With the world facing the issue of overpopulation, there has been discussion of implementing limits on the number of children households can have. Although officially such policy has only existed in China, it is likely that as resource scarcity worsens, other countries may consider such steps. Limits on the number of children should be implemented yet introduced in a way that focuses on family planning and government support rather than draconic interventions.
The primary argument on limitation is overpopulation. The global population is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030 and 9.7 billion in 2050 (United Nations, 2022). Scientists and experts are increasingly emphasizing that the human population is becoming too large to be sustained by the planet. Furthermore, hundreds of millions of people are living in insecure conditions on unsuitable land and homes, often struggling to meet their basic needs such as food and water. Due to climate change, many places in the earth are expected to become virtually unhabitable, while food production is expected to become more difficult. The impacts of overpopulation are long-lasting and far-reaching, and it is a vicious cycle as rising birth rates are seeing greater resource consumption, which in turn, leads to an environment where these resources are limited (Khan, 2021).
Another supporting factor of limiting the number of children is that it allows for more resources to be dedicated to each child both within microenvironments of the family and the macro considerations of the national economy. There should not be a one-child policy as occurred in China as this was socially detrimental, but a limit of 2 children (or 3 with evident of financial resources to support it) is more appropriate. Evidence suggests that fewer kids made families happier and provided more opportunities for education and other development until maturity. The costs of raising children are substantial from a financial standpoint, particularly if they are highly successful in a specific field (athletics or academics) (Pinsker, 2019). Furthermore, publicly, there are limited resources that the government can provide (resulting in larger class sizes in schools and other inconveniences). Therefore, limiting the number of children can focus more resources on a single child, potentially ensuring their successful upbringing.
The main counterargument is that population control is unethical and violates fundamental freedoms in democracies such as the US. That is not unfounded but can be countered with the evidence that unrestrained population growth goes in conflict with most of commonly accepted human rights. Overpopulation will directly threat the stability of society in every way, from a lack of resources to civil unrest as people will fight to fulfill their needs. Ethics of population control are generally perceived as negative but if done correctly, can be implemented in a safe manner. Responsible reproduction goes beyond supporting one’s children, it is considering their future and the world the next generations will live in, so ethically carefully limiting numbers without discrimination or eugenics is appropriate.
There are increasing pressures and arguments towards creating policies on limiting the number of children. However, it has to be done ethically and correctly to avoid pitfalls seen in China’s experiment where there is a tremendous gender discrepancy due to cultural differences and a number of highly unethical practices were implemented. Population control should be done through family planning and incentives for families to limit childbirth on their own accord. The limits will not only begin to gradually resolve the issues of overpopulation, but will allow for a greater amount of resources, such as education and opportunities, to be distributed for each child.
References
Khan, C. (2021). Is our planet overpopulated? We ask the expert. The Guardian. Web.
Pinsker, J. (2019). What number of kids makes parents happiest? The Atlantic. Web.
United Nations. (2022). Population. Web.