India Pays Women Not to Have Children

I shouldn't have to explain the ill health effects of having too many children too close together. It's better for the mother, the children, and society as a whole when women wait to have children, have fewer children, and wait at least two years between pregnancies. It's also better for over-populated countries, like India, which is why in Satara, a farming region in Western India, the government is now paying newly married couples $106 to wait two years before having children.

India has nearly 1.2 billion people and nearly half the population is under the age of 25. In the coming decades, India will overtake China as the most populous country. Estimates put the population at 1.5 to 1.9 billion people, too many for the already strained government and limited resources.

Officials would like to see an average of 2.1 children per family, a rate that would stabilize the population. That is already the average in many educated, high income regions, but the poorer more populous states average upwards of 4 children per family.

The rates in Satara are not that high, but more than 25% of the women are marrying before the legal age of 18 and nearly half of the infants and young children are malnourished. Since the inception of the government "honeymoon package," over 2000 couples have enrolled.

The economist in me appreciates the cash incentive, the global health aficionado in me recognize the health benefits of delayed child bearing, but the feminist in me is uncomfortable with the government taking such a direct role in fertility. True, it's a long way from forced sterilizations or illegal abortions, and the program does seem to have potential to improve health standards and reduce child ill-health, but it makes me uneasy. We argue that abortion is a personal decision and the government has no business telling a woman when to have children or what to do with her body, yet here's a (seemingly positive) example of a government doing just that.

Photo credit: babasteve