Evaluate the effectiveness of anti-natal policies in less developed countries




Globally, many least developed countries (LDCs) implement anti-natal policies, with the aim of reducing the crude birth rate and the total fertility rate so that the size of the population can be reduced. These measures are typically used when an LDC is experiencing an unsustainably high rate of natural increase, so governments are concerned that the country’s carrying capacity will be exceeded. In other words, it is in part about trying to improve living standards.

Anti-natal policies vary from harsh methods to milder methods in their variety of cases. A world famous case would be China’s “one child policy” applied since the 1970s, when it was still a poverty-stricken LDC and far from being the second largest economy in the world. Deng Xiaoping had publicly announced that for China to achieve its economic development goals for the 21st century, the population size would have to be reduced to 1.2 billion. Under his ideology, harsh measures such as forced sterilization and abortion were ruthlessly employed. The National Population and Family Planning Commission implements the policy and with its notorious 300,000 full-time workers and 80 million volunteers, ensured that regular home visits and assessments were carried out, especially in rural villages. The policy covered about 35% of the Chinese population and contraceptives were readily available. Couples could only have one child, or in the field two if the first was a girl. Hefty fines of 10,000 yuan were imposed for the second and subsequent children. There were also some areas that had the “Son’s Glory Certificate,” which awarded couples who met the rule cash bonuses, longer maternity leave, cheaper daycare, and preferential housing. An additional month’s salary is awarded until the child turns 14 and discounted medical care, cheaper subscriptions and even 100,000 yuan loans to renovate their homes as they wish.

Given its plethora of measures, this policy was expected to achieve complete success. Statistically, it has achieved the best reduction in the fertility rate since from 1970 to 1979 the TFR was reduced by more than half from 5.8 to 2.7 and, subsequently, it prevented some 400 million births between 1979 and 2011, equivalent to the size of Europe. It was also very successful in urban areas such as Beijing and Shanghai, as it was implemented at an optimal time, when the desire to improve socioeconomic conditions outweighed the desire for large families. In these urban cities, raising a child requires around RMB 50,000 for a comfortable life and many know that it is not an easy decision. As a result, urban coastal cities in particular willingly lowered their TGF to 1.5-1.6, significantly lower than China’s national average. This led to an improvement in living standards, as the carrying capacity was better able to support a smaller population with existing resources. As such, the trend for these cities has already been set, leading to the prevalence of nuclear families and even “little emperor syndrome.”

Having recognized that, many feel that this policy was a failure in intangible terms, especially when it comes to morale. It is surprising that, even 30 years later, this barbaric experiment in social engineering is still going on. It has served to distort gender balances by contributing to female infanticide and sex-selective abortions, so that nationally, there are only 100 girls for 118 boys. In rural villages, the figure is much more worrying with 100 girls for 133 boys. It has also received widespread criticism for its total disregard for basic human rights by forcing village women to undergo sterilization and abortions, such that in some villages up to 98% of women have had an IUD implanted, a often without their knowledge, as had been done when they were unconscious after forced procedures. In Bobai County, in western Guangxi, officials launched a brutal crackdown and arrested 17,000 women before subjecting them to forced procedures, extracting 7.8 million yuan as fines and looting the homes of those who refused to pay. Perhaps a more glaring failure is the fact that the policy is already causing harm to China itself, as it is evidently reducing its economic comparative advantage of surplus labor and being the “factory of the world.” The labor crisis can be seen as the Pearl River Delta has less than 2 million workers, while central Wenzhou has less than 1 million. Chinese wages are increasing by about 4% annually and the minimum wage in Guangzhou has risen to more than 1,000 yuan from the previous 860. It will be counterproductive if the policy is not controlled and ends up affecting FDI in the country.

LDCs are generally unable to implement their anti-natal policies very successfully due to inherent weaknesses in governance and the national base that prevent them from handling various complex issues well. In Nigeria, for example, the 1988 National Population Policy was practically a failure. Contraception was promoted and it must be recognized, first of all, that perhaps the good thing was that contraception and family planning services became easily available and affordable for all, whose contraceptive use to an impressive 50% in 5 years from a lousy 6%. Aggressive campaigns were also carried out to eradicate discrimination against women in the workplace and at home. However, the policy was a general failure due to its extremely fleeting success. In the long term, it did not work well, as more than half of Nigerians are Muslim, so the promotion of contraceptives had violated religious beliefs and its reasons were not understood. The policy also operated on a voluntary basis, allowing families to determine if they wanted to participate. Naturally, many chose not to participate and the final participation rate was disappointing. The TFR remained relatively high at 5.70 from 2000-2005 and 5.61 from 2005-2010. Their population growth rate of 3% per year has made them the fastest growing nation in Africa, with one in 6 Africans being Nigerian. This can have unintended consequences if the problem persists and the dependency of young people increases to a state that the country cannot bear.

In democratic least developed countries such as India, their situation is quite similar to Nigeria in the sense that, being a democracy, they could not legislate the number of babies allowed per couple in their anti-natal policy of 1972. This year abortion was legalized and contraception was widely promoted, including methods such as the pill and the coil. The mass media were used to broadcast advertisements and posters with a globe overflowing with people and a message “limited resources, increasing population” were used in the advertisements. Recently, the state of Rajasthan is encouraging voluntary sterilization by offering a car, the Indian-made Tata Nano (the cheapest car in the world) as a prize, along with motorcycles, televisions and food blenders. This will work well, especially among the poorer group, as these once luxury appliances and household items of choice are now available sterilized. The crude birth rate more than halved from 40.8 in 1951 to 26.4 in 1998. The TFR also fell from 4.5 to 3.4 in a matter of years.

Despite the small success, much more lies in its subtle failures. In 1978, the legal age of marriage was raised from 15 to 18, but this was largely ignored, as tradition took precedence over state laws, the problem of human free choice in a democracy. In addition, the promotion of contraception was unsuccessful with only a 25% level of use despite improvements. In rural villages like Uttar Pradesh, unintentional female infanticide occurred with fewer than 90 girls for every 100 boys. More significantly, there were widespread complaints that many were forced to sterilize and miscarry, leading to the abandonment of the campaign. With states like Uttar Pradesh adding 10 million every 3 years, India’s population of 1.1 billion is expected to surpass China’s 1.3 billion by 2030, showing the success of the former compared to the dismal results of the latter.

In conclusion, anti-natal policies in LDCs definitely have their own successes or failures, however, in the case of an authorized government in China, the legislation takes precedence and the statistics will show the absolute success of the measure, albeit morally intangible. and socioeconomic. of life may not get better. However, in most cases, we tend to see an LDC unable to handle such complexities of birth policies due to the myriad of factors that need to be considered such as religious practices, acceptability and relevance of the policy, etc. so, with other pressing priorities to alleviate poverty and achieve economic growth, LDCs generally do not have the additional capacity to cope with successful implementation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post