Editing Human population planning (section)

==Modern practice by country==

===Australia===
[[Australia]] currently offers fortnightly Family Tax Benefit payments plus a free immunization scheme, and recently{{when|date=December 2023}} proposed to pay all child care costs for women who want to work.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Family Tax Benefit: Department of Social Services, Australian Government |url=https://www.dss.gov.au/families-and-children/benefits-payments/family-tax-benefit |access-date=22 June 2022 |website=www.dss.gov.au}}</ref>

===China===
{{Main|Family planning policies of China}}

====One-child era (1979–2015)====
{{Main|One-child policy}}
The most significant population planning system in the world was China's [[one-child policy]], in which, with various exceptions, having more than one child was discouraged. Unauthorized births were punished by fines, although there were also allegations of illegal forced [[abortion]]s and [[forced sterilization]].<ref name=dewey>Arthur E. Dewey, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees and Migration Testimony before the House International Relations Committee Washington, DC 14 December 2004 {{cite web |url=http://statelists.state.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0412c&L=dossdo&P=401 |title=Archived copy |access-date=31 July 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110721062432/http://statelists.state.gov/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0412c&L=dossdo&P=401 |archive-date=21 July 2011 }}</ref> As part of China's planned birth policy, (work) unit supervisors monitored the fertility of married women and may decide whose turn it is to have a baby.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd/cstdy:@field(DOCID+cn0081) |title= China : a country study|website=lcweb2.loc.gov |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130303220526/http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?frd%2Fcstdy%3A%40field%28DOCID+cn0081%29 |archive-date=3 March 2013}}</ref>

The Chinese government introduced the policy in 1978 to alleviate the social and [[Environmental issues in the People's Republic of China|environmental problems of China]].<ref>{{citation|author=Pascal Rocha da Silva|title=La politique de l'enfant unique en République Populaire de Chine|year=2006|publisher=[[Université de Genève]]|pages=22–28|url=http://www.sinoptic.ch/textes/recherche/2006/200608_Rocha.Pascal_memoire.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071128072311/http://www.sinoptic.ch/textes/recherche/2006/200608_Rocha.Pascal_memoire.pdf |archive-date= 28 November 2007}}</ref> According to government officials, the policy has helped prevent 400 million births. The success of the policy has been questioned, and reduction in fertility has also been attributed to the modernization of China.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7000931.stm | work = BBC News | title = Has China's one-child policy worked? | date = 20 September 2007 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080719103208/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7000931.stm | archive-date = 19 July 2008 }}</ref> The policy is controversial both within and outside of China because of its manner of implementation and because of concerns about negative economic and social consequences e.g. [[female infanticide]]. In Asian cultures, the oldest male child has responsibility of caring for the parents in their old age. Therefore, it is common for Asian families to invest most heavily in the oldest male child, such as providing college, steering them into the most lucrative careers, and so on. To these families, having an oldest male child is paramount, so in a one-child policy, daughters have no economic benefit, so daughters, especially as a first child, are often targeted for abortion or infanticide. China introduced several government reforms to increase retirement payments to coincide with the one-child policy. During that time, couples could request permission to have more than one child.<ref>{{cite news |first=Max |last=Fisher |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/16/chinas-rules-for-when-families-can-and-cant-have-more-than-one-child/ |title=China's rules for when families can and can't have more than one child |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=16 November 2013 |access-date=8 May 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160610152024/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/11/16/chinas-rules-for-when-families-can-and-cant-have-more-than-one-child/ |archive-date=10 June 2016 }}</ref>
[[File:China Pop Pyramid Forecast.gif|thumb|China's population distribution in 2012, 2015 and 2020]]
According to [[Tibetology|Tibetologist]] [[Melvyn Goldstein]], natalist feelings run high in China's [[Tibet Autonomous Region]], among both ordinary people and government officials. Seeing [[population control]] "as a matter of power and ethnic survival" rather than in terms of ecological [[sustainability]], Tibetans successfully argued for an exemption of [[Tibetan people]] from the usual [[family planning]] policies in China such as the [[one-child policy]].<ref>{{Cite journal | doi = 10.2307/2645246 | title = China's Birth Control Policy in the Tibet Autonomous Region| journal= [[Asian Survey]] | author1-link= Melvyn Goldstein |first1= Melvyn |last1= Goldstein |first2= Beall|last2= Cynthia|date=March 1991|volume= 31 | issue= 3| pages= 285–303| jstor = 2645246}}</ref>

==== Two-child era (2016–2021) ====
{{Main|Two-child policy}}
In November 2014, the Chinese government allowed its people to conceive a second child under the supervision of government regulation.<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-08-01/with-end-of-chinas-one-child-policy-there-hasnt-been-a-baby-boom | work=Bloomberg | title=Why China's Second-Baby Boom Might Not Happen | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306230412/http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-08-01/with-end-of-chinas-one-child-policy-there-hasnt-been-a-baby-boom | archive-date=6 March 2016 }}</ref>

On 29 October 2015, the ruling Chinese Communist Party announced that all one-child policies would be scrapped, allowing all couples to have two children. The change was needed to allow a better balance of male and female children, and to grow the young population to ease the problem of paying for the aging population. The law enacting the [[two-child policy]] took effect on 1 January 2016, and replaced the previous one-child policy.<ref>{{cite news |title= China to end one-child policy and allow two |work= BBC |date= 29 October 2015 |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-34665539 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-12-27/chinas-one-child-policy-officially-scrapped/7055834|title=China officially ends one-child policy, signing into law bill allowing married couples to have two children|publisher=[[ABC Online]]| date=27 December 2015}}</ref>

==== Three-child era (2021–) ====
{{Main|Three-child policy}}
In May 2021, the Chinese government allowed its people to conceive a third child, in a move accompanied by "supportive measures" it regarded "conducive" to improving its "population structure, fulfilling the country's strategy of actively coping with an ageing population and maintaining the advantage, endowment of human resources" after declining birth rates recorded in the [[2020 Chinese census]].<ref>{{Cite news|date=31 May 2021|title=China allows three children in major policy shift|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57303592|access-date=6 September 2021}}</ref>

===Hungary===
During the [[Second Orbán Government]], Hungary increased its family benefits spending from one of the lowest rates in the [[OECD]] to one of the highest.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://visegradinsight.eu/the-v4s-greatest-existential-threat05082014/|title=The V4's greatest existential threat|date=5 August 2014|website=Visegrad Insight}}</ref> In 2015, it amounted to nearly 4% of GDP.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.oecd.org/els/soc/PF1_1_Public_spending_on_family_benefits.pdf|title=OECD - Public spending on family benefits}}</ref>

===India===
{{Main|Family planning in India}}
Only those with two or fewer children are eligible for election to a local government.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Buch|first=Nirmala|date=2005|title=Law of Two-Child Norm in Panchayats: Implications, Consequences and Experiences|journal=Economic and Political Weekly|volume=40|issue=24|pages=2421–2429|issn=0012-9976|jstor=4416748}}</ref>

''Us two, our two'' ("Hum do, hamare do" in Hindi) is a slogan meaning ''one family, two children'' and is intended to reinforce the message of family planning thereby aiding population planning.

Facilities offered by government to its employees are limited to two children. The government offers incentives for families accepted for sterilization. Moreover, India was the first country to take measures for family planning back in 1952.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://iussp.org/sites/default/files/event_call_for_papers/IUSSP_40FP_0.pdf | title=40 YEARS OF PLANNED FAMILY PLANNING EFFORTS IN INDIA | access-date=26 June 2019 | author=Aalok Ranjan Chaurasia, Ravendra Singh | pages=1}}</ref>
{{cquote |In the south west of India lies the long narrow coastal state of Kerala. Most of its thirty-two million inhabitants live off the land and the ocean, a rich tropical ecosystem watered by two monsoons a year. It's also one of India's most crowded states – but the population is stable because nearly everybody has small families…  At the root of it all is education. Thanks to a long tradition of compulsory schooling for boys and girls Kerala has one of the highest literacy rates in the World.  Where women are well educated they tend to choose to have smaller families…  What Kerala shows is that you don't need aggressive policies or government incentives for birthrates to fall. Everywhere in the world where women have access to education and have the freedom to run their own lives, on the whole they and their partners have been choosing to have smaller families than their parents.  But reducing birthrates is very difficult to achieve without a simple piece of medical technology, contraception.||[[David Attenborough]]|[[Horizon (British TV series)|BBC ''Horizon'']] (2009)|''How Many People Can Live on Planet Earth''}}

In 2019, the [[Population Control Bill, 2019]] bill was introduced in the [[Rajya Sabha]] in July 2019 by [[Rakesh Sinha]]. The purpose of the bill is to control the population growth of India.

===Iran===
{{Main|Family planning in Iran}}
{{contradict-self|section|date=March 2017}}
{{Update|section|date=March 2017}}
After the [[Iran–Iraq War]], [[Iran]] encouraged married couples to produce as many children as possible to replace population lost to the war.<ref>{{cite web | title = 'Get back to your washing machine': Iran's ambitious women | url = http://mondediplo.com/2016/02/02iran | work = Le monde diplomatique | date = 2 February 2016 | access-date = 27 April 2016 | last = Beaugé | first = Florence | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160408082339/http://mondediplo.com/2016/02/02iran | archive-date = 8 April 2016 }}</ref>

Iran succeeded in sharply reducing its birth rate from the late 1980s to 2010.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Abbasi-Shavasi |first1=Mohammad J. |last2=McDonald |first2=Pater |title=National and Provincial-level fertility trends in Iran, 1972-2000 |journal=Working Paper in Demography |date=February 2005 |issue=94 |pages=9–10 |url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/156615121.pdf |access-date=20 February 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Iran's declining birth rate alarms country's leaders |date=30 July 2020 |url=https://www.dw.com/en/iran-birth-rate-decline/a-54371973 |access-date=22 June 2022 |website=DW.COM |language=en-GB}}</ref> Mandatory contraceptive courses are required for both males and females before a marriage license can be obtained, and the government emphasized the benefits of smaller families and the use of contraception.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update4ss.htm|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080917192303/http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update4ss.htm|url-status=dead|title=Iran's Birth Rate Plummeting at Record Pace|archivedate=17 September 2008}}</ref> This changed in 2012, when a major policy shift back towards increasing birth rates was announced. In 2014, permanent contraception and advertising of birth control were to be outlawed.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-ban-permanent-contraception-after-islamic-clerics-edict-to-increase-population-9662349.html|title=Iran bans permanent contraception in attempt to increase population|date=11 August 2014|website=independent.co.uk|access-date=9 May 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829204243/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-ban-permanent-contraception-after-islamic-clerics-edict-to-increase-population-9662349.html|archive-date=29 August 2017}}</ref>

===Israel===
In [[Israel]], [[Haredi Judaism|Haredi]] families with many children receive economic support through generous governmental child allowances, government assistance in housing young religious couples, as well as specific funds by their own community institutions.<ref>{{cite web|first=Dov|last=Friedlander|url=https://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/completingfertility/RevisedFriedlanderpaper.PDF|title=Fertility in Israel: Is the Transition to Replacement Level in Sight?|series=Completing the Fertility Transition|publisher=[[United Nations]], Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division|year=2002|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171211125436/http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/completingfertility/RevisedFriedlanderpaper.PDF|archive-date=11 December 2017}}</ref> Haredi women have an average of 6.7 children while the average Jewish Israeli woman has 3 children.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/essays/117247/israeli-women-do-it-numbers | title=Israeli women do it by the numbers | work=The Jewish Chronicle | date=7 April 2014 | access-date=20 May 2014 | first=Paul | last=Morland | url-status=live | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140521085616/http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/essays/117247/israeli-women-do-it-numbers | archive-date=21 May 2014 }}</ref>

===Japan===
[[Japan]] has experienced [[Aging of Japan|a shrinking population]] for many years.<ref name='economist-japan'>{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2014/03/japans-demography|title=Japan's demography: the incredible shrinking country|newspaper=[[The Economist]]|date=25 March 2014|access-date=25 March 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170324183812/http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2014/03/japans-demography|archive-date=24 March 2017}}</ref> The government is trying to encourage women to have children or to have more children – many Japanese women do not have children, or even remain single. The population is culturally opposed to [[immigration]]. <ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1369183X.2020.1862645|title=Views on immigration in Japan: identities, interests, and pragmatic divergence|first1=Jeremy|last1=Davison|first2=Ito|last2=and Peng|date=August 18, 2021|journal=Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies|volume=47|issue=11|pages=2578–2595|via=Taylor and Francis+NEJM|doi=10.1080/1369183X.2020.1862645}}</ref>  

Some Japanese localities, facing significant population loss, are offering economic incentives. [[Yamatsuri]], a town of 7,000 just north of [[Tokyo]], offers parents $4,600 for the birth of a child and $460 a year for 10 years.

===Myanmar===
In [[Myanmar]], the Population planning Health Care Bill requires some parents to space each child three years apart.<ref>{{cite news|url= https://apnews.com/7aa2bc05d5264653b5b969d337e89e16/myanmar-president-signs-controversial-population-law|title= Myanmar president signs off on contested population law|via= [[Associated Press]]|date= 23 May 2015}}</ref> The Economist, in 2015, stated that the measure was expected to be used against the persecuted Muslim [[Rohingyas]] minority.<ref>{{cite news |title=Rohingyas: Still in peril: Myanmar's repression of Rohingyas continues apace |url=https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21653661-myanmars-repression-rohingyas-continues-apace-still-peril |access-date=7 June 2015 |newspaper=[[The Economist]] |date=6 June 2015 |location=Singapore |quote=This measure grants local authorities the power to mandate that mothers in areas deemed to have high rates of population growth have children no fewer than three years apart. Buddhist chauvinists in Myanmar have fomented fears of high birth rates among Muslims; this measure is likely to be used against Rohingyas. |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150607020301/http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21653661-myanmars-repression-rohingyas-continues-apace-still-peril |archive-date=7 June 2015 }}</ref>

===Pakistan===
{{main|Family planning in Pakistan}}

=== Russia ===
Russian President [[Vladimir Putin]] directed Parliament in 2006 to adopt a 10-year program to stop the sharp decline in [[Russia]]'s population, principally by offering financial incentives and subsidies to encourage women to have children.<ref name='nytimes-russia'>{{cite news| url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/11/world/europe/11russia.html| title=Putin Urges Plan to Reverse Slide in the Birth Rate| work=The New York Times| first=C.J| last=Chivers| date=11 May 2006| url-status=live| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170515125939/http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/11/world/europe/11russia.html| archive-date=15 May 2017}}</ref>

=== Singapore ===
{{main|Population planning in Singapore}}

Singapore has undergone two major phases in its population planning: first to slow and reverse the [[Post-World War II baby boom|baby boom]] in the [[Post-World War II]] era; then from the 1980s onwards to encourage couples to have more children as the [[birth rate]] had fallen below the [[Sub-replacement fertility|replacement-level fertility]]. In addition, during the [[demographic transition|interim period]], [[eugenics]] policies were adopted.<ref>{{citation | url = http://www.populationasia.org/Publications/RP/AMCRP12.pdf | title = Fertility and the Family: An Overview of Pro-natalist Population Policies in Singapore | first1 = Theresa | last1 = Wong | first2 = Brenda S.A | last2 = Yeoh | series = Asian MetaCentre Research Paper Series | date = June 2003 | issue = 12 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110727182245/http://www.populationasia.org/Publications/RP/AMCRP12.pdf | archive-date = 27 July 2011 | access-date = 30 November 2013 }}</ref>

The [[anti-natalist]] policies flourished in the 1960s and 1970s: initiatives advocating small families were launched and developed into the ''Stop at Two'' programme, pushing for two-children families and promoting [[sterilisation (medicine)|sterilisation]]. In 1984, the government announced the ''Graduate Mothers' Scheme'', which favoured children of [[Population Planning in Singapore#The demographic transition and the Graduate Mothers Scheme|more well-educated mothers]];<ref>{{cite book| first =Pekka | last = Louhiala |title= Preventing intellectual disability: ethical and clinical issues |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9bb8grOsEyEC&pg=PA62|year= 2004|publisher= Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-53371-3|page= 62}}</ref> the policy was however soon abandoned due to the outcry in the [[Singapore general election, 1984|general election of the same year]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Quah|first=Jon |title= Singapore in 1984: Leadership Transition in an Election Year |journal=Asian Survey|year=1985|jstor=2644306 |doi= 10.2307/2644306 |volume= 25|issue=2 |pages=220–231 }}</ref>
Eventually, the government became [[pro-natalist]] in the late 1980s, marked by its ''Have Three or More'' plan in 1987.<ref>{{cite web |title=Singapore: Population Control Policies |url=http://www.photius.com/countries/singapore/society/singapore_society_population_control_p~11008.html |work=Country Studies |year=1989 |publisher=[[Library of Congress]] |access-date=11 August 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110411115633/http://www.photius.com/countries/singapore/society/singapore_society_population_control_p~11008.html |archive-date=11 April 2011 }}</ref> Singapore pays $3,000 for the first child, $9,000 in cash and savings for the second; and up to $18,000 each for the third and fourth.<ref name= 'nytimes-russia' />

===Spain===
In 2017, the government of Spain appointed [[Edelmira Barreira]], as "Government Commissioner facing the Demographic Challenge", in a pro-natalist attempt to reverse a negative population growth rate.<ref name='spain-independent'>{{cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/spain-sex-tsar-population-crisis-baby-parents-demographic-government-a7599091.html|title=Spain appoints 'sex tsar' in bid to boost declining population|website=The Independent|date=25 February 2017|access-date=25 March 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170326052733/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/spain-sex-tsar-population-crisis-baby-parents-demographic-government-a7599091.html|archive-date=26 March 2017}}</ref>

===Turkey===
In May 2012, [[Turkey]]'s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan argued that abortion is murder and announced that legislative preparations to severely limit the practice are underway. Erdogan also argued that abortion and [[Caesarean section|C-section deliveries]] are plots to stall Turkey's economic growth. Prior to this move, Erdogan had repeatedly demanded that each couple have at least three children.<ref>{{cite news | url = https://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/03/us-turkey-abortion-idUSBRE85207520120603 | work = Reuters | date = 3 June 2012 | type = article | title = US, Turkey: abortion | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150102120545/http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/03/us-turkey-abortion-idUSBRE85207520120603 | archive-date = 2 January 2015 }}</ref>

===United States===
{{Main|Family planning in the United States}}
Enacted in 1970, [[Title X]] of the [[Public Health Service Act]] provides access to contraceptive services, supplies and information to those in need. Priority for services is given to people with low incomes. The Title X Family Planning program is administered through the [[Office of Population Affairs]] under the Office of Public Health and Science.
It is directed by the [[Office of Population Affairs#Office of Family Planning|Office of Family Planning]].<ref name="pop">{{cite web|url=http://opa.osophs.dhhs.gov/titlex/ofp.html |title=Office of Population Affairs|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071019032539/http://opa.osophs.dhhs.gov/titlex/ofp.html |archive-date=19 October 2007 }}</ref> In 2007, Congress appropriated roughly $283 million for family planning under Title X, at least 90 percent of which was used for services in family planning clinics.<ref name="pop" /> Title X is a vital source of funding for family planning clinics throughout the nation,<ref name="pp">{{cite web|url=http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news-articles-press/politics-policy-issues/birth-control-access-prevention/family-planning-6553.htm|title=Newsroom and Media Kit - Planned Parenthood|website=www.plannedparenthood.org|access-date=9 May 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071208000810/http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news-articles-press/politics-policy-issues/birth-control-access-prevention/family-planning-6553.htm|archive-date=8 December 2007}}</ref> which provide reproductive health care, including abortion.

The education and services supplied by the Title X-funded clinics support young individuals and low-income families. The goals of developing healthy families are accomplished by helping individuals and couples decide whether to have children and when the appropriate time to do so would be.<ref name="pp" />

Title X has made the prevention of [[unintended pregnancies]] possible.<ref name="pp" /> It has allowed millions of American women to receive necessary reproductive health care, plan their pregnancies and prevent abortions. Title X is dedicated exclusively to funding family planning and reproductive health care services.<ref name="pop" />

Title X as a percentage of total public funding to family planning client services has steadily declined from 44% of total expenditures in 1980 to 12% in 2006. Medicaid has increased from 20% to 71% in the same time. In 2006, Medicaid contributed $1.3 billion to public family planning.<ref>{{Cite web | last1 = Sonfield | first1 = Adam | last2 = Alrich | first2 = Casey | last3 = Gold | first3 = Rachel Benson | title = Public Funding for Family Planning, Sterilization and Abortion Services, FY 1980–2006 | url = https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/pubs/2008/01/28/or38.pdf | series = Occasional Report | place = New York | publisher = Guttmacher Institute | year = 2008 | number = 38 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170910082729/https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/pubs/2008/01/28/or38.pdf | archive-date = 10 September 2017 }}</ref>

In the early 1970s, the United States Congress established the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future (Chairman [[John D. Rockefeller III]]), which was created to provide recommendations regarding population growth and its social consequences. The Commission submitted its final recommendations in 1972, which included promoting contraceptives and liberalizing abortion regulations, for example.<ref>{{Cite book|date=1972|title=Population and the American future; the report. United States.|url=https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015007261855|via=HathiTrust Digital Library|publisher=Washington|hdl=2027/mdp.39015007261855}}</ref>

====Natalism in the United States====
In a 2004 [[editorial]] in ''[[The New York Times]]'', [[David Brooks (journalist)|David Brooks]] expressed the opinion that the relatively high birth rate of the United States in comparison to Europe could be attributed to social groups with "natalist" attitudes.<ref>{{Citation | url = https://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07brooks.html?ex=1260162000&en=ebdde83f03fe6d2e&ei=5090 | title = The New Red-Diaper Babies | first = David | last = Brooks | newspaper = The New York Times | access-date = 21 January 2006 | date = 7 December 2004 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20070311175027/http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/07/opinion/07brooks.html?ex=1260162000&en=ebdde83f03fe6d2e&ei=5090 | archive-date = 11 March 2007 }}.</ref> The article is referred to in an analysis of the [[Quiverfull]] movement.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.thenation.com/article/arrows-war | newspaper = The Nation | date = 27 November 2006 | first = Kathryn | last = Joyce | title = Arrows for the War | access-date = 10 March 2015 | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150320060132/http://www.thenation.com/article/arrows-war | archive-date = 20 March 2015 }}.</ref> However, the figures identified for the demographic are extremely low.

Former US Senator [[Rick Santorum]] made natalism part of his platform for his [[Rick Santorum presidential campaign, 2012|2012 presidential campaign]].<ref name="santorum">{{cite web |url= http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/01/santorum-more-babies-please-110897.html |first= Seung Min |last= Kim |website= Politico |date= 15 January 2012 |title= Santorum: More babies, please! |url-status= live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120118215636/http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2012/01/santorum-more-babies-please-110897.html |archive-date= 18 January 2012 }}</ref>   Many of those categorized in the General Social Survey as "Fundamentalist Protestant" are more or less natalist, and have a higher birth rate than "Moderate" and "Liberal" Protestants.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=McKeown |first1=John |title=Receptions of Israelite Nation-building: Modern Protestant Natalism and Martin Luther |journal=Dialog |date=14 June 2010 |volume=49 |issue=2 |pages=133–140 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6385.2010.00517.x |hdl=10034/254540 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> However, Rick Santorum is not a Protestant but a practicing Catholic.

===Uzbekistan===
{{Main|Compulsory_sterilization#Uzbekistan|l1=Compulsory sterilization in Uzbekistan}}
It is reported that [[Uzbekistan]] has been pursuing a policy of forced sterilizations, hysterectomies and IUD insertions since the late 1990s in order to impose population planning.<ref name=iwpr-2005-11-18>{{cite web|url=http://iwpr.net/report-news/birth-control-decree-uzbekistan |title=Birth Control by Decree in Uzbekistan|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131019132115/http://iwpr.net/report-news/birth-control-decree-uzbekistan |archive-date=19 October 2013 |publisher=[[Institute for War and Peace Reporting|IWPR Institute for War & Peace Reporting]]|date=18 November 2005}}</ref><ref name=bbc-news-2012-04-12>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17612550|title=BBC News: Uzbekistan's policy of secretly sterilising women|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150405112247/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17612550 |archive-date=5 April 2015 |publisher=[[BBC]]|date=12 April 2012}}</ref><ref name=bbc-cc-2012-04-12>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01fjx63|title=Crossing Continents: Forced Sterilisation in Uzbekistan|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160903195248/http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01fjx63 |archive-date=3 September 2016|publisher=[[BBC]]|date=12 April 2012}}</ref><ref name=moscow-2010-03-10>{{cite web|url=http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/uzbeks-face-forced-sterilization/401279.html|title=Uzbeks Face Forced Sterilization|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131019203218/http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/uzbeks-face-forced-sterilization/401279.html |archive-date=19 October 2013 |publisher=[[The Moscow Times]]|date=10 March 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/ngos/omctuzbekistan39.pdf|title=Shadow Report: UN Committee Against Torture|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141109020604/http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/ngos/omctuzbekistan39.pdf |archive-date=9 November 2014 |publisher=[[United Nations]], authors Rapid Response Group and OMCT|date=November 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Antelava |first=Natalia |date=12 April 2012 |title=Uzbekistan's policy of secretly sterilising women |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17612550 |newspaper=BBC World Service |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150302071400/http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17612550 |archive-date=2 March 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Antelava |first=Natalia |date=12 April 2012 |title=Uzbekistan's policy of secretly sterilising women |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17612550 |newspaper=BBC World Service |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150405112247/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17612550 |archive-date=5 April 2015 }}</ref>