Singapore should look again at diverse forms of parenthood

Singapore's total fertility rate (TFR) has declined drastically over the past few years, hitting a record low of 0.87 children per woman in 2025. This has sparked widespread consternation among government policymakers, who view this demographic crunch as an existential threat to national survival.

As a small city-state lacking natural and agricultural resources, Singapore has long relied on human capital to drive its economy, while a steady stream of youth has provided conscripts for its military. An ultra-low fertility rate and rapidly ageing population would thus undermine Singapore's twin pillars of economic and military security.

Initiatives to encourage and support parenthood among Singaporeans have included various financial subsidies, improved pre-school and childcare support, and the creation of more family-friendly workplace environments. However, these have so far failed to mitigate the nation's declining fertility rate, and a 'radical reset' in how parenthood is supported may be required to change the country's shrinking population trajectory.

A highly contentious issue that has largely been overlooked and 'swept under the rug' is whether Singapore's government should consider being more supportive of diverse forms of parenthood: those outside the norm of heterosexual marriage.

In particular, unwed and same-sex parenthood are currently discouraged and financially penalised by the state. Most notably, such families are ineligible to receive cash gifts for their newborn babies, and are also barred from receiving financial subsidies for public housing. Moreover, current public housing policy in Singapore does not consider unmarried or same-sex parents and their children as an eligible 'family nucleus' for purchasing or renting apartments, often leading to rejected applications and long-term unstable housing situations.

Furthermore, same-sex couples and single people aspiring to be parents are also barred from accessing fertility treatment in Singapore, and surrogacy is banned in the country. This leaves some with no choice but to pursue much more expensive options overseas.

Singapore's policy logic can thus be seen as one of 'differentiated deservedness,' where access to public goods like subsidised housing and financial grants is contingent on performing specific behaviours that conform to conservative Asian social norms, despite everyone being expected to pay their fair share of taxes.

Specific roles are thus reinforced, as government policy rewards those who practice 'traditional womanhood' through marriage, and motherhood within a legally wedded union.

The government often invokes Confucian values to justify its paternalistic stance, arguing that individuals exist primarily within the context of their families. The traditional family structure, comprising a heterosexual couple with their children, is thus viewed as the fundamental 'building block' of society, and as the primary bulwark against social, political, and cultural crises.

By positioning the traditional family structure as the 'first line of support', the state resists becoming a universal welfare state, placing the burden of care for children and the elderly on individual families. Supporting non-traditional families is often viewed as asking the state to 'fulfil the obligations of the family when it fails', an approach that Singaporean leaders have historically sought to avoid.

This framework thus promotes the perception of a symbiotic relationship between the traditional family and national survival, where any deviation is framed as a threat to the nation's cultural roots.

Furthermore, non-traditional family structures are frequently framed as an imported 'liberal Western' concept that represents a 'dangerous decadence' and 'breakdown of traditional Asian values'. By characterising homosexual rights or unmarried parenthood as external 'moral deviancy', the state reinforces a binary between 'Asian conservatism' and 'Western liberalism' to maintain its existing social order.

Nevertheless, like most urbanised societies, Singapore is undergoing rapid social and technological change in the 21st century, and such a conservative framework may be neither sustainable nor politically viable in the long term. Already, there are signs of a growing acceptance of diverse family structures, particularly among younger and more educated Singaporeans, who are more likely to hold liberal views on marriage and sexuality.

In the near future, there may be a significant number of unmarried women who, having frozen their eggs and failed to find their ideal life partner, want to pursue single motherhood with donor sperm. It may be cruel to deny such women their last shot at motherhood.

Also looming on the horizon are newer reproductive technologies that could further facilitate such non-traditional family formation. For example, in vitro gametogenesis (IVG) technology that produces lab-grown sperm and eggs from skin cells could enable the conception of children that are genetically related to both partners in a same-sex relationship.

IVG technology is advancing rapidly and has already produced healthy, fertile offspring in rat and mouse models (see BioNews 1295). It is only a matter of time before such scientific breakthroughs are replicated in humans (see BioNews 1184).

Hence, what is needed is a more open, frank and honest debate on whether such non-traditional parenthood should be supported to boost Singapore's dismal birthrates.

Moreover, there is also the question of promoting social inclusion and reducing stigma on non-traditional families. Expanding the definition of the 'family nucleus' to include unmarried and same-sex parents would be a significant step toward recognising them as equal members of society.

Given increasingly liberal attitudes and declining religiosity among younger Singaporeans, it is only a matter of time before debate around supporting non-traditional family formation must arise in Singapore. It may be better to have this debate now than later.