China – the aims and effects of the one child policy

A variety of social policies aimed at controlling population change have been established around the world. But in this answer I will be evaluating a very controversial example of a policy that aimed to tackle rapid population growth by reducing fertility rate (also known as anti-natalist) – China’s One-Child Policy.

During the second half of the twentieth century, the Chinese government became concerned about the population growth; this is mainly due to the philosophy of the government under Chairman Mao, in the mid-twentieth century, which was that ‘a large population gives a strong nation’ and so the government encouraged people to have more and more children. This consequently led to an increase in population of 55 million every year and a famine in 1962 which caused nearly 30 million deaths.

This massive growth in population forced a policy change in 1974, in order to avoid a Malthusian-type disaster in the future (The theory that population increases more rapidly than the food supply leading to famine and, inevitably, death). It encouraged the country to reduce the birth rate by the slogan ‘wan-xi-shao’ which called for later marriages, longer gaps between children and fewer children. However, this policy was not effective enough, and the population continued increasing and did not follow the pattern of the DTM (demographic transition model).

This then led the government to introduce the one-child policy in 1979, which set strict limits on the number of children that a couple were allowed to have. In order to further enforce this policy; strong pressure was put on women to use contraceptives (e.g. contraceptive pills) which were more widely available. Special family planners and ‘granny police’ were introduced in order to make sure that women were practising contraception and were instructed to report any pregnancies. The government also introduce incentives like; free healthcare and education for one child and then fines for more than one child. Also, more controversially, enforced late abortions and sterilisation became common, which mainly human rights activist heavily criticised and opposed.

However, the policy had very negative effects on the country.

Firstly, it led to female infanticide; where couples preferred sons, and baby girls were killed so they could have another chance of getting a boy. This occurred more often in rural areas, where there was less control from the government, and also where traditions were most important. This was mainly because male descendents were preferred as they can carry on the family name from generation to generation. This male dominance led to an imbalance in male to female sex ratio, where the number of men far exceeded that of men. This then further lowered fertility rates as there weren’t enough women ‘to go round’.

As well as an imbalance in the sex ratio, where was also an imbalance in the age ratio, as the policy vastly increased the dependency ratio and the country suffered from an ageing population. This was mainly due to the ‘4-2-1’ situation, which meant that ‘1’ child had to look after their ‘2’ parents and ‘4’ grandparents all at the same time and because of the increasing life expectancy.

The policy also led to social implications on the child itself, such as the spoilt ‘little emperor’ syndrome where the attention of the family fell on one child. It is also suggested that it had a negative effect on the child’s social skills, as they grew up with no other siblings, therefore found it harder to integrate into society and led to poor communication skills.

However, from 1990 onwards, the policy was slightly relaxed in order to combat some of the problems.

For example, only-child couples were allowed to have two children, in order to relieve some of dependency on the children and also because they were concerned about the economic implications of an ageing population. In addition, the policy became harder to enforce for reasons such as the revolution in global communication and socialisation, which opened up the country to much greater social influence from the west. However, in more remote parts of the country, the policy is still encouraged. For example, the authorities in Guangdong (state capital) order 20,000 abortions and sterilisations by the end of 2001.

Despite all of the negative implications, the decrease in overall population growth has had some positive effects, such as the positive economic growth. This was mainly due to the major decrease in demand for resources to support the needs of the population, which in turn led to a reduction in the stress placed upon the environment. There was also a drop in unemployment due to labour surplus and more disposable being available due to less money being spent on children.

In conclusion, I believe that the one-child policy was a very brutal policy that disregarded the basic human rights of people and that a more gentle approach should have been taken. However, there is no argument that population management was inevitable in order to maintain a high standard of living, and that the one-child policy has avoided a Malthusian-type disaster (e.g. famine and war) and has better stabilised the population of China. This is because 400 million births were prevented and the annual growth rate had fallen to 0.6% as well. It is also clear that the policy is evolving for the better, as by 2006 the Chinese government moved towards a more health-orientated policy and committed itself to implement international agreements, promoting mother and child welfare.

Read more

Childcare Policy Proposal

The social welfare concern I chose for analysis is the growing concern for affordable daycare in the United States. Two specific problems I will be analyzing are “latch-key kids” and child neglect which are a direct result of not having access to affordable daycare. One of the main factors that contribute to these issues is poverty. Poverty has plagued children throughout United States history. Poverty rates are higher among the youngest children ages birth to four years. These children are more vulnerable to long term effects of poverty.

According to the National Center for Children in Poverty, “An estimated forty-two percent of children under the age of eighteen are living below the poverty line. ” (NCSC, 2009). About half of the forty-two percent live close to two hundred percent below the line. As the poverty rate rises, more single and low- income parents are in need of affordable daycare. A recent study showed that “Forty percent of low-income or single-income families spend almost half of their total income on childcare” (Associated Press, 2007).

Although subsidized programs are available, the waiting process can be long and tedious. For example, programs like Operation 3 Breakthrough which provide daycare at no cost to families have close to a thousand families on their waiting list. Because cities are not providing for the growing need childcare, parents are “forced” to seek alternative methods. One alternative parents chose is to leave their children either at home alone or with other siblings.

An estimated seventy-seven percent of American kids are considered “latch-key’ kids” (Another study showed that “nationwide, parents report leaving more than three million children under thirteen, some as young as five, to care for homeless for at least a few hours a week on a regular basis” (Associated Press, 2007). SAFETIES is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to reduce and stop preventable child injury and death. SAFETIES recommends that no child under the age of twelve be left alone for any period of time. There is no federal statute on the age a child can be safely left alone; it is left up to the states to decide.

In Kansas, the current age a child can be left alone is twelve; however, in Missouri there is no age requirement. Although a child may be aware of emergency and accident prevention, any times they do not have the cognitive capability and Judgment to handle the situation when it occurs. Children four and under require interaction and supervision that another child can not adequately provide to them. “Children four and under are at a higher risk and make up half of the unintentional injury-related deaths among children fourteen and under” (Safe Kids, 2010).

The bottom line is that the latch-key method of childcare results in an increasing amount of preventable child injury and death. NEGLECT 4 Neglect is federally defined as “Failure of a parent or guardian to provide needed DOD, clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision such that the child’s health, safety, and well-being are threatened with harm” (HAS, 2009). “An estimated 5. 8 million children are neglected or abused each year” (HAS, 2009). Parents that do not have older children rely on neighbors, family members or friends to watch their children.

This is sometimes referred to as “patchwork” childcare. Out of desperation, other parents leave their children alone at home, public parks, or public libraries. “Children and their families may be in need of services even though the parent may not be intentionally gleeful. When poverty limits a parent’s resources to adequately provide necessities for the child, services may be offered to help families provide for their children” (American Humane society, 2010). Attachment Theory, (Bowl, 1969) shows certain aspects that all children require and need in order to flourish and grow healthy.

In order to have “Secure attachment” children need human physical contact. “Physical connection means plenty of touch and eye contact. Such things as cradling an infant while feeding, cuddling with a toddler before bedtime, and hugging a teenager increase the sense of physical injection, especially if touch and eye contact take place on a daily basis throughout childhood years” (Wassermann, 2006). Many times the child goes from place to place, to different locations and sometimes watched by “strangers”. The child has no stability, permanency or sense of “home. Permanency is a key factor for early child development. A “safe haven” is needed so that when a child feels threatened or afraid, he or she can return to the caregiver for comfort and soothing. If the child is alone or does not receive POLICY PROPOSAL 5 this comfort, they will eventually stop relying on the caregiver and become outdrawn. Children also need a “secure base” that is provided by the caregiver. This gives them safe and dependable place to explore the world. In many cases the caregiver is not intentionally putting the child in danger, but is simply unaware of the many household dangers to children. Separation distress” is also detrimental too child’s well-being. When separated from the primary caregiver, the child will immediately become upset and depressed. Many children experience this even in the most “normal”, ideal family circumstances. A deficiency in any of these areas can affect a child later down the road. LEGISLATION In the past, the United States has tried to correct this problem through legislation. The Aid to Families with Dependent Children (FADE) was first passed in 1935, provided money for “relief” to help families provide for their children.

In 1972, President Nixon built on the idea but changing it to Aid to Dependent Children (DC) trying to switch focus on to the children as opposed to the family. Republicans typically have a “laissez fairer” attitude, however all sides felt this was an important issue. Later Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANK) was created in 1996 and reformed the DC. With TANK, time limits were put in place, and subsidies were provided to parents to help them care for their children. Currently the federal government allows up to thirty percent of each state’s TANK funds to be used alongside current child care grants.

In the sass’s The Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare act focused on keeping the child with the biological parents at any cost. Later this was reformed into the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. The new act switched the focus from family preservation to safety and permanency of the child. 6 The Child Care and Development Block Grant (JDBC) is a block grant given to tastes to subsidize child care for low-income families if parents are currently employed or enrolled in school. “Approximately 1. 8 million US children receive funds, 36,300 in Missouri alone” (IDS, 2009).

The grant only applies to children thirteen and under offering in-kind assistance to their families. “An average of sixty-six dollars per week given in vouchers to subsidize child care” (Almanac of Economic Policy, 1995). Another step in the right direction is provided by the Early Childhood Development, Education, and Care Fund (SEDUCE). This is another block grant that is provided to tastes and has many programs set in place to allow the child to remain in the home instead of utilizing facilitated child care.

They offer a program called Stay At Home Parent (ASAP) which allows families with children three and younger to receive in- cash and in-kind benefits in order to provide childcare themselves. Other qualifications this program include teen moms, high risk, no permanent residence, unemployed, The family must also be 185% below the poverty line to be eligible. While these programs have been successful with goals regarding abuse, safety, and permanency; the poverty level continues to be at an all time high. LOOKING ABROAD – THE NETHERLANDS I chose to compare our policies with The Netherlands.

I found that the Netherlands is more progressive with its view of social welfare than the United States, however is far behind almost all other European countries. In The Netherlands they offer what are considered “General Provisions. ” Basically every citizen is entitled to certain basic needs and provisions. General provisions include Child development groups, pre- school playgroups, child day-care, out of school child care, special education, primary 7 education, and youth health services. All of these programs are universal and available to all citizens.

The majority of the provisions are geared towards children staying with parents if possible to have a strong family unit. They offer extended maternity and parental leave for both parents to lower the cost and need for facilitated child care centers. The funding fro child care and maternity/parental leave is provided by both national and local municipal authorities. All citizens pay in for the “greater good” of country. LOOKING AHEAD – REFORM I propose not to create a new policy but reform the currant policy.

I feel that the Child Care and Development Block Grant (JDBC) is meeting the expectations and Laos the program was designed for. Because the problem is growing rapidly, changes need to be made so that we don’t lose control of the situation. The program’s goals would continue to focus on , and strive to provide stability, permanency, and enrichment to families. I also feel that we need more focus on early child development (birth to four years) because it will play a dramatic role later in these children’s lives.

Working and collaborating with programs such as Head Start provide care givers tools to provide young children with what they need to thrive. Graduated assignment should be another key factor in the success of the program. Graduated disengagement is one of the most important core functions of social work. As social workers we need to help people build their own support system so that when they complete the process, they don’t feel alone or back where they started. Finding activities and helping them build new trusting relationships is a key factor in this step.

They need a support system in place so that when crisis or hardship happens, they POLICY PROPOSAL do not feel hopeless. SERVICES 8 The program I am proposing would be separated into two main groups. The first group is children ages birth to four years and the second would reach children ages five to eighteen years old. Playgroups which are used in the Netherlands as well as many other European countries give young children ages birth to four years old a chance to interact and socialize with other children their age.

Licensed facilitators specializing in early education and development will guide volunteers in providing educational and stimulating activities. Meetings would be held three times a week at local schools, churches, parks, and community centers. Keeping the locations in the neighborhoods of he people they are serving will make attending the programs easier for these families. Child day care will also be provided to families that qualify. Accredited programs are required for all programs receiving grant funding implementing the core value competency.

The number of locations should be based on the need for each individual community. For example, in areas of greater need, there should also be greater access to programs. I would also like to propose “Emergency’ child care. This program would be a temporary “safe” arrangement to offer parents “peace of mind” if their usual arrangements fall through. For example if the baby-sitter doesn’t show up, or you have a family emergency, you could drop your child off for a short period of time. Children must already be enrolled in the program or be on some corresponding program such TANK to qualify.

Companies that provide on-site day care centers for employees will also receive funding as well as tax incentives. This will give the parents incentive to want to keep their Job as well as peace of mind knowing their children are close by. 9 I also feel that more funds should be used for the Stay At Home Parent program to allow children ages four and under to be with their parents. Families that qualify will receive subsidies while working or attending school part-time and stay home with their child rest of the time.

For older children ages five to eighteen the program would continue to offer rewarding after school and summer activities. The objective is to get these kids away from the TV and teach them about the world around them. These activities should based on the strengths perspective model. It is important to find something that the child is interested in or desires, so that they can feel like they have a skill or purpose. After school programs would include tutoring, mentoring, counseling, skill building social interaction, violence prevention, and other similar programs.

As social workers we must first build a trusting, positive relationship with the people we are working with. Finding common interests help to bridge partnerships and giving them someone they feel they can “turn to. ” It is important to focus on forming positive relationships instead of trying “treat” them. These programs will give the children the skills they need to be responsible for their own behavior and become productive members of their communities. I would also like to provide subsidies for summer camps.

I found some programs such as the YMCA that offer subsidized summer programs for under-privileged youth already. Many families struggle the most during the summer months when their children are out of school. This would eliminate having to pay for child care the entire three months of summer, as well as give the child something enjoyable to do. 10 Parents would be provided education and resources on child development and health. The program would offer employment resources, resume help, transportation assistance, , internet access, and listings for local Job openings in the

Read more

One Child Policy Should Be Abolished

One child policy has been in effect in China for more than thirty years. However, during the recent several years, the controversy of whether the government should abolish the one child policy has been debated widely among government officials as well as ordinary people. It is a significant issue because it involves a lot of essential social problems and moral principles. There have been various opinions concerning this issue. This essay will consider arguments for abolishing the one child policy and point out the problems and consequences of keeping the policy in effect.

When the one child policy was advanced, it had been argued that one child policy would benefit the country as well as its people (Qing, 1995). Its undeniable that the one child policy has shown its great effect on alleviating the population pressure. However, as the society develops, more and more inharmonious social problems are coming about because of the one child policy, among which the biggest problem is the unbalanced population. By 2020, there will be about 40 million Chinese men unable to marry, because too few girls will have been born. Sociologists say that could trigger aggressive behavior among frustrated bachelors, including kidnapping and trafficking in women. ” (VOA, 2006). Moreover, the one child policy is also exacerbating China’s aging population problem, whose severe consequences will be further explained in the following statement. It is the contention that china’s one child policy helps eradicate poverty (idebate. org).

This opinion goes on to assert that by controlling china’s population with one child policy, there will be more resources distributed to every individual, thus the society will be wealthier and poverty will be eliminated. In fact, it is on the contrary that after china’s population has been massively reduced, the one child policy has started doing harm to the economy. The unusually rapid fertility decline in China has produced a rapidly aging population—one that is expected to become disproportionately older well into this century.

What’s worse, “By 2025, the aging level among urban Chinese will reach 20 percent, a level found today only in Japan and Italy. ” (idebate. org) As a result, there are and there will be fewer and fewer available labors contribute to China’s economical development. In addition, other social problems related to aging population such as the burden on the social welfare system and medical insurance system are becoming more and more severe. Above all, the one child policy violates basic human right.

The policy has been criticized by human rights advocacy groups and Western religious advocacy groups who consider it contrary to the human rights of reproduction. Many governments, including the United State government, argue that the policy violates a right to “found a family”, which is protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (UDHR, 1948) Indeed, forcing every married couple to have only one child is morally unreasonable. Moreover, it is every couple themselves, not the government, that have the right to choose how many children they are going to have.

Thus, although the one child policy’s intention is to create a better society for people, it has already done harm to people’s basic human rights. In conclusion, even though the one child policy has done a good job before on controlling China’s population, it has been proved out-of-date and should be abolished, at least changed, nowadays. Otherwise, we will still be suffering from the economical burdens, aging population problem, human rights violation, etc, due to the one child policy.

Read more

China’s One Child Policy

The policy was put onto place In 1979 as “an aggressive effort to Improve standards of living and the economy through population control” (CNN). The initial policy that was put into place was much stricter than the policy most people are familiar with now. This is because the original plan was meant to be short-term (only a couple of decades), however it’s success of preventing nearly 400 million births made China leaders think twice about terminating the plan altogether and instead revised the policy Into what it is today (CNN).

This essay will be breaking down the one child policy by looking Into a variety f different aspects such as; the company that oversees the policy and what rewards or punishments they hand out, the baby boomers effect on the policy and the reason the leaders implemented it, and prior attempts to control the population. As well as the current population standings, the well-known daughter to son ratio problem, how it affected one families plan, and current feelings by the locals towards the policy. The one-child policy Is known by those that abide by It as the “family planning policy.

Understanding the policy

In China Is difficult as there are many exceptions and rules. The family planning policy states that married urban couples are only allowed one child. However, exceptions include rural families, ethnic minorities, couples who themselves only have one sibling, and foreigners residing in China. According to Maria Trichina, the NIFOC (The National Population and Family Planning Commission of China), Is a state agency responsible for overseeing population control, reproductive health and family planning across China.

The NIFOC was created to help families make decisions about their child, designate rewards to abiding families, and enforce penalties when it is disobeyed. Everyone who falls under the policy in China is personally responsible to practice family planning and use proper contraceptive methods. Those that play by the rules are offered a number of perks such as special financial assistance, longer maternity and honeymoon breaks, “Certificate of Honor for Single-Child Parents,” loans, along with other rewards.

Those that disobey the strict law can be fined up to half of their annual household income or be subject to confiscation of their household items. The “excess” children themselves may personally be subject to health and education disadvantages. All of these penalties and rewards make having a single child very attractive and make most couples not even consider having a second child. The way the policy is set up Is very smart and lucrative, making nearly 97% of the country follow It’s guidelines. Hays) 1979 as the “baby boomers” of the sass’s and ass’s were beginning to reproduce. The reason for the sudden worry of the population in China came when leaders realized that China was home to a quarter of the world’s population on Just 7 percent of the world’s land (Hester). The population increase during the sass through 1979 introduced a large number of problems in China. With such a rapid increase, came the government’s inability to provide for its citizens the way China’s citizens were used to the way that was previously possible.

Also, leadership argued that rapid population growth would “retard achievement of the four modernization (industry, agriculture, science and technology, and defense) by hampering attainment of full employment and by cutting into increases in capital accumulation, living standards, and education” (Bonaparte) The rule was implemented in order to return the country AAA higher standard of living, education, and economic reform.

Because the long term effects of the policy have not been felt and there are still a number of people in China that were born before the policy, it is uncertain if China’s goals to make a better life for its citizens have been fulfilled. Judging by the number of children born under the one child policy that plan to follow it with their own families, the policy obviously has its perks. But before this law was enforced, a number of other options were attempted. A number of other options were researched and attempted before the law went into effect, many failed efforts to control the population took place.

Although the policy seems harsh, the one child policy was not implemented on a whim. In 1971 the Chinese government introduced a birth-limitation campaign called “longer-later- fewer. ” In this plan men and women would have longer periods between the births of their children, wait until they were older to have their first child, and have fewer than the average children. Fewer than average was three children if you were a rural dwelling couple and 2 for those in the Urbana (Bonaparte).

Due to the lack of success f that program, the decision was made to limit couples to having Just two children in the year 1977, followed by Just one child in 1979. China will maintain its one-child policy for at least another decade as nearly 200 million Chinese will enter child- bearing age over the next 10 years. Minister Ghana Weighing told the China Daily newspaper, abandoning the policy during this period would cause “serious problems and add extra pressure on social and economic development. However, the exact details of the continued policy will be less strict and will include exceptions and options such as being able to apply for certificates to allow the birth of a second child. Another revision of the policy has not yet been started, however the grip is a lot less tight and more families are able to have more than one child while still following the rules, and falling under the exceptions. The successes of the policy can be seen in the current population standings versus where the country was headed prior to the policy beginning.

It is hard to reflect what the exact population goals were and what the current population is as a number of sources contradict each other yet each claim to be en discontinued in China in the late sass and since population counts have been restarted in 1975 they have never been referred to as reliable. This shows that the population goal was not set in stone and that the actual population in China is unknown. According to sources, the estimated population in China has been continually growing since 1953 when the death rate began falling significantly and the birthrate increased, creating a 2. 8 percent population growth rate.

The increase was initially embraced by the public and the leaders of China saw the population growth as part of the countries strength. A growing population following hundreds of years of war, epidemics, rebellions and the collapse of imperial authority was a welcomed change. (Kane) However, when the reality of the increasing population hit home and the effects of the growing population started effecting communities, the policy began being designed. When it was introduced, it is said the leaders had a goal in mind; in 1979 they hoped the population of China, in the year 2000, would be at approximately 1. Billion. The 2000 census showed the population at 1. 27 billion, however many people argue that this is an underestimate because the census neuters in China is the same committee that is meant to be in charge of population control. Whether the population actually decreased or not is hard to say, but what has been proven is that per woman, the fertility rate has dropped from 2. 9 children, down to 1. 7. (Hester) China’s population, which now stands at about 1. 3 billion, is growing at the rate of 0. 6 percent and is expected to peak around 1. 6 billion by 2050, according to the U. S. State Department. CNN) Following the peak, it is expected to drop off drastically resulting in the population numbers desired by leaders in China. As a whole, the policy has helped prevent approximately 250 million births since 1979. The greatest difference in population has come from those in urban areas, as those in rural settings are less keen on the rule. Although the rule only officially applies to those living in urban areas, couples in rural landscapes are also advised and sometimes pressured to follow the one child policy as well. Even before the rule went into effect, nearly 90% of urban couples had already decided to have only one child.

This was in part due to the small living spaces and the hours Chinese workers are expected to put into a Job. Add to that the exhausting tasks of caring for a family and the majority of couples can’t fathom having more than one child. Rural families, on the other hand, need larger families to financially support them as they grow older as they tend to have limited savings and no pensions (Kane). Discouragements of larger families include “financial levies on each additional child and sanctions which ranged from social pressure to curtailed career prospects for those in government Jobs” (Kane).

Specific measures varied across each individual community, but in a tight knit community, the pressure o adhere to the one-child policy is high. Having what they call “unapproved pregnancies” which are children that are not approved by the family planning authorities, can bring problems to more than Just the defiant family. For example, if a couple was to have an unapproved pregnancy in a community and this birth caused the community to exceed the yearly birth quota, then other families who had previously been approved to have a child, would have to wait until the next year and families in China.

Not only do families feel pressure in having children, they also feel pressure in the gender of the child they have. A well-known effect caused by the one child policy in China, is the preference of having a son over a daughter. Before the policy was implemented, the ratio was about 105 males to every 100 females overall in China, but currently the ratio stands at 114 males to every 100 females. The desire to have a son rather than a daughter is due to the tradition that in the parents’ old age, the daughter moves in with the parents of the son to care for them.

In the event that a daughter is born instead off son, families abiding by the one child rule, more often peasants, dispose of the infant RL and try again, this time hoping for a son. This practice is called sex selective infanticide. Another well-known reason to dispose of the daughter is so that when the child grows up and tries to start a family, the families’ last name tied with the daughter won’t have a chance to be tarnished by a daughter breaking the one child policy. Beliefs in China are that an infant does not own life until they are six months old; therefore getting rid of the infant daughter is not seen as a crime.

The method used, most commonly by the father, is to place the infant in a bucket of cold water that Chinese refer to as “baby water”. In a study done in 1980, for every 1000 infants being born across China, 53 were being disposed of, but in the rural areas of the country, the ratio was much higher (Kane). In some communities of China, one out of every three daughters born are disposed of. The boy to girl ratio proves to be troubling for China in the future, but as of now, no measures are being taken to prevent this common practice. Families struggle to decide whether to keep the daughter or try again for another, in hopes that it is a boy.

Many people were frustrated when the rule was set in place in 1979. Going from the “longer-later- ewer” rule that did allow more than one child, Just a certain amount of space between each birth (usually 3 years), to having Just one child, ruined a lot of couple’s family plans. Especially those who had already had one child, a girl, and were planning on trying again later for a boy. Most couples had to accept the plan and were “plagued” with the reality that their one child would be a girl and would likely leave them in their old age. But some couples broke the new rule, and tried for a son.

Penalties faced for having another child included losing workforce “points” and even personal belongings. Some locals surveyed say it was worth it, but others, who had a daughter a second time, are now even more devastated. The only way to gain back those points and reclaim their confiscated items is for the woman to be permanently fixed by a licensed doctor. Almost all couples breaking the rule and having a second child are forced to undergo such procedures. For traditional families, it can be heartbreaking. However, for a number of more modern families, the policy is becoming understood and even accepted.

Some say having only one child ensures better care, including better nutrition, dress, education, and more attention. These modern couples embrace the one child rule, understanding that “the best care can be given to a child when there is only one child to care for” (Ghana). Modern couples understand the policy and some even chose to undergo the procedure after their first child to avoid being punished. These are the government or NIFOC. While there are some that agree and abide, there are still some that will fight it until it is taken out of practice.

Those that fight it may not be beneficiaries of some of the positive results the policy has produced. Even some of the only daughters are enjoying benefits that, without the policy, would not have existed. Since the policy implementation over 30 years ago, a number of children born under the one child policy are now adults. Feelings towards the policy are across the board, but the statistics are not. A number of studies done show that children born under the policy, especially girls, tend to have a better life than those with multiple siblings.

One obvious reason for that is the family with one child is not scolded by the government with fees, income confiscation and other humiliations. But in the studies there are other reasons that children are better off as an only child. For example, “many one child families are made of two parents and one gather. With no male heir competing for resources, parents have spent more on their daughters’ education and well-being, a groundbreaking shift after centuries of discrimination” says Jeffery Hays, an expert on the one child policy.

In 1978, women made up only 24. 2 percent of the student population at Chinese colleges and universities. By 2009, nearly half of China’s full-time undergraduates were women and 47 percent of graduate students were female, according to the National Bureau of Statistics. (Hays) This is the first time in China’s history that school enrollment between males and females are near equal. So, although the policy might be hard to understand and frowned upon by many, the statistics can’t be denied, having Just one child in China ensures that child a better life.

In studying and reading of the family planning policy in China I believe that it is a very difficult rule to dissect. There are obvious reasons that the policy was set into place, and had it not been implemented, the population of China would have far outgrown the resources that country has to offer. I think the biggest issue that comes into play is the tradition of sons moving in with their parents to care for them. This is the largest reason that the surviving birth rate of females is so low and males is so high.

It is hard to say to abandon the tradition and have elderly care in a home or find another way, however in China, the act of a tradition so strong between families it makes that idea unrealistic. I do think that something needs to be done that alters the tradition into something that welcomes both males and females into the world before China is overrun by males and the men to women ratio is even worse than it currently is. Overall I think the policy had to happen and it would not be horrible if other entries took this idea into consideration.

Read more

China one child policy

China One Child Policy State philosophy of the 1950s was that a large population gave a strong nation, so high birth rate was encouraged, as well as this during that time death rate fell due to better supply of food and medicine. In 1959, all attention was paid to improving industry leaving no attention on farming and as a result killing 20 million in a famine. After the famine, during the 1960s population was seen to be a problem with 55 million born every year. The result of this was the policy ‘later, longer, fewer’ encouraging people to decrease birth rate by later marriages, longer gap between hildren and fewer children.

This did bring natural increase down from 2. 1% to 1. 2% however this was not enough. This led to the Introduction of the One Child Policy: Limiting the children families could have. Putting pressure to use contraception. Family planning workers in every workplace. ‘Granny police making sure contraception was used, reported on pregnancies and If necessary enforced abortions and sterilisation. In urban areas it was easier to enforce with rewards of good provision of education and health care however in rural areas people did not keep to the policy as strictly.

It was necessary to have the permission of council for a child, but in remote areas it was far harder to check up and therefore more unreported births. Especially In rural areas, where much of the economy is subsistence farming, baby boys were more desirable resulting in female infanticide and baby girls ‘disappearing. The male dominance gave the only child little emperor syndrome’ being the only child getting the attention. In rural areas because of the poor provision of education and much of the Income coming from farming, the government had to offer opportunltles to generate Income should they dhere to the restrictions.

However the penalties for not respecting the policy included: Cash fine or taking away livestock. No benefits that you can gain from having one child to those with two or more. However In some cases councils encouraged peasants to have more children as It would get them more money and in any case many people are prepared to pay the fine for another child. Benefits of keeping to policy: Better lifestyles are promised for the families. Later marriages In life. Better retirement pensions. The mother is granted a longer maternity leave than in other countries.

Salary rise for the parents Free education for their children. The child gets priority for a job in the future. Since 1990 there have been relaxations to the policy because it was so difficult to enforce and the government worrying about the impacts of an ageing population on economy. If husband and wife are from one child families they can have two children. Couples can have another child If first one is disabled or dies. In the western regions, ethnic minorities able to have as many children as they like. 1 OF2 However even In 2 aoortlons were ora erea In one city alone. successes: 00 million births prevented.

Read more

No Child Left Behind Policy

Table of contents Education indeed is a very important aspect in an individual’s life. In a personal quest for enhancing and developing oneself in general so as his or her innate talents will actually determine the possibilities of the future of the said individual whereas it will actually reflect whether that individual will indeed be […]

Read more

One Child Policy in China

What is One Child Policy? It is the birth control policy, one of the most important social policies over the world. Simply to say, One Child Policy is the population control policy that has applied since 1979 in China. The government sets a limit for the maximum number of children for each family. It officially […]

Read more
OUR GIFT TO YOU
15% OFF your first order
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Claim my 15% OFF Order in Chat
Close

Sometimes it is hard to do all the work on your own

Let us help you get a good grade on your paper. Get professional help and free up your time for more important courses. Let us handle your;

  • Dissertations and Thesis
  • Essays
  • All Assignments

  • Research papers
  • Terms Papers
  • Online Classes
Live ChatWhatsApp