New Delhi: Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) has suggested changes to be carried out in the Draft Population of Uttar Pradesh (control, stabilization and welfare) Bill, 2021 which has been published by the Law Commission that invites advice for modification.
The right organization has recommended the elimination of three parts “to avoid population contractions as well as unwanted social and economic consequences of one child’s policy and also eliminate award anomalies or punish children than parents”.
In a letter to the Law Commission up was written on Monday, VHP said the opening of the bill stated that this was a bill, among others to stabilize the population and promotion of two children.
VHP has approved both objects.
However, it has stated reservations around Section 5, 6 (2) and 7 bills, which provide incentives to civil servants and others only have one child in the family on the ground that this will run far beyond the purpose of the bill.
On the world population day on Sunday, Head of Yogi Adityanath’s head launched the state population policy in 2021-2030.
The VHP letter, which was signed by his work, Alok Kumar, said Population Policy Uttar Pradesh had the purpose of bringing total fertility (TFR) to 1.7 within a certain time limit.
“We suggest that part 5, 6 (2) and 7 of the bill as well as the object carrying TFR to 1.7 needs to be reconsidered again,” he said.
It is said that the population in society stabilizes when the average number of children born of a woman in her reproductive life (called TFR) slightly above two.
This happens when TFR is 2.1.
This level is also defined as the level of replacement.
At this TFR level, on average, there are two children born to replace two parents and 0.1 additional children provide the possibility of several children dying before reaching reproductive age and other possibilities.
The letter was posted by the VHP on his Twitter handle, said, “Therefore, the two-child policy is deemed desirable to achieve population stability.
A policy aiming at an average of less than two children per woman leads to population contractions from time to time .
Such contractions have several social and negative economic consequences.
“VHP noted that in the contract population, the ratio between age age and dependent population was disrupted.
There is an increase in the number of people who must be taken care of by each person.
“In extreme cases, one child’s policy will lead to a situation where there is only one adult adult to care for two parents and four grandparents.” Quoting Chinese cases, VHP said that the state adopted a one-child policy in 1980 and called it a 1-2-4 phenomenon.
To overcome it, China must relax the policy of one child for parents who themselves are the only child of their parents.
“It is said that in China, one child’s policy has never been applied to more than half of the prospective parents.
In about three decades, it must be fully withdrawn.” VHP also states that the only child is known to be less socially accommodating.
“This is partly because they don’t learn to share with siblings, and partly because they are too pampered and spoiled by their parents.
This has been referred to as the” small emperor “syndrome.” In the case of Uttar Pradesh, said VHP, one child’s policy tends to lead to The reality between different communities because they are known to respond differently with incentives and disincentives related to family planning and contraception.
“Imbalance has grown in several states of India.
Imbalance becomes very worrying in countries such as Assam and Kerala where the overall population growth decreases.
In both states, Hindu TPR has declined well below the level of replacement 2.1, but Muslims are Muslims.
It is 3.16 in Assam and 2.33 in Kerala.
In these countries, one of the communities has entered the other temporary contraction phase still developing, “he said.
VHP said he had to avoid it to the situation.
Policies need to be adjusted to correct imbalances if not, one child’s policy may end up doing the opposite, he said.
“Therefore, we suggest the elimination of Section 5, and a consequential section of 6 (2) and 7 to avoid population contractions as unwanted social and economic consequences of the policy of one child and also eliminate anomalies of award or punish children instead of parents,” The letter concluded that he asked the Law Commission to consider their advice.