their families to rear children instead of fully recognizing parenting as a public service.
With over two decades of extremely low fertility, childbearing and childrearing have become essential for the country’s economic and demographic future, and parenting should therefore be recognized as a “public service.”
What a great idea! Officially designating parenting as public service could be a game-changer.
Professor Lim calls for extending generous child support up to the age of 17. The OECD average for spending on child support is 2.103 percent of GDP. South Korea is a third lower at 1.374 percent. They should reallocate resources to achieve at least the OECD average.
She also advocates “universal and mandatory child parental leave.” Many South Koreans do not avail themselves of existing paid parental leave options, such is their workaholic culture. Safeguards should ensure that extended parental leave does not negatively impact professional standing and advancement. That means job security, something lacking at present.
The government should instead offer universal and mandatory parental leave to all new parents, including fathers. Mandatory parental leave for fathers reduces the childcare burden on women, promulgates gender-egalitarian attitudes towards childcare responsibilities in the longer term, and could reduce the stigmatization of women’s leave-taking.
Got that? Mandatory parental leave. While I don’t like the idea of government telling folks what to do, it happens all the time, like paying taxes. We allow the economy to dictate what we do, and the economic system is set by the government. Parental leave should be a duty, much as military service. This would be great for South Korean children and could possibly break the pattern of workaholism. At the very least, it could shift the priorities of Koreans from worrying about job performance to focusing on the quality of their public service, i.e., parenting. Maybe if they frame it as national defense, politicians will support it.
Speaking of defense, a generous slice of the military budget could be reallocated for parental public service. This could be an issue to facilitate cooperation between North and South Korea. They have similar challenges. If left to their own devices (sans imperial meddling), these countries could help each other. After all, they are the same people. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if pronatalism led to peace breaking out?
Professor Lim also advocates parental insurance untethered to employment. To the best of my understanding, this would be a hearth and home version of workers compensation insurance.
The ultimate goal should be to promote a healthy work-life balance for all workers and create a social environment where work and family are not mutually exclusive… [P]arents should be able to freely choose amongst various options such as reduced work hours, flexible hybrid or work-from-home schedules, and family medical leave to reconcile workplace and parenting responsibilities.
South Korea provides a useful test of whether current socioeconomic and cultural forces are inevitably anti-natalist, and if not, how effective policies based on social agreement can reshape them.
Globalist economics is indeed anti-natalist. How else could you describe a system where profits, not families and children, are what counts. How could one possibly not understand that?
Paradigm shift
Talk about a game-changer. Should governments officially designate parenting as public service, there could be a major realignment of social priorities. For example:
Ever heard of the Association of Mature American Citizens or the larger left-leaning American Association of Retired Persons (AARP)? If you join there are any number of membership benefits and discounts. They have lobbyists. How about a Parent’s association, where parents join and receive benefits?
Government employees have any number of organizations representing them. There is the National Federation of Federal Employees. Then there is IFPTE, a union of state and local government professionals. There is the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) with a membership of public sector and healthcare industry employees. How about a federation or union representing and lobbying for parental interests?
Active duty and retired military can shop at the PX (aka Base Exchange) with a wide range of “military discounts.” How about a Parent’s Exchange, a place where parents can shop?
The sky’s the limit. Time to think outside the box.
In any event, Wow. Parenting as public service. Properly implemented, that would be a profound paradigm shift. Professor Sojung Lim is on to something. This is historic, an idea whose time has come. Spread the word.