2016’s Best & Worst States to Have a Baby

With August being one of the most popular months for newborn arrival in the U.S. and Americans paying the most expensive birthing costs in the world, the personal-finance website WalletHub took an in-depth look at 2016’s Best & Worst States to Have a Baby.

To give expectant parents an idea of the delivery costs, health-care accessibility and baby-friendliness of each state, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia across 17 key metrics. Our data set ranges from “hospital Caesarean-delivery charges” to “annual average infant-care costs” to “number of pediatricians per capita.”


Best States to Have a Baby
1 Vermont
2 Maine
3 Connecticut
4 Minnesota
5 New Hampshire
6 Hawaii
7 Oregon
8 Massachusetts
9 North Dakota
10 Washington

Worst States to Have a Baby
42 North Carolina
43 Florida
44 Arkansas
45 Nevada
46 West Virginia
47 Georgia
48 New York
49 Alabama
50 Louisiana
51 Mississippi


Best vs. Worst
• Mississippi has the lowest average annual infant-care costs, $3,824, which are 3.9 times lower than in the District of Columbia, where the costs are highest, $14,837.

• California has the lowest number of infant deaths per 1,000 births, 4.30, which is two times lower than in Alabama, where the number is lowest, 8.68.

• Vermont has the highest number of child-care centers per 100,000 residents, 84.14, which is 9.2 times higher than in West Virginia, where the number is lowest, 9.17.

• Alaska has the lowest rate of low birth weight, 5.90 percent, which is 1.9 times lower than in Mississippi, where the rate is highest, 11.29 percent.

• The District of Columbia has the highest number of obstetricians and gynecologists per 100,000 residents, 20.51, which is 7.7 times higher than in Mississippi, where the number is lowest, 2.68.

• California has the best parental leave policy score, 140, whereas 17 states — such as Arizona, Michigan and South Carolina — tied for the worst, 0.

• The District of Columbia has the highest number of pediatricians per 100,000 residents, 48.92, which is 17.5 times higher than in Wisconsin, where the number is lowest, 2.79.