The two major players in population reduction policies are the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the United Nations Population Fund UNFPA.
It is particularly instructive to look back at the policies promoted by these organisations as far back as the late 1960's and early 1970's and to look at the current state of the world in which we now live. One such document, authored in 1969 by the then Vice President of Planned Parenthood/World Population, Frederick S. Jaffe who was at the time making proposals specifically for the US, nevertheless while the document may not have been fully implemented in every respect we can all recognise that the policies are now being promoted on a global scale and in some cases more so than others. The document is titled "Examples of Proposed Measures to Reduce U.S. Fertility, by Universality or Selectivity of Impact" and it was sent by Jaffe as a Memorandum to Bernard Berelson (President, Population Council).
View a PDF of the document here...
This is due to the fact that people's fertility is reduced, as well as the fact that the aged are living longer. The resulting slowdown in the growth of the number of children coupled with the steady increase in the number of older persons" has deeply impacted the balance of society.
There is a definite connection between these alarming population rates and the rapid spread of abortion and sterilization in the past century. The promoters of abortion, often with population control ideologies, have sought and acheived the support of almost every government and state agency in the world. This has allowed them to push their agenda on every facet of life.
Anti-family measures have dis-encouraged people from getting married and having a family. Men and women are delaying marriage, making it less likely that they'll have more than one or two children. Today in the West, almost one in two marriages ends in divorce. The children of divorce are less likely to marry and form families themselves.
More married women are putting off having children for careers. After 35, it becomes progressively harder for women to conceive.
The news and entertainment industry tell young adults that satisfaction comes from careers, romance, travel and personal growth - not from having children. The culture's message is live-for-the moment and primarily for yourself, with no sense of obligation to generations past or concern for those in the future.
Modernity and government policies works against family life and in favour of singleness and small families or voluntary childlessness.
Deliberate government policy backed by advertising and enforcement has added to the population crisis. Take the case of Singapore where government officials, concerned about overpopulation, promoted a two-child policy with highly visible posters and billboards advertising the "Stop at Two" campaign. In addition to the ubiquitous propaganda posters, the Singaporean government imposed sanctions on families who had more than the recommended two children – including fines, reduced priority for government housing, and limiting third and later offspring to bottom-tier schools.
The "Stop at Two" campaign was so effective in Singapore that the birth rate fell from 4.3 children per family in 1973 to just 1.44 by 1987. But by that point, the government realized it had gone too far. Faced with a dwindling and aging population, they turned their campaign around, printing new propaganda posters urging couples to “Have three or more (if you can afford it)!”
But the damage was done. Many women of childbearing age had already been sterilized, fearing government reprisal should they become pregnant a third time. Meanwhile, their daughters were growing up in a culture that no longer valued large families; in fact, they had been taught to fear them. Today in Singapore, the birth rate is only 1.2 per family, far short of replacement rate.
The campaign by the government led by Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, was ruthless. In the 1970s, Lee's government legalized abortion, offered cash incentives for sterilization, and began a campaign of institutional discrimination against larger families. Workers in the public sector were denied maternity leave after their second child, and hospitals were required to increase their fees for each additional child after the second. Income tax deductions were only given for the first two children, and large families were given less desirable public housing.
Even children were penalized under the system, with a couple's third, fourth or later child being given lower priority in schools and top placement being reserved for first or second children of parents who had been sterilized before the age of 40.
Gynecologist Paul Tan told Singaporean journalist Mavis Toh that the school placement policy made the difference. “That was when people stopped reproducing,” he said. Tan recalled that sterilization rates “went sky-high,” with doctors at his hospital performing up to nine procedures a day.
In INDIA, a similar slogan, "Us two, our two" (Hum do, hamare in Hindi), reminds families that for each couple, the government believes there should be only two children. Couples who have more than two children are ineligible to run for local public office, and those who work for the government are denied employee housing if they have more than two children. The nation’s birth rate has fallen from 5.7 per family in 1966 to 2.7 per family – roughly replacement rate in a developing nation like India – as of 2009. Birth rates in many states within the country have actually fallen below replacement levels.
In 2010, India came under fire for its policy of providing financial incentives for sterilization operations in an effort to meet the “Millennium Development Goals” set for them by the United Nations, which demands that India reduce its birth rate to 2 children per mother by 2015. Presently, a full 37% of India’s female population has undergone sterilization, and 1% of the male population has undergone vasectomies. Critics warn that the procedures are often done in unsanitary conditions, with many women dying during the operation, and that women who are sterilized early in life are at increased risk for gynecological health problems.
In November 2014, it was reported that as part of a mass, government-run sterilization program, eight Indian women had died and 20 others were in critical condition after undergoing surgeries to help slow the country’s population growth.
The Blaze online news service reported the below suggesting that coercion was used in persuading poverty stricken women to undergo sterilisations.
While India’s central government stopped setting targets for sterilizing women in the 1990s, activists such as Brinda Karat of the All India Democratic Women’s Association say state governments still set sterilization quotas that lead health authorities to pressure patients into surgery rather than advising them on other forms of contraception.
Jagmati Sangwan, general secretary of the organization, wrote on the group’s Facebook page that it would be staging a protest over the “deep shock and outrage” felt over the “family planning camp’s” issues.
“These women have become victims because of the target-based approach to population control,” Karat told reporters Tuesday, while demanding that the state’s health minister resign.
It was reported in late 2014, by LifeSiteNews, that Kenya’s Catholic bishops are charging two United Nations organizations with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus inoculation program sponsored by the Kenyan government.
According to a statement released Tuesday by the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, the organization has found an antigen that causes miscarriages in a vaccine being administered to 2.3 million girls and women by the World Health Organization and UNICEF.
“We sent six samples from around Kenya to laboratories in South Africa. They tested positive for the HCG antigen,” Dr. Muhame Ngare of the Mercy Medical Centre in Nairobi told LifeSiteNews. “They were all laced with HCG.”