{"id":1953,"date":"2015-04-02T20:05:03","date_gmt":"2015-04-02T20:05:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/?p=1953"},"modified":"2015-04-02T20:05:03","modified_gmt":"2015-04-02T20:05:03","slug":"women-still-dying-after-chinas-1-child-policy-eased","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/women-still-dying-after-chinas-1-child-policy-eased\/","title":{"rendered":"Women &#8216;still dying&#8217; after China&#8217;s 1-child policy &#8216;eased&#8217;"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"copy-paste-block\">\n<article id=\"post-1710585\" class=\"post-1710585 post type-post status-publish format-video has-post-thumbnail hentry category-faith category-front-page category-health category-politics category-us category-world wnd\">\n<div id=\"hentry\" class=\"entry-content wnd\">\n<div id=\"attachment_1840\" style=\"width: 442px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/Chris_SmithChenLittlejohn-Credit-Karen-Cross-Oct-9-2014.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1840\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1840\" src=\"http:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/Chris_SmithChenLittlejohn-Credit-Karen-Cross-Oct-9-2014.jpg\" alt=\"Congressman Chris Smith, Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng, and Women\u2019s Rights Without Frontiers President Reggie Littlejohn spoke out against coercive family planning in China at The Heritage Foundation in October 2014 \" width=\"432\" height=\"289\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/Chris_SmithChenLittlejohn-Credit-Karen-Cross-Oct-9-2014.jpg 432w, https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/10\/Chris_SmithChenLittlejohn-Credit-Karen-Cross-Oct-9-2014-300x200.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 432px) 100vw, 432px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-1840\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Congressman Chris Smith, Chinese activist Chen Guangcheng, and Women\u2019s Rights Without Frontiers President Reggie Littlejohn spoke out against coercive family planning in China at The Heritage Foundation in October 2014<\/p><\/div>\n<p>By Bob Unruh<\/p>\n<p>Republished with permission from World Net Daily<\/p>\n<p>A women\u2019s-rights activist battling China over its one-child policy says no one should be fooled by the communist government\u2019s insistence that the practice has been \u201ceased,\u201d because the infamous forced abortions continue.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe core of the problem is not whether the government is allowing one child or two children,\u201d Reggie Littlejohn, president of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\">Womens Rights Without Frontiers,<\/a> told WND on Wednesday.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe government is still telling how many children people can have and is enforcing that limit with coerced abortions,\u201d she said. \u201cAnd it\u2019s not clear to me that there are fewer abortions. Women and babies still are dying.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Littlejohn pointed out China still requires a birth permit for the first child and for the second child.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWithout a permit, there still are forced abortions, unless you\u2019re rich enough to buy your way out,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<p>Her organization has created <a href=\"http:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/index.php?nav=sign_our_petition\">an Internet petition calling for an end to forced abortions.<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Littlejohn\u2019s frustration stems from things like a recent China Daily headline that stated \u201cShanghai couples urged to have 2nd children.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Some organizations are declaring such headlines a \u201cvictory\u201d in the fight against the restrictive nation\u2019s one-child policy.<\/p>\n<p>But Littlejohn said that \u201cto proclaim victory while women and babies in China are dying \u2013 that is misleading.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>On Jan. 1, 2014, the Chinese Communist Party \u201ctweaked\u201d the policy that has brought forced abortion to hundreds of millions of women.<\/p>\n<p>According to the new policy, some women \u2013 those who are only children themselves or have a husband who is an only child \u2013 are being allowed a second child, if they obtain permission.<\/p>\n<p>Littlejohn noted one non-profit organization recently released a statement that it \u201cwould like to celebrate and rejoice\u201d in the \u201cvictory\u201d that additional babies have been born under the most recent exception.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTheir statement \u2013 and the reports published in the mainstream media \u2013 do not mention the fact that the Chinese Communist Party has made no promise whatsoever to end coercive birth control,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, the government said at the same time it was urging couples to have more children that National Health and Family Planning Commission officials said in November 2014 that China had no plans to suspend or further relax its one-child policy.<\/p>\n<p>Blind activist Chen Guangcheng, at a Heritage Foundation event last fall, described the brutal government practices.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIn today\u2019s China, under the communist rule, the government can put their hand into your body, grab your baby out of your womb, and kill your baby in your face,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<p>At the same event, Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said it was \u201cthe most egregious, vicious attack on women ever.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>China\u2019s one-child policy announced in 1979 is state-sponsored violence against women and children \u2013 including and especially the girl child \u2013 and constitutes massive crimes against humanity,\u201d Smith said.<\/p>\n<p>Littlejohn said the \u201ccoercive enforcement of the one-child policy continues unabated, destroying women, children, whole families \u2013 and indeed, the fabric of Chinese society.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt constitutes the greatest women\u2019s rights violation on the face of the earth and in the history of the world. Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, no one supports forced abortion, because it is not a choice. The one-child policy does not need to be \u2018eased.\u2019 It needs to be abolished.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Her organization has monitored some of the policy\u2019s consequent horrors, including murder and suicide, that still are prevalent.<\/p>\n<p>For example, parents who don\u2019t have a permit for a child sometimes are charged \u201csocial compensation fees\u201d of up to 14 times a person\u2019s annual salary.<\/p>\n<p>Without making those payments, however, the children are denied health care and education.<\/p>\n<p>Most abuses from the policy never are reported, she said, but among some cases that did come to light:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A man in the Guangxi Region stabbed to death two government workers because they told him he could not registered his child without paying the fees.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>In Hunan Province, a husband demanded compensation from the Chinese government, claiming that his wife, Gong Qifeng, has suffered from schizophrenia and violent behavior since she was forcibly aborted at seven months in November 2011.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>A farmer in Hebei Province who did not have the money to pay the extra fines and fees committed suicide by drinking pesticide \u201cduring a dispute with family planning officials.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul>\n<li>And an obstetrician in Shaanxi province, Zhang Shuxia, was convicted of trafficking seven infants after she had convinced their parents that the infants were seriously ill or deceased. She was given a suspended death sentence.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u201cThe minor modification of the policy that took place on January 1, 2014: 1) does not affect a large percentage of couples in China; 2) retains the dreaded \u2018birth intervals\u2019 between children (if a woman gets pregnant before the interval has lapsed, she may be subject to forced abortion); and 3) makes no promise to end the coercive enforcement of the policy,\u201d Littlejohn said in a statement.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTo proclaim \u2018victory\u2019 under these circumstances is entirely unwarranted and may mislead many into thinking that the One Child Policy is a thing of the past,\u201d her statement said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThis is a time to increase pressure for change, not to release it,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<p>WND reported Littlejohn\u2019s criticism of Washington\u2019s decision to promote China from Tier 3 to Tier 2 status on its watch list of human rights violators.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe Chinese government\u2019s efforts to remedy the problems that brought it to a \u2018Tier 3\u2032 status range from ineffective to non-existent,\u201d Littlejohn said at the time.<\/p>\n<p>Her new comments followed the release by Washington of its 2014 Trafficking in Persons report.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe report appears to attribute this promotion to a technical modification of the one-child policy,\u201d Littlejohn said.<\/p>\n<p>The State Department reasoned that the Chinese government \u201cmaintained efforts to prevent trafficking in persons.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIn November 2013, the government modified its birth limitation policy to allow families with one single-child parent to have a second child, a change that may affect future demand for prostitution and for foreign women as brides for Chinese men \u2013 both of which may be procured by force or coercion. TIP Report, p. 134.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Littlejohn said the fact that China \u201ctweaked\u201d the policy \u201cdoes not signify that it \u2018maintained efforts to prevent trafficking in persons.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAllowing a relatively small number of families to have a second child will not end gendercide or sexual slavery in China,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe selective abortion and abandonment of baby girls is most prevalent in the countryside, where couples already can have a second child if the first child is a girl,\u201d Littlejohn said. \u201cEven if the most recent modification were to improve gender ratios at birth, the impact on sexual slavery would not be felt for decades to come.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Read original article at wnd.com: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.wnd.com\/2015\/02\/women-still-dying-after-chinas-1-child-policy-eased\/\">http:\/\/www.wnd.com\/2015\/02\/women-still-dying-after-chinas-1-child-policy-eased\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By Bob Unruh Republished with permission from World Net Daily A women\u2019s-rights activist battling China over its one-child policy says no one should be fooled by the communist government\u2019s insistence that the practice has been \u201ceased,\u201d because the infamous forced &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/women-still-dying-after-chinas-1-child-policy-eased\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"yes","footnotes":""},"categories":[22,10,5,49,12,30,7,16,15,160,8,34,33,20,32,31,35,148,123,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1953","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-abortion","category-chen-guangcheng","category-china","category-chinas-one-child-policy","category-chris-smith","category-coerced-abortion","category-forced-abortion","category-forced-sterilization","category-gendercide","category-heritage-foundation","category-one-child-policy","category-pro-choice","category-pro-life","category-reggie-littlejohn","category-reproductive-health","category-reproductive-rights","category-right-to-choose","category-trafficking-in-persons-report","category-two-child-policy","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1953","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1953"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1953\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1972,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1953\/revisions\/1972"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1953"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1953"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1953"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}