Ease one-child policy conducive to national development

By Mu Guangzong
0 Comment(s)Print E-mail China.org.cn, March 25, 2011
Adjust font size:

China's controversial "one-child" policy drew heated debate recently at the annual meeting of the country's legislature and its top political advisory body.

Several representatives suggested relaxing the policy to allow families to have a second child if either parent was an only child. Wang Yuqing, a Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) member and deputy chairman of CPPCC Committee of Population, Resources and Environment, predicted that the "two-child" policy may be expanded to urban areas by the end of the 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-2016).

Proposed reforms of China's population management policies have sparked much discussion in recent years. Family planning is one of China's core policy initiatives. It is of vital importance to the nation's economic development and the people's livelihood. Children are the center of the family structure and the basis of a happy family. The balanced, coordinated and sustainable development of the population impacts the sustainable development of society as a whole. Raising healthier, better children is an aspiration of every household. As such, this topic deserves careful consideration.

China's "one-child" policy began September 25, 1980, when the Communist Party of China's (CPC) Central Committee sent an open letter to all members of the CPC and the Communist Youth League. The letter called on couple to have one child. This suggestion later became mandatory as local governments implemented the policy. Since then, China has entered a period of imbalanced population growth under the "one-child" family planning policy. A substantial decline in fertility and rapid demographic transition will bring some benefits. With fewer children, families and the government can invest more money and resources per child in their upbringing, improving the quality of their education and development. However, there is no strong evidence to prove that only children are more successful than those with siblings. On the contrary, in non-academic areas such as character, emotion, morality and determination, research and experience shows that children with siblings outperform only children.

After more than 30 years of strictly implementing the one-child policy, its drawbacks loom large. The apparent benefits of a smaller population are essentially a liability for future generations. China now faces a demographic imbalance. Some people argue that the change from high to low birth rate has lowered the child dependency ratio, but they are confusing these demographic benefits for a demographic window of opportunity.

These demographic benefits, in essence, stem from the economic growth and social benefits achieved through increased human capital investment. This investment, however, cannot be sustained. Thanks to the growing proportion of senior citizens, in several decades, the workforce will be graying and the ratio of the retired to those of working age is sure to rise. Since 2004, I have come to the conclusion that a family with only one child is essentially a "risky family." A society composed of families with only child, then, is a "risky society." If the only child dies or gets sick, the family will inevitably fall upon hard times.

Poor family structure can lead to loneliness or coldness. Growing up without a sibling may causes imbalances between intellectual and non-intellectual qualities, such as morality and empathy. The desire for a son also causes gender imbalance. The lack of young adults can cause shortages in supply of labor, and also may make it difficult for coming generations to take care of the elderly. This policy also incurs other significant social costs such as violating the right to bear children, causing tension between the government and the people, requiring large administrative expenditures, and risking the collapse of the traditional pension system. In view of these drawbacks, the compulsory one-child policy is not worth it. The policy focus should be shifted from numbers to people.

1   2   Next  


Print E-mail Bookmark and Share

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)

No comments.

Add your comments...

  • User Name Required
  • Your Comment
  • Racist, abusive and off-topic comments may be removed by the moderator.
Send your storiesGet more from China.org.cnMobileRSSNewsletter
主站蜘蛛池模板: 亚洲国产精品欧美日韩一区二区| 成年人一级毛片| 亚洲精品国产精品乱码不99| 经典国产一级毛片| 国产免费内射又粗又爽密桃视频| 亚洲色图欧美激情| 国产精品美女一级在线观看| A级国产乱理伦片| 很黄很污的视频在线观看| 久久av无码专区亚洲av桃花岛| 日韩精品欧美高清区| 亚洲午夜久久久精品影院| 波多野结无码高清中文| 做受视频60秒试看 | 日本在线观看中文字幕| 久久综合亚洲色hezyo国产| 果冻传媒和精东影业在线观看 | 亚洲AV无码潮喷在线观看| 欧美性猛交xxxx乱大交中文| 亚洲精品99久久久久中文字幕 | 韩国伦理s级在线| 国产成人av一区二区三区在线| 500福利视频导航| 国产精品夜间视频香蕉| 500福利视频导航| 国产综合色在线视频区| 91精品国产色综合久久不卡蜜| 在线观看国产成人av片| a毛片免费全部在线播放**| 天天看天天射天天碰| √最新版天堂资源网在线| 少妇太爽了在线观看| 三级毛片在线播放| 成人免费观看高清在线毛片| 中文字幕无码免费久久| 扒丝袜永久网址pisiwa| 中文成人无字幕乱码精品区| 日本japanese丰满奶水| 久久久久久国产精品视频| 日本一道本在线| 久久99精品久久久久久|