This has bothered me for ages.
Poor countries like etheopia and other parts of the world.
We see the begging adverts on tv to give them money for water medicine etc.But i know if i was so poor i would'nt keep popping kids out every 9 months if I couldn't provide for them.They do that why?
Instead of sending them food why dont we provide them contreception instead?
2006-07-15 05:27:50 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Could not agree more, they need to be educated on the facts and then they might be able to help themselves and will not need money from every other country..
2006-07-15 05:33:54 · answer #1 · answered by Bob The Builder 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
My thoughts exactly, instead of (or as well as) giving money for water etc. give the women and the men an injection that lasts to stop them getting pregnant.
I don't know how they have the energy to do it in the first place.
A break from having kids for a good many years would mean there would be more food and water for them.
And their government isn't so poor.
2006-07-15 15:02:32 · answer #2 · answered by Jayne 2 (LMHJJ) 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Side effect of evolution. Animals that have many young fatality's make up for this by having more children. For example I watched a dog have 12 puppies the other week, it did this because not all of them lived (only 8 survived over two weeks). So because of the high number of deaths in these countries, the people have larger numbers of children to increase the chance that at least one of them will survive.
Evolution has always worked in this way, look at insects for example, they have hundreds of young because they don`t live long and a large number will die.
2006-07-15 12:34:34 · answer #3 · answered by MARTIN B 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They need information about contraception. These are very poor uneducated people who lack the basic necessities of life. Keep in mind that there is a high infant mortality rate in these countries so they have several children in hopes that some will survive. They also need children to work the fields and to take care of them in their old age. Their customs are totally different from ours and their government cannot help them.
2006-07-15 12:34:12 · answer #4 · answered by notyou311 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way to distribute it or get the men of the county to use condoms
Most women do no have the education or sense to use it.
Some times it against the local religion or the wishes of her family.
We don’t need to send them money. What we need to do is help then learn to farm, fish, hunt and govern them selves.
Give a man a fish he can eat for a day, teach a man to fish he can eat for a life time.
2006-07-15 13:24:52 · answer #5 · answered by Ryce Queen 13 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Poor countries are not the only guilty ones.
Here in the UK, where contraception is freely available,we have enormous numbers of young mothers knocking out children that they would be unable to support without the welfare system.
The quickest way to cut down here would be to not pay any sort of benefits to women who get themselves pregnant,so as not to be prejudiced any boy/man who fathered such a child should also not receive any welfare help
2006-07-15 12:51:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is part of the policy of the present administration in Washington DC to not provide monetary assistance to foreign countries for the purpose of population control. It is contrary to the family values of the evangelical right wing that people should enjoy recreational sex, and so in many cases in the poorer countries of the world only pro-creational sex is available. Just my opinion but we seem to prefer using violence and war as a means of controlling excess populations.
2006-07-15 12:42:55 · answer #7 · answered by colin d 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The traditional reason I was given is that they need to have a family to provide them with stability later in life, if your life expectancy is less than 50 years old and you know that your children might not live then you make sure that you hedge your bets and have more children.
It's not really possible to judge what is going through the minds of people in these areas, we simply are not in that position.
One thing I have noticed in my travels through Africa and elsewhere is that people are hopeful and have faith in whatever their god is to carry them though. They don't want to starve and they do everything they can to avoid it.
2006-07-16 11:59:39 · answer #8 · answered by INFOPOTAMUS 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The religious nuts step in and protest the birth control methods.
It is almost like they are animals, living like animals.
I agree with you. They need to stop populating and set their concerns for a better life in which they can live.
I don't want to hear that they are too poor. Poor or rich, doesn't give you a reason for stupidity.
Live within your means.
2006-07-15 12:32:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suppose they have large families because they want people to look after them when they get old or sick, and they are not educated enough in contraception. I agree with you that this problem needs to be addressed, however, i think the biggest crisis at the moment is AID's, and we need to put as much as possible into finding cures, comfort and preventatives for AID sufferers.
2006-07-16 15:59:37 · answer #10 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good point! But with underdeveloped countries like the ones you mentioned you have to remember that it isn't just food production that is underdeveloped. Plus if you add religious attitudes, political corruption, no or very little education, into the mix it can get even more complicated. I don't doubt your suggestion would help, but it is easy to over simplify complicated situations.
2006-07-15 12:38:38 · answer #11 · answered by linkus86 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋