Is forced abortion a necessary evil, for China, to control its problem with the rapidly increasing population?
The dilemma lay not in the gray area of the limits and pressures of civil society in China, where women’s freedoms are ostensively valued less in Chinese culture based on years of traditionalism, but rather the point where China has regressed so extensively that all efficacy is maimed on behalf of an ever existant and necessary act–sexual reproduction. The qualms for the quantity of people has come to threaten the quality of life; this belies any ethical implication that China values its meaning.
Supplementing the already overpopulated lands of China with a counteractive reform (not unanimously decreed) leads to more questions about legitimacy in China’s government. Liberties and the once considered sovereignty of an individual are coherently supressed, and all in the name of the collective body–the people. These same people who once identified with Mao and the leadership of Xiaoping and Jintao, have come to be the voices stifled by the cries of babies–those unborn, as they are those who haunt China’s legacy.
The Chinese are taking new routes to improve on the subsistence of the situation of overcrowding, by leveling rural areas and creating infrastructure–the new urban sprawl, if you will. However, “[W]omen have been forced to have abortions. Many take place late in preganancy. China has relaxed family planning laws”. However, women’s status remains controversial. Many women are subject to a forced abortion, when given notice of the bylaw and break the clause without paying high fines, while several other forced sterilizations occur. Consent agreements are issued and signed, but how free is freedom or freewill when it’s a contract conjured by a single party state, under which it is denoted you are only a citizen and the life of your unborn child is as expendable as the demonstrators at Tiananmen Square. Legitimacy. Anyone?
China’s government is controlled by the communist party, which oversees everything. While several freedoms are protected, it has become a facade that the government would rule on behalf of any one individual’s interests, with the seeming existence of some options for those soon to be parents or those considering such. Should one violate the laws and disregard the precautionary measures of contraception or abstinence, consequences are in opposition to those who have been victimized or any who attempt to shed light on injustice. Remember: China’s contemporary reforms incorporate a less than moderate view about equality. The stark contrast to effective legislation by those few with real authority, is China’s way of shortsighted reforms that illustrate a despot–where power without oversight leads to human rights violations at local level.
Forced Abortions are unnecessary. The likelihood of China’s population being a model geometric sequence of exponential growth or a constant linear progression is highly ignornant and insubstantial evidence disproves such theories. Numbers do not equate truth: the verdict is beyond quantitative facts. If China so wishes to delineate from the stresses on the environment’s carry capacity and densities in China’s social atmosphere, they ought to implement a more prominent role of the social sexual reform of sterilization, as a clause to the family laws, and therein provide histerectomies and vasectomies. Simply put, if the population growth is the issue, why not cut it off at the source, instead of warranting tragedy, perpetuating the grotesque, and enacting treachery, on behalf of the traumatic alternative that is not the only answer.
