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: 人人妻人人做人人爽精品| 国产亚洲人成在线影院| HEYZO无码综合国产精品| 成人免费观看视频高清视频| 久久国产综合精品欧美| 极品少妇伦理一区二区| 亚洲欧美中文日韩v在线观看| 男朋友想吻我腿中间的部位| 啊灬用力啊灬啊灬快灬深| 青娱乐国产视频| 日韩美女专区中文字幕| 亚洲欧美乱综合图片区小说区| 王爷晚上含奶h嗯额嗯| 国产女人aaa级久久久级| chinese麻豆自制国产| 国产精品美女久久久久AV福利| 99热这里有精品| 夭天干天天做天天免费看 | 国产壮汉男同志69可播放| 亚洲精品中文字幕无乱码麻豆| 国产精品蜜芽在线观看| 99久久精品免费视频| 天堂网在线www| a级黄色片网站| 天天躁日日躁狠狠躁人妻| 一区二区精品在线观看| 最新69堂国产成人精品视频| 亚洲国产成人久久综合一| 欧美精品blacked中文字幕| 亚洲精品成人a| 波多野结衣伦理片| 亚洲综合久久精品无码色欲| 爽好大快深点一视频| 人妻无码久久一区二区三区免费| 精品一区二区三区在线视频观看 | 超清中文乱码精品字幕在线观看| 国产在线观看精品香蕉v区| 黄色一级免费网站| 国产孕妇孕交大片孕| 麻豆精品在线观看| 国产在线观看的|