The One Child Policy in China Is Wrong, Essay Example

This essay relates the one child Policy in China and its ultimate setbacks or benefits for Chinese families. Significantly, for people who are learning the first time about this one child policy in China, youmay need some clarification regarding why such a policy was instituted in the first place. What is this one child policy in Chinese culture all about?Essentially, this is considered a family planning policy instituted asa population control measure for persons residing in the People’s Republic of China. While the terminology ‘one child’ may sound harsh there are many exceptions to the rule. For example, the policy caters towards exempting ethnic minorities. Precisely, the extent to which this policy was instituted allowed only 35.9% of Chinese population to be affected by the restriction. It was enforced by provincial regulation whereby fines were imposed and prosecution by state authorities ensued. Why should people living in a civilized culture such as China have to be demoralized into a one child restriction regarding the amount of children a family could produce?(Naughton, 14).

Arguments for the one child policy have been focused on the issue of China’s economy not being able to afford an impeding over population crisis facing the country. While this might be true prior to implementation of this policy in 1979 analysts have confirmed that people have been one of the major resource in China’s economic development. How people have now become a detriment to its economic growth. Apparently, there could be more to the ‘one child policy in China’ than what is told to the public because based on history there seems to be no logic behindthis ludicrous intervention. Could it be that this is a purely political intervention ensuring that the rich continue flourishing and the poor suffer? (Hasketh, Lu, Li; Xing, 1171).

Historically, here is data to prove that during Mao Zedong’s leadership of China, asignificant decline in the crude birth rate was experienced. It went from 37 to 20 per thousand. Likewise infant mortality dropped from 227/1000 births in 1949 to 53/1000 in 1981. Subsequently, Chinese life expectancy showed vast improvement from 35 years in 1949 to 66 years in 1976. It was about that time China flourished on increased human resources. Governments, until the 1960 encouraged families to be fruitful and multiply replenishing the Chinese population. Mao’s ideology catered to population growth being a source of wealth empowering the country’s economic status. Family planning was not advocated because there was the need for people to build China to where it is today. Consequently, there was a population hike from 540 million in 1949 to 940 1976 respectively. However, starting in 1970 someaffluent people n the society fearing that these new people as children in generations to come will ultimately make them poor. As such, they had to preservetheir identity by subverting the population to a one child era, which is wrong(Hasketh et. al, 171).

A change of government produced diverse ideological views regarding population growth and the rights of Chinese families. This new wave of political persuasion created the assumption that the Chinese population had grown too large and measures must be taken to control this growth.  Further, contention advocating the usefulness of this policy relates to the fact thatsince its implementation in 1979 there has been as significant decline in birth rates to the tune of 200 million births. For policymakers this has improved the socio-economic situation of Chinese. However, there has been limited supportive data to this effect. As such, this assumption can be considered futile and merely  apolitical propaganda because the one child policy in China is totally wrong from the perspective of human rights and rights of the child convened in the United Nations Convention on rights of the child Act (Hasketh et. al, 171).

In relation to human rights violation,while a PEW research study indicated that 76% of China’s population support the policy, it is still wrong from the perspective that it directly and in directly causedinduced abortion become to become legal, the aged society to suffer  anddifficulty in accessing education for young people. These three features are elements of structured inequality in the society, which is a violation of human rights. Chinese governments ought to be held accountable by world leaders within the United Nations provisionsof human rights, forviolation to the population.(Hasketh et. al, 171).

Importantly, the principle of regulating howmanychildren a family must produce is wrong. This policy has been immensely challenged, internationally. No one, government or institution has the right to regulate how many children a family must have. It is reducing their ability to function as normal humanswithin the social structure. It is as if they are treated like animals when castrated after producing the desired offspring. In this case their masters cannot afford to feed them any longer and desire to reduce the cost of their living. More importantly, in keeping with the 1968 proclamation of the International Conference on Human Rights, “Parents have a basic human right to determine freely and responsibly the number and the spacing of their children” (Proclamation of Teheran, 17).

Under this regime it has been reported that the government planned to conduct a total of of 20,000 abortions and sterilizations yearly withinHuaiji County in Guangdong Province because the population has ignored the one child China policy. Where is United Nations when this is happening? Actually, abortions have become legal and the value of human life has been reduced to political interpretations of what makes  business sense o the extent of women being hunted down and pressured to have ultrasounds taken to detect early pregnancy for arranged abortions. This is ridiculous! Where is the value for people and the unborn fetus? Have Chinese leaders become so insensitive to the offspring that like Pharaoh of ancient Egypt they would have all the male children killed.These atrocities are beingconducted even among the minorities who were not expected to be targeted by this law(Proclamation of Teheran, 17.)

It is a shame on  theChinese administration! Is it as if a type of apartheid exits in China among unborn infants and their parents. No boundaries crossed! More importantly, reports have been that the extent of cruelty exists in China is tantamount to murder that women who are almost to term  have endure abortions before delivery if they have more than one child. They are injected with saline and allowed to kill the child. This human torture must be addressed at the highest level of human rights provisions. Both mothers and the inborn infants/fetuses must be protected from these murders. Why a child mustbe denied the privilege of born because politicians do not want more people in China than for which they have estimated to keep their status co?(Hasketh et. al, 171).

In concluding this argument it must be reiterated that the one child policy in China is wrong from a human rights perspective as well as rights of the child UN convention. Many atrocities are being conducted in the society in relation to adherence to this policy. An antagonism now exists between child bearing and policy makers who are doing everything to hinder population growth in China. Why must this continue? It is violation of women rights, human rights and rights of the child! Chinese politicians and policy makers must be held responsible for the murders they have committed on the world’s children!

Works cited

Hasketh, Therese; Lu, Li; Xing, Zhu Wei. The effects of China’s One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years”. New England Journal of Medicine 353 (11), 2005; 1171–1176. Print.

Naughton, Barry. The Chinese Economy: Transitions and Growth. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.2007. Print

Proclamation of Teheran. International Conference on Human Rights. 1968. Archived. 2007-10-Print.