When the One-Child Policy was put into operation, couples that gave birth to only one child were rewarded with work bonuses and priority in housing. Disincentives for noncompliance included loss of jobs, a ten-percent decrease in annual wages, loss of benefits in areas such as health-care, loss of free education for their children, taxes, and even a loss of bonuses. Of notable importance is the fact that workers are organized in groups of 10 to 30 people, and noncompliance with the One-Child policy would result in a loss of bonuses for the entire group. With “such overwhelming penalties for the group as a whole,” the demand to conform to the policy escalated to an even higher level. The intensity of the pressure in complying with the Policy is so grand due to its devastating consequences that it produces both a loss of individuality and a loss of identity. This, in combination with the IUDs (birth-control devices) that are forcibly put in place and the obliged sterilizations that also occur rampantly, demonstrates the lack of human rights given to Chinese women, as her right to have numerous children is taken away from her and she is forced into state-imposed conformity.
Of course, it must be understood that the strategic intent of the One-Child policy is indeed a legitimate one. The government felt threatened by the expected food scarcity due to overpopulation and the possible occurrence of a famine (such as the one that occurred after the Great Leap Forward from 1959-1962). As a result, the government chose to avoid all possible crises by controlling the population growth rate. Being concerned with the further economic development of the country is certainly a valid reason for implementing a strict, dominating policy. However, the rigorous enforcement of the One-Child Policy also causes the destruction of the traditional Chinese family structure, as well as degrades the role of the woman in Chinese society.
The customary Chinese family structure is strictly based on Confucian thought. Aspects of this philosophy, such as filial piety and family lineage, are highly integrated into Chinese culture, and the younger generation is known to take care of its older generations. However, the One-Child Policy has led to the phenomenon of “little emperors”, where only children “are the center of attention of six anxious adults (the parents and two sets of grandparents), who carefully scrutinize their every movement.” The fear that there will no longer be enough youngsters to take care of their elders is rampant, and, since it is usually the son who takes economic care of his aged family, as well as carries on the family’s ancestry, parents would thus prefer to have a “little emperor” son than a daughter.
The belittlement of the woman’s role in society derives from this widespread Chinese yearning to have a son. Parents, only being allowed to give legal birth to one child, would ultimately prefer to have a male, so that they can be both ensured a comfortable retirement and be assisted economically in the present, as the boy can do the heavy farm labor on their private-owned land. In some rural areas, a small fee will allow a couple to have a second child if their first attempt resulted in a female baby; however, many peasants have “taken steps to ensure that their female offspring are not counted” towards their limit without paying the fine. Moving to another village to have a baby girl, and then not registering her existence with the government, allows the peasants to have additional children as they await the birth of a boy. This causes many women to officially not exist, and although this means that China will not have to deal with a “large demographic crisis in the ratio between males and females”, this demeans the ‘unofficial’ woman’s rights and freedoms as an individual. Every person should have the ability to live freely with all their rights intact, and the fact that these illegitimate girls are being denied the right to even be considered as having an existence demonstrates the lack of concern related to human rights on behalf of the state.
The state’s intervention in manipulating the population growth rate can simply be described as the ‘good of the group’, or aiming to make the policy’s objectives beneficial to the country as a whole. However, can the ‘good of the group’ really take precedence over the ‘good of the individual’? Indisputably, the One-Child Policy put into practice by the Chinese government is a self-centered act that was created without regards to its many possible disadvantageous consequences. A country’s desire to decrease their population growth rate cannot take priority over the ability to retain one’s identity and to have individuality, over Chinese culture and traditional familial structure, or over women’s rights and freedoms.
Bibliography
Davis, Deborah and Steven Harrell. Chinese Families in the Post-Mao Era. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Guthrie, Doug. “Economic Policy in Reform Era China.” Lecture, New York University, Silver Center, Room 703. October 9, 2002.
Guthrie, Doug. “Social Institutions: The Family.” Lecture, New York University, Silver Center, Room 703. October 30, 2002.
Ogden, Suzanne. Global Studies: China. New York: Dushkin/McGraw Hill, 2002.
“China.” The Encarta Encyclopedia Online. 1997. 26 October 2002. <http://www.encarta.com>
Guthrie, lecture, Wednesday, Oct 9th, 2002.
Guthrie, lecture, Wednesday, Oct 30th, 2002.
Guthrie, lecture, Wednesday, Oct 30th, 2002.
Encarta, “China: One-Child Policy”, 2002
Encarta, “China: One-Child Policy”, 2002
Encarta, “China: One-Child Policy”, 2002
Encarta, “China: One Child Policy”, 2002
