Taiwan’s low birthrate is no longer an abstract statistical concern, but an unfolding structural crisis. Demographic dividends — economic growth driven by a large working population — are fast evaporating. With compounding effects, the trend is set to exert long-term and potentially irreversible pressure on state governance, industrial competitiveness, social security and intergenerational support systems.
The issue has also drawn international attention, with technology leaders repeatedly warning of the fundamental threat that declining birthrates pose to a nation’s future.
Neither the government nor society can afford to sit back or avoid the issue amid such urgency. Much like national defense, there are many policy decisions to be made that, if delayed, would only come at a higher cost further down the road.
To address low fertility seriously, policy thinking must simultaneously focus on reducing the costs associated with having children and substantially increasing access to reproductive health services. The former involves lowering the economic, caregiving and career burdens borne by individuals during childrearing.
However, this article focuses on the latter — an issue that has long been neglected.
In reality, there are many who are willing to become parents and capable of raising children responsibly, yet are unable to conceive through traditional means. “Traditional” here refers to natural conception through sexual intercourse within a heterosexual marriage. Surrogacy legislation is designed precisely to respond to these genuine yet institutionally marginalized reproductive needs. Any form of reproduction that departs from traditional family models is often scrutinized, and questioned on matters of ethics and social consensus. This raises a fundamental question: Should something that is different, uncommon or new be automatically subjected to moral judgement?
History shows that many rights and institutions now taken for granted were once labeled “unnatural” or “ethically problematic” when they first emerged. It is the responsibility of law and public policy not to conform to entrenched prejudices, but to respond mindfully to legitimate human needs and design well-regulated and transparent systems to serve them. Choosing inaction simply because something feels unfamiliar is not a sign of mature governance.
From a constitutional perspective, reproductive freedom, human dignity and fundamental rights are deserving of robust protection. As long as there are no violations of the rights of others or public order, the state should not impose a single “normal” family model to restrict people’s ability to become parents. Allowing people to have children through means such as surrogacy does not negate traditional families; rather, it acknowledges the legitimacy of diverse life choices.
Opponents to surrogacy programs frequently invoke the “best interests of the child.”
However, a simple truth must be acknowledged: Children raised within traditional family structures are not inherently healthier or happier, nor are children raised in nontraditional families necessarily disadvantaged. What is important is that a child receives stable care, love and commitment — the gender composition of their parents or the method of conception are secondary. Holding up one single family structure as the ideal standard is baseless and ignores the diversity of real-world society.
The international reality is that many countries recognized for their commitment to human rights and the rule of law have long permitted surrogacy under a closely regulated system. This is a response to individual needs and also part of an emerging recognition of surrogacy as a necessary component of the population policy toolkit.
If the government is sincere about addressing low fertility, continuing to postpone surrogacy legislation indefinitely is no longer tenable. Instead, it should be brought under rational public debate, institutional planning and democratic supervision.
Hopefully, single adult men and women will, in the near future, be able to realize their aspirations of parenthood through surrogacy within a sound legal framework and human rights protections. Unless a particular reproductive method clearly violates human rights or public morals, the state and society should approach it with cautious recognition rather than instinctive rejection. Only by doing so can Taiwan build a truly healthy and sustainable future.
Tsai Yu-te is a cross-border governance consultant and founder of Governance Edge.
Translated by Gilda Knox Streader
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