Contributors
Viewpoints from various contributors to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. Updated when available.
Thursday, September 30, 1999
Population growth is crowding out the future
The human population will pass the six billion mark on Oct. 12. So what's the problem? you might ask. There was a big deal about this in the 1970's, but we haven't heard much about it lately. In fact, the percentage increase in world population growth has decreased and some countries are worried that an aging population without sufficient children being born will disrupt their economies.
Actually there is a great deal to be concerned about. Anyone older than 40 has seen unprecedented population growth with the world's population doubling from 3 to 6 billion. This represents the addition of almost 1 billion people every 12 years. Even at our present lower growth rates, we will add 80 million people per year or almost 1 billion in the same 12 year period. There are countries, notably Japan and in Western Europe, where both deaths and births have decreased such that their population growth is near zero (slightly negative or positive). This could cause economic dislocations due to an aging population, but such problems, while difficult, can be handled. They will not lead to ecological collapse and loss of the "free" services the earth supplies such as clean air, fresh water, and food.
Other countries-Afghanistan, Egypt, and India-are growing rapidly and have only a few short years to shift to smaller families and achieve the population stability of much of Western Europe. The alternative is the self-reinforcing cycles of high death rates, high birth rates, and the breakdown of economic and social structures caused by mounting population pressures and environmental collapse. Unfortunately, these are ultimately the only two alternatives-either countries reach population stability or they move back to the dark ages. A tragic example of the latter possibility is Aids-ravaged Zimbabwe. Primarily due to Aids, the average life expectancy in Zimbabwe has decreased from about 61 to 38 during the 1990s. Zimbabwe may be the first country to make this tragic, backward transition.
So you ask, what does this have to do with me? Population growth is a problem in far countries that have little to do with the United States. But we have our own population pressures caused mainly by our tremendous use of resources. Our growth rate is somewhat below the world average, but our consumption is the highest in the world. This means a baby born in the US will consume some 20 times more resources than a baby born in India or more than 100 times that of a baby born in Ethiopia.
So what can be done? To the extent possible, it is necessary to eliminate unintended pregnancy. Raising the education levels and status of women leads to smaller family sizes as women find they have more options. This education is necessary in the US since approximately one-third of all births are to unwed mothers (most are presumably unintended). Sadly, we as a nation are quite reluctant to provide aid for either education or voluntary family planning.
For many in the US there is a strongly held view that the only sex education required is: "just say no". While this is certainly an ideal, it is unrealistic in our media and sex-drenched society. It is much more realistic to accept the fact that tens will, unfortunately, be sexually active, so we need to educate accordingly. Without this education, unintended pregnancies to unwed mothers is the inevitable result. Oddly, those that are the least willing to provide sex education tend to be the least willing to provide support for those unintended children. In another paradoxical twist, our largely male dominated society is willing to provide insurance coverage for viagra, but not birth controls pills. Go figure.
At the population conference in Cairo in 1994, the industrial world agreed to supply one-third of the funds necessary for providing quality reproductive health services to developing nations. The United States has seriously reneged on its commitment. The US Congress has been extremely reluctant to supply the funds necessary for international voluntary family planning. This is largely due to the fear that the funds will be used for abortion, even though the US has not allowed funds to be used this way for some time. Some Members of Congress have taken the point almost to fanaticism by attempting to withhold funds if health care officials in other countries even suggest abortion is an option. It should be absolutely obvious that intended pregnancies are not terminated by abortion. Therefore, it should be just as obvious that voluntary family planning, will lead to fewer, not more abortions.
Finally, about one-third of the US population growth is due to immigration, legal and otherwise. Our approach to family planning assistance abroad will do nothing but exacerbate this problem. Try as we might, we will not be able to secure our borders against people who have no options in their homeland. Helping people to avoid unintended pregnancy is more humane and will help insure that we do not destroy the planet which has given us life.
We in Texas have a big role to play. A lot of our citizens seem to hold views which deep them from supporting sex education and contraception services. Accordingly, we elect public servants who hold the same views. If we are to be part of any realistic solution to the challenges represented by the day of six billion, we need to change these attitudes and those of our elected officials. Today is not too soon to start-we are already late.
(Jerry D. Unruh of Corpus Christi is a research chemist for a major chemical company. He has a Ph.d. in organic chemistry from Oregon State University. He has actively followed world population problems for several years.)
