This story originally appeared in Kids Today, Vox’s newsletter about kids, for everyone. Sign up here for future editions.

The pronatalists have entered the White House.

Last week, news broke that the Trump administration was considering a variety of policies to get Americans to have more kids, inspired by figures like Elon Musk (who has 14 known kids) and activists Simone and Malcolm Collins (who have four but want as many as 10). Those suggestions, which included a $5,000 baby bonus and a “National Medal of Motherhood” uncomfortably reminiscent of Nazi Germany, triggered immediate backlash. Many wondered how any of them would actually help parents, at a time when $5,000 only covers a few months of child care in some places.

Today, however, I want to look at pronatalist policies through a slightly different lens: whether they benefit kids. People who want to boost birth rates generally talk about the importance of children to society as a whole: We need more kids, they often say, to pay into Social Security and take care of us when we’re old. But what about the kids themselves? Are pronatalist policies, and pronatalism in general, in their best interest?

In some cases, these questions can be easily answered with data. In others, they’re more about values. Is a world with more kids inherently better for kids? Is championing childbirth the best way to show kids that they’re valued? The answers to these questions are complex, but the experts I spoke to were clear about one thing: If the United States aims to be a pro-child country, we have a long way to go.

The idea that really helps kids

Of all the pronatalist policies reportedly under consideration, one is straightforwardly good for kids, experts told me. That would be the one where the government gives parents money.

Five thousand dollars may not pay........

© Vox