Enforcing the birth control policy left millions of children with no identity.
China has announced the end to its infamous one-child policy, the restrictive rule that has limited many families to one child—and some to two children—for the past 37 years. The changes will allow all couples to have two children.
China has a long history of controlling its population. Throughout the 1950s, family planning was encouraged under Mao Zedong to promote economic growth. But only in 1973 did it become a political priority, with the national wan, xi, shao—“late marriage, longer spacing, and fewer children”—campaign encouraging two children per couple.
In June 1978, a policy of one child per couple was rigorously pursued as the government feared that China would not be able to modernize and support a large population at the same time.
Yet the law was difficult to enforce. Male children were prized and families who first gave birth to a daughter would lack a son to support them in old age. From 1984 onward, responding to societal unrest, rural couples whose first child was a girl were allowed to conceive a second child.
A series of changes took place from 2010 after it emerged that 13 million children were on record as being without proof of identity (hukou), because they were denied birth registration as a result of family planning policies.
The National Health Ministry and National Population and Family Planning Commission were merged in 2013, which signaled a relaxation of birth control as a government priority. In November 2013, the state decreed that citizens were allowed to have two children if either member of the couple was an only child themselves. The new announcement marks the most radical change of all: two children allowed for all couples.
Children with no identity
From forced abortions, sterilization and astronomical fines, the one-child policy led to a plethora of human rights abuses.
From the beginning, there were questions about how best to enforce it. One way was to charge citizens who had more than one child “social compensation fees,” colloquially referred to as “fines,” from two to eight times the annual incomes in rural areas, or annual disposable income in urban areas. With the income derived from these fines, livelihoods and careers of government staff depended on charging fees for unauthorized children. For example, in Henan Province alone, the Population and Family Planning Commission employed 17,000 administrators and 22,000 nursing and technical staff.
In the early days, mass sterilizations and abortions were particularly rife in the early 1980s. As time went on, great pressure was put on mothers with one child to accept an IUD coil, and mothers with two children were to be sterilized. In many areas, children could not have their birth recorded until this took place. Mothers and families who could not afford fines for giving birth to unauthorized children would see no choice but to undergo an abortion.
When births could not be prevented, local government could deny legal identity documentation to children born without permission. This was initially a way to hide unauthorized births. In this way, the child did not exist on government records or population statistics. Even the parents themselves might prefer to lose out on their child’s hukou than be punished for an unauthorized child.
Over time, as China’s birth rate decelerated and the population aged, local governments worried less about fulfilling birthing targets. Later on, denial of the hukou would be used as leverage to enforce payments of fines. Without it, parents would face their child being barred from obtaining an education and being unable to obtain an ID card, or paying the outstanding fines. Assets could be seized, bank accounts frozen, or a parent detained for 15 days at a time and taken to court when parents refused to pay up.
The legacy of 4-2-1 families
The driving factor behind the relaxations is that control over births is no longer necessary. China’s population is ageing rapidly. Longer life expectancy means that by 2050, it is expected that for every 100 people aged 20-64, there will be 45 people aged over 65. This has led to the “4-2-1” family where a child of working age could have to care for two parents and four grandparents in retirement.
Equally troubling is China’s skewed gender ratio. In 2014, China now had 33 million more men than women—believed to be a consequence of selective abortion and female child abandonment exacerbated by family planning restrictions. Without radical changes, many men (usually referred to as “bare sticks”) will be unable to find wives.
Some will question if China’s abandonment of its one-child policy will really lead to more births, as the previous relaxation in 2013 did little to boost birth rates. Others will note that the policy is not really over: couples are still limited to two children. Meanwhile, with giving birth out of wedlock still effectively illegal, some will question if the relaxations go far enough.
*[This article was originally published by The Conversation.]
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.
For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.
In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.
We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This doesn’t come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost money. Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a sustaining member.