New research shows that the share of childfree people varies widely across the United States, with some states reporting rates as high as 20 percent while others hover around 10 percent.
State‑by‑state differences reveal surprising patterns
The study, published in PLOS One, analyzed responses from more than 20,000 adults surveyed in 2024 as part of the Civic Health and Institutions Project. By distinguishing those who have chosen not to have children from respondents who intend to parent later or cannot do so, researchers were able to map the prevalence of childfree adults in every state.
Zachary Neal and Jennifer Watling Neal, both professors of psychology at Michigan State University, noted that these numbers reflect “a lot of variation” among regions.
California and Michigan each have roughly one in five adults who are childfree. In contrast, Louisiana and the Dakotas report only about one in ten.
Related: Can You Use CBD Cream for Sunburn Relief?
While higher living costs appear to correlate with larger childfree populations, the team emphasizes that personal factors such as marital status and age exert a stronger influence. “A state’s cost of living and protection of reproductive rights are related to how many of its residents are childfree,” the study states, “but those state factors matter much less than individual characteristics like marital status and age.”
Implications for demographic trends
Some states with notable childfree percentages, like California and Michigan, have been experiencing overall population decline. The authors caution against assuming that policy changes—such as lowering housing expenses, increasing education spending, or easing abortion restrictions—will automatically shift these adults toward parenthood. “These findings suggest that reducing the cost of living, spending more on education, or changing restrictions on abortion are unlikely to lead childfree residents to have children,” says Neal.
Data also show that childfree individuals tend to be older and more likely to be unmarried compared with those planning to have children. This demographic profile aligns with broader trends observed in fertility research, where life‑stage decisions often dictate family planning.
The research team plans to use the dataset to explore how social networks differ between childfree adults and parents. Understanding these connections could shed light on how norms around family formation evolve in diverse communities.
Related: Common Plastic Linked to Higher Risk of Fatty Liver Disease
From a practical standpoint, the concentration of childfree adults in certain locales may affect local economies, housing markets, and community services. Areas with higher rates might see reduced demand for schools and childcare, while still needing to support a growing older population that does not rely on traditional family structures for support.
Future research directions
Although the study provides the first detailed state‑level portrait of childfree prevalence, the authors acknowledge that causality remains unclear. They call for additional investigations to determine why individuals in some states opt out of parenthood more frequently than those elsewhere.
“Although some states have large childfree populations, they remain a hidden group because their decision not to have children violates a strong norm,” the paper notes. This observation shows the social stigma that can accompany the choice, suggesting that public perception may lag behind demographic realities.
Overall, the findings show that personal circumstances—marriage status, age, and perhaps career aspirations—play a decisive role in the decision to remain childfree, outweighing broader economic or policy environments. This nuance is essential for policymakers and planners who might otherwise attribute population shifts solely to external factors.