Let's first look at what Hua's proposal itself says, and then look at the full text. You will find that the starting point of his proposal seems to be to consider the fertility rate. I refined his suggestions: first, the fertility rate continued to decline last year, and it may soon enter a negative population growth; Second, there are a large number of aborted fetuses. For example, he said that in 20 19, the number of induced abortions reached 9.762 million, and the number of private hospitals and underground clinics was even higher. Third, older women want to have children but can't find a suitable object; Fourthly, the infertility rate is getting higher and higher, from 3.5% in 1997 to 16.4% in 20 19 years.
Therefore, he believes that there are such problems at present, for example, unmarried childbirth can not be guaranteed by social inclusion and policies, and it is illegal to give birth out of wedlock according to the law; Then induced abortion is extremely harmful to women's health and innocent lives; Then, unmarried women's reproductive rights cannot be guaranteed, unmarried women cannot implement human assisted reproductive technology according to law, and so on.
Then he suggested that women over the age of 30 should be allowed to have a child and enjoy statutory maternity leave and maternity insurance. Of course, there is also setting the threshold for abortion for women and improving the assisted reproductive policy.
I don't know why, maybe my thinking is still relatively traditional. The first feeling when I see such a proposal is that it is full of malicious proposals.
The suggestion of allowing women over 30 to have a child is certainly beneficial. For example, older single women who really don't want to get married want to have a child, and they can give birth reasonably through assisted reproduction, and at the same time they can get social security, maternity leave and maternity insurance, and so on.
It is really meaningful to protect the rights of such women.
However, the question is how many people really have this demand? How helpful is it to improve the fertility rate? It can really be improved. how much is it? Is it easier for a single woman to raise a child than for two people? There is still pressure for two people to raise one, and the economic pressure of single support can not be ignored.
I think there are advantages and disadvantages, and the problem may be unbearable for this society.
What kind of problems may it bring? For example:
First, if there are male compatriots, why should I assume social maternity insurance in disguise as a child who is not my own?
Secondly, some women are discussing this issue, saying that once this proposal is passed, will it become reasonable for the rich to support women? Delaying three can become delaying ten, or even delaying a hundred, and the social and moral constraints on illegitimate children will be invalid immediately. What's more, is it also challenging monogamy? Obviously, assisted reproduction can legally give birth to children, but at the same time, it also provides convenience for extramarital problems and completely gives space to challenge traditional morality, traditional culture and traditional customs. Can our society bear such a problem? Would you like to see this happen?
Third, it is unfriendly to women's employment. The hidden rules of job hunting are full of discrimination against married childless people. Once they give birth out of wedlock, such women may directly lose their employment opportunities, especially in private enterprises, and they will not be guaranteed.
Finally, let me talk about my opinion.
Commissioner Hua's suggestion has a good starting point, taking into account the fertility rate and the reproductive rights of single women.
But I don't know why, I always feel that this proposal is full of harm.
Moreover, the problems mentioned in the starting point of the proposal are not solved by this proposal at all, because the root causes of those problems are not here.
First, the birth rate is low. With the cognitive ability of netizens, we basically know that this is an economic problem and should be solved from an economic perspective. Young people are under great pressure in life, work and economy and don't want to get married. They just don't want to bear the family pressure after marriage.
Now everything is high, housing prices are high, oil prices are high, the cost of having children is high, and the cost of education is even higher. Only the salary is low. Under such circumstances, do you dare to have children? We might as well think about it. Are young people really unwilling to have children? I don't think so, but I dare not. If free medical care and education can be provided, I don't think young people will want to have children.
In fact, the strict implementation of the double reduction policy shows that the country has begun to solve the problem of high education cost. The location of the house has been made clear again and again. It is for living, not for speculation. As long as you don't speculate in real estate, how can the price of buying a house rise? Explain that the country is also solving the problem of high housing prices. From all the big moves last year, everyone should have a feeling that the country is cleaning up the problems that affect the fertility rate.
Therefore, Hua's suggestion is to challenge the traditional social concept through the population problem. Protecting the reproductive rights of some women seems to be a deviation, and the problems it brings may be very harmful to society.
Of course, Hua's suggestions are not limited to these, such as setting a threshold to reduce abortion and improving the assisted reproductive policy, which is still worthy of recognition.