|
An
Addendum to China's Demographic Disaster
Part Three of Three
By
Dave Andrusko
A
little over a week ago I wrote about China's
demographic disaster in the making, based on an
article in the British Medical Journal.
The dilemma was captured in the lead sentence of
the New York Times' account of the study: "For
the next 20 years, China will have increasingly
more men than women of reproductive age."
A
friend forwarded an article that ran in the
online publication Slate that talked
about considerations I had not dealt with
adequately. So, on the theory better late than
never, let me revisit this grim topic again.
As
recently as 1985 to 1989, there were 108 boys
for every 100 girls. But by 2000-2004, the
imbalance had soared to 124 boys for every 100
girls. In 2005, according to the British Medical
Journal, "males under the age of 20 exceeded
females by more than 32 million."
The study pointed to two factors,
only one of which I talked about in detail.
First was the growth in the use of ultrasound.
Once a rarity, by the 1990s ultrasonography was
"very cheap and available even to the rural
poor."
"Second," wrote William Saletan,
a columnist for Slate, "the boy-girl
ratio escalates radically among children who
were born second or third in their respective
families." By the time you get to third births,
in four provinces the sex ratio rose to over
200 boys for every 100 girls.
Saletan asks the rhetorical
question "Why would the boy-girl ratio rise so
precipitously with birth order?" and then
answers it: Chinese law, specifically its
"one-child" policy, "which limits family size
but allows exceptions, with variations from
province to province, for couples who have only
daughters. Essentially, the exceptions give you
a second or, in some cases, a third chance to
have a son. That's why, as couples approach the
family size limit or the exception allotment,
the boy-girl ratio goes up. You get the
ultrasound, and if the fetus is a girl, you
abort it and try again for a son." Saletan
concludes, "It's a terrible convergence of
ancient prejudice with modern
totalitarianism."
Saletan adds. "The old problem
was too many children. The new problem is too
few girls. Without enough girls, the boys become
unruly."
As I noted
April 14, thanks to a bill signed into law by
pro-abortion President Barack Obama over
vigorous NRLC objections, the United Nations
Population Fund (UNFPA) will receive U.S. funds
regardless of whether that agency continues to
participate in China's population-control
program, which relies heavily on coerced
abortion. On March 24 the State Department
announced that it would release $50 million to
the UNFPA.
Please send your comments
to
daveandrusko@gmail.com.
Part One
Part Two |
