Egg Freezing in Spain Rises 30-Fold Over a Decade

Egg Freezing in Spain Rises 30-Fold Over a Decade

The official narrative claims women delay motherhood for their careers and due to precariousness. However, data from assisted reproduction clinics and studies on egg vitrification point to a less comfortable factor: many heterosenshetero women cannot find male partners willing to commit to raising children during the years when their fertility is still viable. Researcher Sara Lafuente summarizes it bluntly: the age range considered "normal" for getting pregnant has narrowed so much that it is almost impossible to align finances, relationships, and shared responsibility within it.

Women freezing eggs have increased nearly 30-fold in a decade in Spain. This is not a minor statistic. Behind each treatment lies an economic decision—between €6,000 and €7,000 for two rounds, according to the material—and a relational decision that is rarely discussed.

Why do women delay motherhood if money isn't the only issue?

The thesis that prevailed a decade ago, when companies like Facebook or Apple began offering egg freezing to employees, was that women prioritized their careers. US researcher Marcia C. Inhorn challenges this framework in Frozen Eggs: her work suggests that freezing is not done by women with careers seeking to postpone fertility, but by women trying to preserve it until the end of their reproductive lives because they cannot find stable, committed partners, even though they desire them.

Testimonials collected in her book speak of a specific difficulty: establishing relationships that meet current expectations, which involve maintaining professional life while the partner does more than just work or leisure—they care and support. Sociologist Teresa Castro adds another dimension: staff at assisted reproduction clinics detect that neither women nor men truly understand how fertility drops after age 35, and men even less so.

The result is a repeating sequence. Women freeze during their thirties "to see if the father appears," and later must decide whether to be partnered or not. Others vitrify after a breakup, when the partner wasn't convinced about having children, and return to their eggs years later, after embracing and dreaming of solo motherhood.

Irene's Case: €6,000 and Two Rounds at Age 35

Irene, a pseudonym, nearing 37, is one such woman. She knew she wanted to be a mother, but the relationship wasn't working. He was four years older and claimed he wanted to be a young father; she handled the logistics and one day realized she had a child of nearly 40, not a partner. When she left him, her first thought was to freeze. At 35, she used inheritance money to spend between €6,000 and €7,000 on two treatment rounds.

Now she considers solo motherhood while calculating resources and support networks. Her phrase captures the intersection of factors: "I don't know what makes me angrier: the economic situation, the difficulty of reconciling work and life, the difficulty of finding responsible men, or all of it together."

Some argue the problem is one of expectations: seeking a partner who meets an impossible standard, beyond what the relational market can offer. Counterarguments are more prosaic: if childcare still falls de facto on women, a man's willingness to commit to care is not a whim, but a material condition for the project to be viable.

The Economic Cost of Raising Children: Why Divorce Enters the Equation

Part of the analysis shifts focus from the relational market to the legal and economic framework. It argues that living conditions created by modern states have degraded the position of any man trying to form a family: only those with multiple properties and ample income can raise children without ruin, because in case of separation they face alimony, housing costs, and child support. The calculation, broken down item by item, reveals a surprising difference.

This antiestéticar is not exclusive to men. There are also women who want a conventional family but cannot achieve it, trapped between an economy that doesn't keep up and a biological calendar that doesn't wait. Researcher Lafuente insists that material conditions intertwine with relational difficulties: job insecurity, socioeconomic uncertainty, and relationships that don't mature in the same age bracket.

The aggregate result is a paradox: we speak of a birth rate crisis as a national problem, but decisions are made within a few years and with very little margin for error. Those who freeze late because they were embarrassed to do it while partnered may reach 38 with far fewer chances of success. And those who wait for everything to align—apartment, stable salary, responsible partner—may discover the calendar no longer allows it.

The Wait and the Wall: What Fertility Data Says

Female fertility declines after age 35, and much more sharply past 40. This is the hard fact that no reconciliation policy reverses. The practical consequence is that the decision to freeze or not is made with incomplete information and under social pressure: doing it as a couple generates reservations, doing it alone requires assuming a single-parent project with limited networks.

In terms of opinions, the conversation splits. One stream argues the problem is legal and economic incentives, and that as long as divorce remains ruinous for the higher earner, many men will avoid commitment. Another points to the mismatch between what is offered and what is sought in the relational market. A third, more uncomfortable view notes that real shared responsibility remains pending: without it, having a child with a partner can cost more—in time, money, and health—than having one alone.

With these elements, the question is not why women delay motherhood. It is why the system continues to assume that finding a partner, an apartment, and a salary in the same three-year period is normal.