Some governments say how many children a family can here in their country. They may control the number of children someone has through taxes. It is sometimes necessary and right for a government to control the population in this way. v.2

It is certainly very understandable that some government should start looking at ways of limiting their population to sustainable figure. In the past, populations were partly regulated by frequent war and widespread disease. But in recent years the effects of those factors have been diminished. Country can be faced with a population that is growing much faster than she nations food resources or employment opportunities and whose members can be condemned to poverty by the need to feed extra mouths. They identify population control as a means living standards. But how should it be achieved? Clearly, this whole area is a very delicate personal and cultural issue. Many people feel that this is not a matter for the state. They feel this is one area of life where they have the right to make decision for themselves. For that reason, it would seem that the best approach would be to work by persuasion rather than compulsion. This could be done by a process of education that points out the way a smaller family can mean am improved quality of life for the family members, as well as less strain on the country perhaps very limited resource. This is the preferred way. Of course, if this does not succeeded within a reasonable time scale, it may be necessary to consider other measures. Such as tax incentives or child benefit payments for small families only. These are midway between persuasion and compulsion. So yes, it is sometimes necessary, but governments should try very hard to persuade first. They should also remember that is very delicated area indeed and that social engineering can create as many problems as it solves? ?