妇女儿童保护：权利重塑，而非“善良”绝育
近年来，伴随着社会的快速发展和个体意识的觉醒，“不婚不育”成为越来越多人的选择。一句流行的论调频频出现：“如果不能给孩子一个好的成长环境，那么选择不生育也是一种善良。”乍听之下，这似乎是理性而温暖的，但实际上，这种逻辑隐藏着对父母权利的漠视和社会责任的推卸。
“善良”的假象：真正的问题被掩盖
“不生育也是一种善良”的背后逻辑是假设：如果一个家庭无法在物质和精神上提供“完美”的条件，那么孩子的到来便是灾难。可是，真正的问题并不在于父母是否足够“完美”，而在于现行社会结构对父母的束缚和限制。
在现代社会，父母被赋予了太多义务，但却失去了许多本应属于他们的权利。从“不得体罚”到“不得使用童工”，再到教育、医疗的重压，父母几乎无权自主决定孩子的成长方式。这种制度性干预不仅侵蚀了父母的权利，更将教育、抚养的成本无情地转嫁给了个体家庭。
当“善良”成为不生育的理由时，真正的矛盾却被掩盖：父母不是因为无法养育孩子而不生育，而是因为他们在制度中被剥夺了作为父母的自主权，无法真正主导孩子的成长。与其将不生育美化为善良，不如直面问题：为何父母被剥夺了原本应有的权利？
父母需要权利，而非额外负担的“福利”
当前的生育鼓励政策常常聚焦于提供经济支持，比如发放育儿补贴、延长产假、降低学费等。然而，这些措施不仅成本高昂，还往往事与愿违。因为父母真正需要的，不是施舍性的福利，而是实质性的权利。
1. 废除父母儿童保护法：还父母教育自主权
父母儿童保护法的初衷是保护未成年人，但实践中却衍生出大量的过度干预。例如，父母因为适度管教而被控虐待，孩子稍有抱怨就可能引发社会干预。这种法律使得父母在教育中如履薄冰，严重削弱了亲子关系的稳定性。
废除父母儿童保护法，并将教育权还给父母，可以让家庭根据自身情况选择适合的教育方式，而不是被迫遵循一种统一的“正确”模式。
2. 解除儿童用工限制：赋予孩子成长的权利
禁止儿童劳动的初衷是避免剥削，但在现代社会，这种限制已经成为培养孩子责任感和社会能力的障碍。工作并非只是谋生手段，更是孩子接触社会、学习自立的重要方式。
允许儿童适当参与劳动，不仅能减轻家庭负担，还能帮助孩子理解劳动的价值，锻炼独立能力，为成年后的社会生活打下基础。
3. 废除义务教育法：打破教育的单一化束缚
义务教育法要求所有适龄儿童接受统一的学校教育，初衷是普及知识、提高全民素质。但现实中，学校教育不仅成本高昂，还难以满足多样化需求，尤其是对于特殊家庭和个性化发展需求的孩子。
废除义务教育法，让家庭拥有教育的选择权，既可以选择传统学校，也可以选择居家教育、社会实践等形式。这种灵活性将极大减轻父母的压力，同时让孩子的发展更具个性化。
父母的权利，是社会的未来
当下的不婚不育风潮，是社会系统性失衡的表象。拒绝生育并不代表善良，而是对现行规则的无声抗议。与其一味谴责个体选择，不如深思：如何赋予父母真正的权利，让生育成为一种值得期待的选择。
我们不需要更多的福利来抚平表面的矛盾，而是需要一场深刻的制度变革，将教育与抚养的主导权还给父母。唯有如此，才能让生育摆脱负担与压迫，成为一种自由而美好的权利，而不是被动的牺牲。
**善良不是不生育的理由，而是让生育变得无愧于人性与自由。**如果我们选择继续剥夺父母的权利，那么未来的不婚不育现象只会愈演愈烈。废除繁琐的法律限制，解放父母的权利，才是真正的妇女儿童保护之道。
Women's and Children's Protection: Reshaping Parental Rights, Not Romanticizing "Benevolent" Sterilization
In recent years, as society rapidly evolves and individual consciousness awakens, "non-marriage and non-childbearing" have become a choice for an increasing number of people. A popular argument often emerges: "If one cannot provide a good environment for a child to grow up in, then choosing not to have children is an act of kindness." At first glance, this seems rational and compassionate, but in reality, this logic masks a disregard for parental rights and a shirking of societal responsibility.
The Illusion of "Kindness": Concealing the Real Issues
The underlying logic of "not having children is an act of kindness" assumes that if a family cannot provide "perfect" material and emotional conditions, a child’s arrival would be a disaster. However, the real issue does not lie in whether parents are “perfect enough,” but in how the current societal structure restricts and confines parents.
In modern society, parents are burdened with an overwhelming number of obligations while losing many of their inherent rights. From "no corporal punishment allowed" to "no child labor permitted," coupled with the mounting pressures of education and healthcare, parents often have little to no autonomy in deciding how to raise their children. This systemic interference not only erodes parental authority but also shifts the costs of education and caregiving entirely onto individual families.
When "kindness" is used as a justification for not having children, the real contradiction is obscured: Parents are not refraining from having children because they are unable to raise them but because the system strips them of their autonomy to shape their children's growth. Instead of glorifying childlessness as a form of kindness, we should face the real issue: Why have parents been deprived of their fundamental rights?
Parents Need Rights, Not Extra Burdens in the Form of "Welfare"
Current pro-natalist policies often focus on providing financial support, such as childcare subsidies, extended parental leave, and reduced tuition costs. However, these measures are not only financially unsustainable but also often counterproductive. What parents truly need is not superficial welfare but substantive rights.
1. Abolish Parental and Child Protection Laws: Restore Parental Autonomy in Education
Parental and child protection laws were originally intended to protect minors but have led to excessive interference in practice. For instance, parents can be accused of abuse for reasonable discipline, and even minor complaints from children can trigger societal intervention. These laws put parents in a precarious position, weakening the stability of parent-child relationships.
Abolishing parental and child protection laws and returning educational rights to parents would allow families to choose educational methods that suit their circumstances, rather than being forced into a uniform "correct" model.
2. Lift Child Labor Restrictions: Grant Children the Right to Grow
The original intent of banning child labor was to prevent exploitation, but in today’s society, these restrictions hinder children’s opportunities to develop responsibility and social skills. Work is not merely a means of livelihood but also a way for children to engage with society and learn self-reliance.
Allowing children to participate in appropriate labor not only alleviates the family’s burdens but also helps children understand the value of work, fostering independence and preparing them for adult life.
3. Abolish Compulsory Education Laws: Break Free from Monolithic Educational Constraints
Compulsory education laws require all school-age children to receive standardized schooling, with the goal of disseminating knowledge and improving overall literacy. However, in practice, school education is both costly and ill-suited to diverse needs, especially for families with unique circumstances or children requiring personalized development.
Abolishing compulsory education laws and granting families the freedom to choose educational paths—whether traditional schooling, homeschooling, or community-based learning—would significantly relieve parental pressures and allow children to thrive in more individualized ways.
Parental Rights Are the Foundation of Society's Future
The current trend of avoiding marriage and parenthood is a symptom of systemic imbalance. Choosing not to have children is not an act of kindness but an unspoken protest against the existing rules. Instead of criticizing individual choices, we should ask ourselves: How can we restore real rights to parents and make parenthood an appealing option?
We don’t need more welfare policies to paper over the cracks. What we need is profound systemic reform to return the rights of education and caregiving to parents. Only then can child-rearing be liberated from the burdens of oppression, becoming a free and joyful choice rather than an imposed sacrifice.
Kindness is not a justification for not having children; it is a call to make parenthood worthy of humanity and freedom. If we continue to strip parents of their rights, the trend of childlessness will only intensify. Abolishing cumbersome legal restrictions and empowering parents is the true path to protecting women and children.
