Nearly 9,000 more people died than were born in Taiwan in the first half of this year, Ministry of the Interior statistics show, signifying that the nation is entering a stage of negative population growth. The situation is especially severe in urban areas.
The total number of births in Taipei this year is expected to fall below 20,000, which would be the lowest in the past decade. The falling birthrate is a national security problem that keeps getting worse and shows no sign of improvement.
The low birthrate among young people is most commonly blamed on economic and social factors, namely that young people have to bear a heavy economic burden and are too busy trying to make ends meet to think about raising children.
Another view blames social and generational changes, saying that young people would rather lead a life of freedom and leisure as “DINKs” (dual income, no kids), rather than be tied down by children.
Given this situation, the central and local governments provide maternity bonuses and child-rearing allowances in the hope of encouraging people to have children.
However, the existing monthly child-rearing allowance from the central government — NT$2,500 for children from birth to five years old — and the maternity allowances given out by local governments — the highest being in Taoyuan, which pays a childbirth bonus of NT$30,000 per child and a monthly childcare allowance of NT$3,000 for children under three years old — are a drop in the ocean compared with the money and effort needed to raise a child into a useful member of society.
Young people will definitely not have children just to collect the allowances, which are better than nothing, but not more than that.
Physiological problems are another reason for the low birthrate. Factors such as environmental hormones and work-related stress have pushed the prevalence of infertility in Taiwan up to nearly 15 percent.
The fact that the US Centers for Disease Control views infertility as a public health issue shows that this problem is not confined to Taiwan.
Although there have been breakthroughs in assisted reproductive technology (ART), women who use it still have to endure dozens of doses of ovulation stimulants, the collection of eggs under general anesthesia and the implantation of fertilized eggs.
After all of that, couples still only have a 40 percent chance of becoming pregnant. This whole process causes considerable physical discomfort and psychological pressure.
Because medical insurance contracts specify that there is no payout for ART and there is no subsidy for it under the National Health Insurance system, couples can easily spend several hundred thousand New Taiwan dollars for a course of treatment, which is a heavy economic burden for most of them.
There are many infertile couples who long to have children. Many of them spend large amounts of money as they race against time to become parents.
If the government could consider providing partial subsidies for fertility treatment, it would be like manna from heaven for those couples — and it could give Taiwan’s birthrate a much-needed boost.
Fan Shuo-ming is a senior administrative specialist at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the
RSS