The recent shift towards “pronatalism” within right-wing circles, along with an influx of articles by The New York Times discussing the Trump administration’s initiatives to encourage more births among married women, might seem surprising to some. This initiative is rooted in the recommendations of Project 2025, which advocates for restoring the family as a central pillar of American life. One chapter specifically outlines plans for the Department of Health and Human Services, detailing these efforts.
Many are aware of the agenda to reduce or abolish access to abortion, medication abortions, and contraceptive options such as Plan B. Roger Severino, a fervent advocate and former HHS counsel, has been vocal in his belief that the federal government should eliminate funding for birth control.
However, the extent of Severino’s advocacy for “natural family planning” methods, often referred to as the “rhythm method,” has been less recognized. This method involves tracking the woman’s ovulation cycle to avoid pregnancy by abstaining from intercourse during fertile periods. Severino suggested that HHS should promote these family structures and methods while pushing for research into modern fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), though the effectiveness claims of such methods are widely disputed.
Severino also asserted that the CDC should update its public communications to distinguish modern FABMs from outdated rhythm methods considerably. This announcement came just shy of a year after an HHS manifesto was highlighted, with The New York Times reporting on the Trump administration’s exploration of measures to encourage higher birthrates. Ideas such as “baby bonuses” and menstrual cycle classes have been proposed.
Simone Collins, referred to as a “mom-activist,” expressed to The New York Times that she perceives the administration as inherently pronatalist. Her husband, Malcolm Collins, agreed, citing the number of children that key figures in the administration have. For instance, Donald Trump has five children with three different mothers, while Elon Musk is known to have at least 14 children with multiple partners. Vice President JD Vance, an advocate for increasing childbirth among women, has emphasized the societal benefits of a higher birthrate.
The Collinses, who appear frequently in various media outlets discussing pronatalism, express a determination to expand their family significantly through methods such as IVF, aiming for enhanced intelligence and health. They are non-religious yet foresee a global demographic decline, asserting that individuals should be held accountable for not contributing to population growth. While not opposing immigration, they identify with a segment of the right-wing thought that they predict will dominate following Trump’s political era.
The push for more traditional family models, as seen in the Project 2025 plan, does not extend to increasing childcare support outside the home. Suggestions such as eliminating programs like Head Start have already been made. Additional proposals considered by the Trump administration include reserving some Fulbright fellowships for married applicants and creating a “National Medal of Motherhood” incentive for women with at least six children.
The pronatalist conversation also featured prominently at the Natal Conference in Austin, organized by Kevin Dolan, motivated by concerns over declining testosterone levels in men. The event featured several notable right-wing figures and discussed the need for society to increase birth rates.
Elon Musk, often cited as a leading figure in this movement, embraces the pronatalist agenda despite his personal life not fitting the traditional family mold. However, even Roger Severino cautioned against viewing Musk as a model due to treating progeny as commodities.
Despite the media focus, including criticism from writers like Michelle Goldberg, similar policies in other countries, such as Hungary, have proven ineffective. Efforts to increase birth rates have been met with declining outcomes, indicating that societal shifts towards equal parenting and genuine family planning freedom are essential in achieving more balanced fertility aspirations. Without addressing broader social and economic challenges, a pronatalist agenda, as pursued by the current administration, may face substantial obstacles.
