Talk:One-child policy

Chart

There is a chart included in the article rendered in blue and pink to show something about the population size of China. However, there is nothing showing what the vertical axis means. Is each layer-cake-like tier of the chart supposed to represent a specific decade? Or the age of the population in ten-year breaks at a specific point of time? Can anyone who knows what it represents add a better explanation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.221.45.194 (talk) 14:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The link to age pyramid in the caption explains it. As for the precise scale, it appears to be listed on the file description page. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The same diagram is in China_population with the following explanation underneath it:

"Age pyramid for China. Each box denotes a five-year age group, starting with 0-5 years in the bottom box. Effects of the one-child policy result in smaller age cohorts in recent years." Maybe that caption could be moved to this page as well? ... Cheers, Neil. 71.198.172.68 (talk) 19:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I logged in to make the same request - add the same caption here to explain an otherwise obtuse graphic. Thanks, Bill Billz2208 (talk) 22:59, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Jiangsu women

Removed the tidbit about how most Jiangsu moms would only want to have an only child. What does this have to do with the paragraph, or the article as a whole? Based on a single source, I don't find the desire that women from a single province want to have only children so important. If it were several provinces or the whole nation, maybe. It's too bare and irrelevant as it stands. Estheroliver (talk) 03:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Rules overview?

Does someone have access to the exact rules of China's birth policy (i.e. which people may have how many children, depending on "race", rural vs. urban, sex of first child, parents' single-child status, ...)? A table of these rules would be a great addition to this article IMO. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Concerning 'related benefits'

The section on non-population-related benefits includes three examples of peripheral benefits of the policy, but provides very little evidence. For instance, the sub-section dealing with economic benefits contains reference to the original goals of the policy, and (for some reason) Marx's view of Malthus, but does not include any actual figures or information on the economic impact of the policy since it has been put into practice. The section dealing with health benefits provides unsourced (and, in my view, dubious) claims that the one-child policy has improved womens' health and reduced deaths and injury related to pregnancy. This is counter-intuitive; certainly forced, late-term abortions don't reduce deaths and injury. I would ask that a source and additional evidence be added to these sections. If none are provided in a reasonable amount of time, I may remove them. —Zujine|talk 17:15, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The article needs a history section

Here are some possible starting points for anyone so inclined:

http://www.pop.org/content/chinas-one-child-policy-1455

China's One-Child Policy

By Steven W. Mosher

I have been a student of China's one-child policy since the late 1970s, when I became the first American social scientist to conduct a full-length study of a Chinese village. From 1979 to 1980, I lived in rural Guangdong.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1912861,00.html

A Brief History of China's One-Child Policy

By Laura Fitzpatrick Monday, Jul. 27, 2009

http://www.amazon.com/Just-One-Child-Science-Policy/dp/product-description/0520253396/ref=dp_proddesc_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

Just One Child: Science and Policy in Deng's China

"First, it is by far the most detailed study of the origins of one of the most controversial, significant, wide-ranging, and as the study makes clear, least understood decisions of the post-Mao China political system. China's one-child family policy is rarely treated with detachment, and its origins have been obscured. This book is likely to be the definitive study on their origins. "--David Bachman, University of Washington

ISBN-10: 9780520253391 ISBN-13: 978-0520253391 ASIN: 0520253396

http://www.amazon.com/Mothers-Ordeal-Womans-Against-One-Child/dp/B000HM55KG/ref=sr_tc_2_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1301107513&sr=1-2-ent

A Mother's Ordeal : One Woman's Fight Against China's One-Child Policy

by Steven W. Mosher ASIN: B000HM55KG

CountMacula (talk) 02:55, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Change request

< It officially restricts the number of children married urban couples can have to one

> It officially restricts the number of children that married urban couples can have to one

Still hard to read, but cannot think of anything better. 79.40.88.59 (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Done as "It officially restricts married, urban couples to having only one child". Feel free to reopen the request if that's no good either. Cheers, — Bility (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Twins

I don't see anything in here about what happens if a family has twins. Tad Lincoln (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

BBC stated that any children born from a single birth are exempt. Though this should be placed somewhere in the article (ideally with 2+ sources), the reader should have the sense to infer that the government would allow this exemption because it was mostly, if not completely, out of the control of the mother. –HXL's Roundtable and Record 23:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps, but people shouldn't really have to infer. They should just be able to find the answer. After all, if they chose to, the Chinese government could presumably penalize parents with twins, despite it being outside their control. Tad Lincoln (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

It's actually stated in the article under "Fertility medicines". --Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:03, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Total population

I came here hoping to find a graph that showed how China's population had changed over time, to see how effective China's one child policy was. So if anyone's looking to expand the article - I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd like that.

Cheers, Neil. 71.198.172.68 (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Enforced not only through fines

I read "The policy is enforced at the provincial level through fines...", I also read about forced abortions. Could a section be added stating the various methods used over time and in the various regions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.78.165.203 (talk) 14:16, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Forced Abortion?

The article does not make clear whether or not the state forces abortions of a second child. It briefly talks about abortion in the into, but later it just talks of fines and garneshment of wages. This needs to be made clear. 97.91.176.159 (talk) 21:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I think the following paragraph from the "Human Rights" sections more or less makes it clear:

"In 2002, China outlawed the use of physical force to make a woman submit to an abortion or sterilization, but it is not entirely enforced.[33][43] In the execution of the policy, many local governments still demand abortions if the pregnancy violates local regulations."

Though maybe it should be moved to a more prominent position... --Roentgenium111 (talk) 15:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Risk of death from birth

The article says that one-child policy reduces the risk from death from birth-related injuries. Is this common in China (and therefor relevant)? A citation would be good in section "Impact on health care". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.103.217.106 (talk) 08:51, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Clear Bias in Article

I'm not Chinese, but there appears to be a clear bias in the article from perhaps countries with no population controls. Look at the 'benefits' vs. 'criticisms' sections. The benefits section is tiny, despite there being a clear problem with overpopulation in the world. It seems like this was done deliberately with a POV. 81.97.120.96 (talk) 14:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

A Wikipedia article is meant to reflect the information available in published reliable sources. If you think there are more benefits that should be listed, feel free to add them, making sure to cite reliable sources. The population-related benefit is, I think, obvious (in that it is the whole point of the policy, as stated clearly in the second paragraph of the introduction section) and there's not much more that can be said about it. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hui people

The Huis are exempted from this policy. This could be incorporated into the article by the main contributors.

• http://books.google.com.bh/books?id=pA_MP4Q11qgC&pg=PA123&dq=Hui+one+child&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lYQBT62DGMfU8gORsoG4AQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Hui%20one%20child&f=false
• http://books.google.com.bh/books?id=gwjeKt7yMogC&pg=PA139&dq=Hui+one+child&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lYQBT62DGMfU8gORsoG4AQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Hui%20one%20child&f=false

Joyson Prabhu ^{Holla at me!} 10:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Update

Population pyramid of China in 2012 from International Futures

Hi all,

I wanted to see if anyone would be opposed to an update of the population pyramid for the page.

I believe this image is an upgrade, because it displays age cohort years on the left. This more easily informs those interested on the timing of the one-child policy historically and its implications on today's population structure.

I've spoken with editors on the WikiProject Countries and the Reliable sources pages, and they've approved of the use of International Futures as source on country pages -- provided that consensus is met with other editors. I'd just like to see if any of you have any thoughts on the matter. I look forward to hearing from you. (Shredder2012 (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC))