Between 14 Kids Freedom & The One-Child Policy

Today in class we discussed the difference between the two sides, and explaining our feelings on the matter. I said that my thoughts were that there should be freedom to decide how many kids you can handle, but that someone should step-in if you have obviously can't decide for yourself. The person(s) who help you should consider the amount of income per month (and per year), your ability (proven in the past) to take care of children, and your previous police records. The government should be trying to help, and make sure that only those who have proven themselves able to take care of more responsibility should be given more.

Nadya Suleman- Kid Krazy

In late January of this year, a woman named Nadya Suleman gave birth to octuplets, or eight children at one time (like 8 twins!). She had previously given birth to Our class has been discussing if the government should control the births of the citizens, and we compared the differences between China's One-Child Policy and Nadya's 14 total children. We argued about Nadya's decision to have 14 kids, and if the government should intervene at a certain time, when enough is enough. There were many good questions asked, such as; Can she take care of them all? Won't they die without proper care and treatment? Do people realize when it's too much? All of these questions were answered. I personally don't think she can support the most recent 8 kids, because she was already struggling -without a job, single, and broke- to support her previous 6b kids. She can't possible believe that she can support 14 kids without a job! I also think that most people know when to stop, and that in Nadya's case she should be taught that what she is doing is ridicules. 

I think that in most cases, people have a number of children, and then they stop. Most of the time, that number is below 5 or 6. Because most people can decide how many kids they can handle, I think that the government(s) shouldn't control the number of kids per couple, but say to each person individually, "You should put the latter 8 children up for adoption (as in Nadya's case)." I think that the government should get personal, giving each person or couple what advice and "law" they need to follow. 

Another perspective was brought into the conversation, "Should only those who can support a vast amount of children be allowed to give birth to a vast amount of children (namely, the rich)?" Our class decided that there needs to be a balance, not a division between the rich and the not so fortunate. 

According to Suleman's mother, Nadya was obsessed with giving birth when she was a teenager. Could this crazy obsession have followed her into adulthood?

In a nutshell, our class believes that people should make their own decisions, but be guided. There needs to be balance between total chaos (like Suleman's kid crazy problem), and the destruction of child-life (like in China).

My Thoughts On China's One-Child Policy

Lately in Humanities, we’ve been discussing our thoughts and opinions about this law. Most of us voiced a dislike of the government controlling what amount of children a couple was allowed. No one likes being controlled, and it’s just unfair to say that people are only allowed to have one child, and if they break that law, there is a heavy fine or loss of their job. “…Breaking the one-child rule would result in a heavy fine… State officials who have more than one child automatically lose their jobs, a heavy punishment…”

 

This law was imposed because previously there had been a law to have as many children as possible, because the leader wanted to, “…bury the United States in a human wave.” That whole part of the article reads, “China's population went out of control after Mao Zedong's instruction to the nation in the 1950s and 1960s to go and have as many children as possible in order to bury the United States in a human wave. …Hundreds of millions of extra children were born in a baby boom that sent the birth rate soaring to 5.8 children per couple, a level unsustainable by China's natural resources of food, water and energy.” After that ruler died, the next one ordered the “One-Child Policy” to help the resources in China become less strained. What they didn’t expect was that it would be a bad thing to have less children, “But this is still below the level of 2.1 children needed to maintain population levels, and as such is starting to put pressure on state resources.”

 

Many of the girls in our class also thought that it was unfair that boy where favored, just because they could handle more labor. No one in the government considered what large amount of work women can do, and what would happen in the future if they encouraged the birth of boys over girls. It says that, “…Chinese officials estimate that by 2020 there will be 30 million men known as, 'bare branches." Unable to find a wife to marry and have their own child…” Apparently no one thought of this before the law was imposed.

 

Most people agreed that this law was bad, but in the words of one of my classmates, if the law was lifted, all the people would have more babies in nine-months, and all the resources in China will be strained. Apparently the officials feel the same way as my classmates, because the article says, “…Although all Chinese feel that the one-child policy has been a good thing for their country, most say they personally wish they could have had more children. Officials are said to fear that if the policy is simply lifted overnight, there will be a population explosion…” No one seemed to consider that some people wouldn’t change their lifestyle and have more children, others would wait a few years, and others may go off and have many kids. The main point is that without a law forcing you to do one thing, even if you do not “break” that rule once it’s removed, it still is great to not be forced to do something you may or may not want to do.

 

Another factor is that many boys were “turning out bad” for want of a better term. It says, “ Another consequence of the one-child rule has been the creation of a generation of 'little emperors, “…Indulged and cosseted boy children who are often overweight, arrogant and lacking in social skills.” I was shocked to read that the “preferred” gender was acting inappropriately, especially when their unborn sisters can do nothing to save their own reputations.

 

I was also shocked to read the measures women and their families would go to so that they were still following the ridiculous law, “…Through state-imposed abortions among pregnant women…” I detest abortion, because it kill a tiny child, who may not be wanted, but still deserves our love. I couldn’t believe that women would kill these innocent unborn children, so that their families would not get fined. I understand that they were under much pressure to obey, and where would this child go, if it was born, because no one would adopt a baby when the law was strictly against multiple children in one household.

 

So, in conclusion, I strongly disagree that this law is good, and can’t wait to see the end of it. I’ve found many reasons why this law should be disbanded, and I think that most people would agree with me, because the death of innocent children is absolutely horrendous.

My thoughts

Lately in Humanities, we’ve been discussing our thoughts and opinions about this law. Most of us voiced a dislike of the government controlling what amount of children a couple was allowed. No one likes being controlled, and it’s just unfair to say that people are only allowed to have one child, and if they break that law, there is a heavy fine or loss of their job. “…Breaking the one-child rule would result in a heavy fine… State officials who have more than one child automatically lose their jobs, a heavy punishment…”

 

This law was imposed because previously there had been a law to have as many children as possible, because the leader wanted to, “…bury the United States in a human wave.” That whole part of the article reads, “China's population went out of control after Mao Zedong's instruction to the nation in the 1950s and 1960s to go and have as many children as possible in order to bury the United States in a human wave. …Hundreds of millions of extra children were born in a baby boom that sent the birth rate soaring to 5.8 children per couple, a level unsustainable by China's natural resources of food, water and energy.” After that ruler died, the next one ordered the “One-Child Policy” to help the resources in China become less strained. What they didn’t expect was that it would be a bad thing to have less children, “But this is still below the level of 2.1 children needed to maintain population levels, and as such is starting to put pressure on state resources.”

 

Many of the girls in our class also thought that it was unfair that boy where favored, just because they could handle more labor. No one in the government considered what large amount of work women can do, and what would happen in the future if they encouraged the birth of boys over girls. It says that, “…Chinese officials estimate that by 2020 there will be 30 million men known as, 'bare branches." Unable to find a wife to marry and have their own child…” Apparently no one thought of this before the law was imposed.

 

Most people agreed that this law was bad, but in the words of one of my classmates, if the law was lifted, all the people would have more babies in nine-months, and all the resources in China will be strained. Apparently the officials feel the same way as my classmates, because the article says, “…Although all Chinese feel that the one-child policy has been a good thing for their country, most say they personally wish they could have had more children. Officials are said to fear that if the policy is simply lifted overnight, there will be a population explosion…” No one seemed to consider that some people wouldn’t change their lifestyle and have more children, others would wait a few years, and others may go off and have many kids. The main point is that without a law forcing you to do one thing, even if you do not “break” that rule once it’s removed, it still is great to not be forced to do something you may or may not want to do.

 

Another factor is that many boys were “turning out bad” for want of a better term. It says, “ Another consequence of the one-child rule has been the creation of a generation of 'little emperors, “…Indulged and cosseted boy children who are often overweight, arrogant and lacking in social skills.” I was shocked to read that the “preferred” gender was acting inappropriately, especially when their unborn sisters can do nothing to save their own reputations.

 

I was also shocked to read the measures women and their families would go to so that they were still following the ridiculous law, “…Through state-imposed abortions among pregnant women…” I detest abortion, because it kill a tiny child, who may not be wanted, but still deserves our love. I couldn’t believe that women would kill these innocent unborn children, so that their families would not get fined. I understand that they were under much pressure to obey, and where would this child go, if it was born, because no one would adopt a baby when the law was strictly against multiple children in one household.

 

So, in conclusion, I strongly disagree that this law is good, and can’t wait to see the end of it. I’ve found many reasons why this law should be disbanded, and I think that most people would agree with me, because the death of innocent children is absolutely horrendous.

Shakespeare's Sonnet 7

In class yesterday we learned and reflected on Shakespeare Sonnet 7.

I thought that Shakespeare’s Sonnet 7 means:

 

There is a handsome man, who looks younger than his age, but he has a burden, of not having a heir, or son to take over his estate when he is old or dead.

 

But now I think differently, after our reflections yesterday:

 

There is a sun, that is “young” and just born in the early morning, but gets older and brighter as the day progresses until it become noo, then it starts getting older and dimmer. when it is night again, then the sun is gone, "dead."