The Cost of Childbirth: 1958 vs. 2012

Test ticker

Monika Bauerlein,
CEO

Dear Reader,

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been of late. In "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," we take a level-headed look at the brutal economics of journalism, why investigative reporting like you get from us matters, and why we're optimistic we can grow our base of support in a big way—starting with hitting a huge $300,000 goal in just three weeks. Please learn more and donate if you can right now.

The next few months are make-or-break for Mother Jones’ fundraising. We need to raise $300,000 quickly, and we need more online readers to pitch in than have been. Please learn more in "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," where we go into the brutal economics of journalism, and what makes Mother Jones unique and worth supporting if you can right now.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

I’ve posted this before, but today’s big New York Times story about the cost of childbirth gives me a chance to post it again. Here’s a comparison of the cost of childbirth today with the cost of childbirth (mine) in 1958. Adjusted for inflation, it was about $1,000 in 1958 and about $10,000 today.

Of course, some of that is due to improved technology. Back in 1958, I was born in a room with a bed, a nightstand, and a telephone, and not much else. No machines that go ping. But that’s not the whole story. Other advanced countries have all the same improved technology we do, and their costs have risen to only about $3,000 or so. To find out what’s going on, just click the link.