The No-Child Policy. Probably not the best population control...

Yes, this world is dangerously overpopulated, everyone knows that.  Anyone that cares anyway.  There's not a whole lot that can be done, however, because of political, social, and religious views.

But there was one idea that I came across once that I really don't think works and I will present why below.  

Years and years ago, I knew an older couple who had had no children.  They claimed that this was conscious choice to counter the overpopulation of the planet which was obvious even then (say about twenty years ago).  Later, when I learned more about these two, I'm not sure this was the complete story.  The woman had been a nurse and used to tell horror stories about women dying horribly in childbirth.  She seemed really focused on that, perhaps she had a fear of childbirth.  I do know that the man, when talking of their population control views, got very sad and misty eyed so I do not think it was a total choice on his part.  Anyway, for the moment, lets just take their point of view as read.

Some time later, I heard of a person who had come from a huge family.  They had literally a dozen sisters and brothers.  And each of those sisters and brothers had an equally large family.  So it went from a couple to over 70 people in two generations.  So many that this person said they literally could not remember all their nieces and nephews, cousins and relations.  

So, we have the childless (by choice) couple and the overpopulating family.  The childless couple did preach and teach and talk to other people about their views, trying to win them over.  But what is such talk worth?  Can they really change a whole lifestyle?  Not with just an occasional diatribe.  In the meantime, the children of the huge families are being raised in a culture that teaches them that they too must go out and have as many children as possible.  In the end, the childless couple die off and the huge family's children continue to produce more children.   So in the end this childless couple's protests come to nothing, at least in my opinion.

But, what if this approach had been taken.  Lets pretend that the childless couple had a boy named Sid.  Or a daughter name Eunice.  Lol, I know, wierd names, I like wierd names.

This child grows up and marries or partners with one of the children from the huge family.  Sid (or Eunice) then says to their new mate that while they like children, maybe they will only have one, or two at most.  Two won't be too many as that's mere replacement for them.   This also occupies one of the huge family children, lets say they're named Bobby or Phyllis.  

So, Bobby and Phyllis then go on to have only one or two children instead of the eight or ten that they would have had had they met someone with beliefs equal to their own (which they do because the childless-by-choice couple never reproduced and passed on their beliefs to a close relative, who might take their teachings to heart more than a stranger or distant friend).

Therefore, this childless couple should have had at least one child.  Then brought that child up with constant teachings of population control which they had.  There's no guarantee of course that the child would agree with them, or be able to continue and enforce such beliefs, but its better in what they did.  They opted out, so to speak.  The children of the huge family will continue on, meeting others who want equal number of children, with no control whatsoever.  

That's why I disagree with the "no-child policy" that this couple had.  Personally, as I said, I think there were other issues going on with this couple, but even so, the theory that they espoused to cover it, I do not think it very valuable or valid.