Two-child families —“or else”

Press, Volume CXIII, Issue 33121, 11 January 1973, Page 5

Two-child families —“or else”

The time has come when the number of children born in a family will profoundly affect the future of New Zealand, according to Dr Beatrice Tinsley, a member of the Texas branch of the Zero Population Growth Organisation. New Zealand should wake up to the fact that even though it is selfcontained and isolated, it is not immune from the problems of other populations, she says. “Young couples must realise that their children’s future will be much better and more protected if they only have two of a family.” she said in Christchurch yesterday. Dr Beatrice Tinsley and( her husband. Dr Brian Tins-1 ley (both graduates of the University of Canterbury), have two young children and: do not intend to have more. If the world population: crisis “gets bad enough,”! Governments might have to limit the size of families by! law, she said. It was the aim of Zero Population Growth to prevent any such extreme measure becoming necessary by promoting voluntary limits on family sizes. Another objective of the i organisation was to help ■ women avoid giving birth to unwanted children — a tragedy for the children as well as being unnecessary for the population, she said. Abortion, adoption Z.P.G. supports the availability of all methods of birth control, including sterilisation and abortion on request. It encourages couples to adopt children if they particularly want more than two, which helps find homes for: children born out of wedlock.! “In all our work we get ex-( cellent co-operation from' Planned Parenthood (family

? planning) groups in the |' United States.” she said. Zero Population Grown ' branches had been formed in--1 must Western countries, she , ’said. A Z.P.G. committee was »I set up recently in Auckland.' (•! Dr Tinsley, who has a 1 (Ph.D. in astronomy from the U University of Texas, Austin, I j is a theoretical astrophysicist at the University of Texas. Dallas. Since settling in Dallas in 1963 with her husband ■ she has become deeply disturbed by the problems of I population growth in the' I United States, with its concomitant depletion of nature 1 resources, increase in! pollution, decay of the urban i environment, over-burdening - of beauty spots and other ij social and environmental ills.! : She joined Z.P.G. which, she ; said, has been verv successful i in educationing the public to awareness of these problems 1( and in starting legislative and' .(legal action to curb them. I Social effects 1 ■ , As a fiew Zealander her-: J self, Dr Tinsley, formerly ! I Miss Beatrice Hill, said she I (hoped the people of this! J country would come to real-! ] ise soon that the time had! passed when they could ’ choose the size of their fami- ; lies without considering ' social consequences. “My reason for saying this is that the future of New : Zealand, as in the United ’ States, will depend very much 1 on population growth.' If par- ’ ents have two children, on I an average, to replace them. 5 the population will stabilise in the long run: An average of three children increases each generation by 50 per cent.” In the United States the 1 detrimental effects of overpopulation were already ob- • vious. she said. A commission: ’ set up by President Nixon to j study the nation’s population I • growth came to the strong; 'conclusion that the United - ■(States did not need any more! ’(people. It made many recom-i (imendations for necessary (changes in social and medical ; attitudes and policies which! (Would bring about stabilisa-; tion. , The United States had; I serious problems of water (and air pollution, the disposal I (of solid wastes in cities and ■ severe overcrowding in nat- . tional parks and “wilder- . nesses,” as well as in the . cities. The high crime rate 1 : was also partly the result of 1 II over-population in the cities. 1 “If you stabilise a popula- ' tion you do not automatically i solve" these problems, but un- ! less you do stabilise it there ( cannot be any long-term solu- i Jtions,” she said. “Control is ( -essential.” 1 “Still time” j In New Zealand the prob- ( lems were not as bad as in 1 the United States and it was not too late for restrictive ’ measures. ; ! “Coming from New Zea- I land and seeing how the ; United States has been spoilt, : ( I feel it would be terrible to (see New Zealand go the same i | way. There is still time to ; ! P reserve the beauty of the <

; country and the lovely wav iof life.” ", It is six years since Dr ■Tinsley last visited New Zealand and on a recent South Island tour she observed increased air pollution through: increased traffic and industrialisation. and the sprawl of suburban housing over what used to be farmlands. "AH this is a direct result of population growth,” she said. "I cannot see what New Zealand would gain by hav-; ing a larger population, though it is said that the economy needs more people — a fairly standard economic) theory.” Grovlli fallacy More and more American: 'economists, studying the economy of a “steady state”: society — constant population and constant capital investment — advocated the use of irreplaceable natural resources at the slowest pos- : sible rate, she said. “Any country that cares | about its future must re-org-anise its thinking in these I ‘steady state’ terms, other-; I wise irreplaceables, such as I (oil, will be swallowed up: I within a few decades.” In i (Texas, for instance, the sup-; ply of natural gas was being curtailed to industrial users as it was in danger of running out, and natural gas might have to be imported to Texas within 10 years — at a much higher cost to the; consumer. What can New Zealanders themselves do about preserving their country from these social and environmental Ills'? Dr Tinsley’s reply came back to her main theme — the restriction of families to two children. “Zero Population Growth I