“Many patients would like to start a family, but they don’t do it for fear of raising children in a world devastated by the effects of global warming,” says Matteo Innocenti, a psychiatrist and psychotherapist who is the president of the Italian Association for Climate Change Anxiety (Aiacc).
In a country that saw just 380,000 new births in 2023 and has one of Europe’s lowest birth rates, a new factor seems to be adding to the causes of the demographic crisis. The reasons for this trend are diverse, ranging from the general decline in human fertility due to biological and genetic factors to the lack of economic stability, which discourages young people from having children. However, in recent years, an unprecedented phenomenon has emerged: more and more people are choosing not to have children for reasons related to climate change.
This is the case for those suffering from eco-anxiety, recognized by the American Psychological Association as a state of “persistent fear of environmental catastrophe.” This condition manifests with symptoms such as worry, insomnia, tension, and accelerated heartbeat, and can lead those affected to a state of paralyzing anguish, preventing them from living their daily lives.
“In recent times, our studies have been focusing on the evolution of eco-anxiety: eco-paralysis,” explains Dr. Innocenti, who is specialized in these topics both in research and clinical practice. “It is a state of frustration so profound that it alters certain behaviors, becoming anti-evolutionary: one does not seek employment, does not think about the future, does nothing because one is resigned to the fact that the world will be devastated.” The president of Aiacc highlights that this is a recent problem, but one that is increasingly widespread and destined to increase exponentially, with possible effects on the demographic crisis.
Interventions to treat this disorder vary: “First and foremost, listening and therapy. Psychologists must be prepared on the subject, because patients want someone to take the problem seriously and know as much about it as they do.” There are also activities that can help those suffering from eco-anxiety better manage the problem. Encouraging ecological behaviors improves self-efficacy, reducing guilt and involving the individual more, especially if these activities are carried out in groups, explains Innocenti. Lastly, it is important to rediscover contact with nature: “Many are concerned about the environment but spend all their time in cities, away from green spaces. With our association, we promote forest-bathing sessions that help change the subject’s perception. Concern takes on a positive connotation, shifting from fear of disaster to an attitude of care towards a precious asset.”
Regarding the fear of leaving future generations with an uninhabitable world, the Aiacc researcher states: “My studies aim to solve the problem of hypo-generativity. I am a great lover of nature and the environment, and I want to have children to teach them not to make the same mistakes we have made. I hope we can change the course.”
On the other hand, there are those who, based on data on overpopulation and climate change, decide not to have children to minimize their impact on the environment. Among them there is Verena Brunschweiger, a German author and philosopher, who argues for antinatalism as the cardinal principle.
“My goal is to make the world a better place, and this involves saving the environment. There are several ways to do it, but the most impactful is not reproducing,” says Brunschweiger, showing a graph that explains why not procreating is the most ecological action one can take.
Her ideas have sparked much criticism and astonishment due to their radical nature, but the philosopher believes this is merely a result of a European cultural prejudice, not present in other countries like England or the United States. “Having children is morally wrong. By bringing a new consumer into our privileged world, I would feel guilty. It’s not a private choice because everything we do has consequences for others. Bringing new people into the world contributes to a worse future for the Global South, fueling migrations and wars for essential resources. It’s not fair to make those who already exist suffer just because you want your own child, with your blue eyes. If you love children so much, adopt one. We have many orphanages full.”
Regarding the demographic crisis that several countries, including Italy, are experiencing, the author argues that the problem does not exist: “We should welcome immigrants, who would become new workers in our countries. Another issue that is always raised is that of pensions, but what good will a pension do in thirty years if we will no longer have water and air to breathe? I believe we will have more serious problems; we are focusing on the wrong things.”
To save the environment, the main path should be population reduction, which, according to Brunschweiger, must start in the most industrialized countries. “I think it is our duty to start this process, as we are the main culprits of climate change. An entire African school class uses on average the same resources as a single German child, so we are the ones who should start. And if there are others who want to join in other parts of the world, why not? Antinatalism is for everyone. I strongly believe in education and want to raise awareness on this issue.”
