What is the most ethical approach to stop overpopulation?

Question

I have often wondered about this especially after reading a book that predicted that by 2600 everyone would be standing sholder to shoulder with someone else.

Answer 1

ethical methods to change a biological drive are futile.

Answer 2

I should point out, that currently the world is not overpopulated, this issue isn't the lack of resources such as food, it is the unequal distribution of them, which is why we have an obesity problem in some parts of the world and starvation in the other.

You might be interested in reading the writings of Malthus, and his critics and supporters on the subject, they believed that when population reached critical points, that war, plague and starvation would resolve the issue. There are those however, that believe that necessity is the mother of invention, and that when that time comes we will simply find a way to cope.

To answer your question, I don't know what to offer except for the standard "education" answer. Heavy handed Government schemes tend to have unfortunate side effects (like the Chinese one child policy) so the answer is to teach people to make the decisions themselves on whether they want children and have the options to prevent it (which is why the catholic church isnt helping the problem with its stance on condoms and such like)

Answer 3

Overpopulation is not a problem in the developed country, our birth rates are low enough that our populations are already declining, Chavs included.

It's the religious nuts of the developing world that are spawning like mad. The emancipation of women is probably the most crucial thing. Educated women with the freedom to control their own reproduction have fewer kids. But at the moment they are just breeding machines that aren't allowed to say 'no' to their husbands, or buy condoms.

I think Lokidrew? had a reasonable point. We could pay the really stupid or criminal chavs to NOT have kids. Say 10k for each sterilisation. The crime rate in 20 years would halve.

Answer 4

I have tried to overcome the natural urge to reproduce, pass on my genes and my family name. I do not let myself get emotionally blackmailed into giving to charities such as Christian Children Fund. These schemes only make matters worse. Providing food, cloths, shelter and education for a poor child in Brazil may sound like a noble act but the long term consciences are anything but positive. The education these children will receive are very likely accompanied with sermons against birth control and other methods of family planning which will lead to them having more children when they grow up.
Even if these ideologies are not taught to the children as they are being fed, the result of keeping a maximum number of children alive in places like Biafra will be more stress on already stretched resources. Before trying to make ourselves feel good by going to poor places and “help” the poor people living there, we need to think a little more and be a little less emotional. Start helping the community by teaching them ways to have less children then start saving their offspring from dieing of preventable illnesses.
What can we do? I suggest starting a fund and using the money to pay people in poor countries 3 months wages in exchange for them to get fixed. In places where people live on $1, $2 or $3 per day, that will not amount to much money but it will make a difference in their lives both short and long term.

Answer 5

Limit all couples to one child, like China.
That is the only way. How else are we going to do it?
There are women where I live spurting out babies like there's no tomorrow. 2,3,4 kids and still getting pregnant. It makes me sick, and it makes me view pregnancy as something other than what it is and should be - a miracle.
Where I live it is fashion, and it's grotesque.

Also, with only one child per family, people will HAVE to socialise, so it will force weirdos like the welsh to actually let their kids play with others!!
Seriously, if people allowed kids to socialise, they wouldn't be lonely. Childcare for working mothers would be less of an ordeal too, with only one to think of. So mothers could care for the kid themelves in it's early years, and return to work flexi time when it's in school.
3 problems solved in one go. Over popluation, lack of social skills, and childcare/working mothers. A fourth is the yob problem, with one kid being cared for better than 3, will create potentailly 3 fewer yobs - at worst 2 fewer.

Answer 6

People who believe the world is overpopulated have a low regard for humanity. They believe that humans are a burden to society, instead of an asset.
If everyone contributes to society, society as a whole is better off. The perceived overpopulation is because of lack of education, and because of governments who introduce policies that reward laziness in the name of humanity.

Answer 7

is it even ethical to ( think) we have the right to limit how many children someone has . ma-be out law sex,,,make it illegal to consummate a relationship. then to reproduce you must go to doctor that implants 1 egg ... adds the magic ingredient and walla a perfect lab baby....then our government will have the power to eradicate all forms of disease's from the beginning , they will be able to choose race, color of hair ,even what color the eyes will be .but then we would have those that hide their ( natural children ) in a shelter that they dug in their basement's . The only way to halt overpopulation is teach our children VALUE"S ...MORAL"S
SEX EDUCATION,,, but sadly,,not enough people have those quality's in them ,,

Answer 8

Send everyone over the age of 50 to the isle of wight!

Answer 9

Hypothetically, because the world is not over populated.

I'd say starvation. Let over populated regions starve the heard. That's natures way of dealing with imbalance in the animal kingdom, why should it be different for humans

Answer 10

Education. The down side of this is that responsible people will limit their children, however less educated and/or irresponsible people will not, thus skewing society.