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: 性欧美熟妇videofreesex| 一级做a爰性色毛片免费| 三级黄在线播放| 182在线播放| 老子影院午夜伦手机在线看| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 果冻传媒麻豆电影| 小小视频在线版观看| 国产精品国产三级在线专区| 国产jizzjizz免费视频| 亚洲精品自在在线观看| 久久老子午夜精品无码| eeuss中文字幕| 高清视频一区二区三区| 波多野结衣教师在线| 日本电影和嫒子同居日子| 天堂中文8资源在线8| 国产午夜福利内射青草| 亚洲精品亚洲人成人网| 中文字幕版免费电影网站| 中国xxxxx高清免费看视频| 精品国产不卡在线电影| 曰批免费视频播放免费| 国语精品91自产拍在线观看二区 | 国产综合在线观看| 午夜福利啪啪片| 久久精品国1国二国三在| 95在线观看精品视频| 精品国产品香蕉在线观看75| 日韩在线免费看网站| 国产精品福利午夜在线观看| 免费观看美女裸体网站| 久久久久亚洲av综合波多野结衣| 天堂www网最新版资源官网| 男人天堂综合网| 成人国产精品999视频| 国产成人av三级在线观看| 亚洲最大成人网色香蕉| www.激情小说| 精品无码一区二区三区爱欲| 日本三级香港三级人妇99视|