devised and implemented which simply confirms the present pattem of disvalues ought to be taken with the utmost seriousness, not just for their sake but for the sake of everyone. Given the potential for social change which a population policy could bring about, a policy which in any way served to more deeply imbed and legitimate the disvalues of American life would be a sad and disastrous outcome. The implication of this argument is obvious. A population policy should attempt to serve freedom, justice, the general welfare, and security/survival by pushing forward the frontiers and implementation of those values. In a word, it will not be enough to be satisfied with a mere preservation of those values as they now exist. For the way in which they now exist is defective, in many instances a genuine scandal. We are not suggesting that a population policy could, by itself, close the gap between espoused American values and their (too painfully) felt reality of only partial observance. That would be naive as well as pretentious. On the contrary, we are only urging that a population policy be devised which would seek to make a contribution to the American dream above and beyond pressing demographic and environmental needs. Unfortunately, things do not automatically take care of themselves in the United States. Even if a policy is devised which well serves the need for a rational husbandry of natural resources and assets, for a sensible rate of population growth, for healthy patterns of population migration and distribution, the nation will by no means be guaranteed a promising future. For the nation may well, in the meantime, be gravely weakened and damaged by other social needs which cry out for a response, a response only too weakly forthcoming. A policy which recognized this, which sought to complement and enhance other social policies, could well enrich American life, far beyond the compass of population problems. But let us not speak only of dreams and ideals. A policy which did not take account of human values, which failed to respect freedom and justice, which ignored the range of grave problems in our society, would almost certainly be doomed to practical failure. To lay out a policy on paper or in legislation can be comparatively easy. To get that policy implemented in day-to-day life, from one end of the country to another, is a very different matter. If the people do not like the policy, if they find it offensive to their values and hopes, they will find ways to ignore or subvert it. It will be a self-defeating policy. Not only must a policy appear to be in the interests of citizens, it must genuinely be in their interests. And if anything has become clear in American life of late, it is the fact that the people, both majority and minority, are little prone to accept someone else's version of what constitutes "their interests." That many laws, and much legislation, have been enacted but never effected bears witness to the power of the people to dismiss that which they find unacceptable. Public policy, whether on population or anything else, has both a literal and a symbolic meaning. Its literal meaning will bear on specific laws, agencies, and mechanisms; they are the bread-and-butter of policy. But policies also have symbolic meanings, projecting an image of the way in which the nation understands its purposes and goals, its values and traditions, its needs, strengths and weaknesses. Human beings respond to the symbolic meanings quite as strongly as to literal meanings. While they are certain to ask of any given policy what its personal impact on them will mean-what will it cost them? how will it benefit them?-they are also likely to ask how it fits into their broader notions of what the nation needs and stands for. There are many people in our society who would not be affected one way or another by a population policy, and many others who would be affected only slightly. But it would be a grave mistake to think that they will not have views on policy or respond to what they take to be larger symbolic meaning of a policy-what it says to them about the quality and significance of national life, both present and future. That a population policy will, of necessity, be bound closely with attitudes and views on sexuality and procreation-matters of great and deep sensitivities-almost guarantees a highly symbolic reading of, and response to, broad policy goals. Moreover, within the context of a world population problem and, specifically, within the context of active American efforts throughout the world to respond to the population problem, how the United States formulates its own policy will, rightly or wrongly, have a great symbolic importance in the eyes of the rest of the world. There already exists considerable suspicion of American motives in its international population and family planning programs, particularly in the Third World nations. They are bound to look with great interest-and an assiduous seeking of significance-at whatever domestic population policy this nation adopts. They are likely to ask two basic questions. First, what values does the American government subscribe to for the American people? Second, is there a difference between what the American govemment will promote for its own people and what it will promote for other people around the world? If a difference is discerned, particularly any difference suggestive of hypocrisy or a double-standard, American credibility will suffer further blows. Yet if American domestic policy bespeaks a commitment to freedom and justice, to the welfare of human life, the grounds for suspicion will be reduced. More than that, the possibility of leadership will be enhanced. We have no crystal ball to peer into American life in the year 2000. We have indicated certain important trends, and especially conflicts among the trends, but we cannot forecast how these conflicts will be resolved. This much can be said. The social crises which have torn American life in the past decade have together conspired to force basic re-examination of what the nation stands for and where it ought to be going. If the crises are political and social, they are also ethical, involving competing visions of the human and national good. To take an ethical stance is to do something more, in the end, than simply attempt to lay down a set of ethical maxims, or to decide what would and would not be compatible with the American tradition. It also requires imagination and sensitivity, an attempt to probe the meaning of human life, national political and cultural traditions, and a willingness to face up to hard moral demands. Ethics is a good deal more than social adjustment, good political tactics, sharp legal analysis, and harmonious group relations. In the end, it is an attempt to seek and to live a rich human life. A population policy should seek nothing less. REFERENCES 1. This section was based primarily on Donald P. Warwick, "Freedom and Population Policy" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). This and other papers so listed in the ensuing footnotes were part of a research project, "Ethics, Population, and the American Tradition," carried out by the Institute, of which the material published here represents the summary findings and conclusions. 2. This section was based primarily on Robert M. Veatch, "Justice and Population Policy" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastingson-Hudson, New York, 1971). 3. See John Rawls, "Justice as Fairness," Philosophical Review, 1958, Vol. 67, pp. 164-194. 4. This section was based primarily on Peter G. Brown, “The Concept of the General Welfare" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 5. Virginia Held, The Public Interest and Individual Interests (New York: Basic Books, 1970). We rely on Professor Held's book only for the typology it presents of the relationship between individual and the public interest. We do not assume that the concept of "the general welfare" is convertible with "the public interest," at least as Professor Held uses the latter term. 6. This section was based primarily on Martin P. Golding, "Security/Survival: A Brief Analysis" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 7. This section was based primarily on Peter G. Brown and Eunice Corfman, "An Historical Analysis of Some MoralPolitical Values as These Bear on Population Control and Distribution," and Harold Edgar and Kent Greenawalt, "The Legal Tradition and Some Population Control Proposals" (unpublished papers prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 8. Naomi H. Golding, "Ethical Aspects of Government Policies Affecting Immigration and Population Distribution" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971), and Brown and Corfman, op. cit. 9. This section was based primarily on Naomi H. Golding, op. cit., and Blair L. Sadler, "Legal and Ethical Implications of Reducing Immigration as Part of a Comprehensive Population Policy" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 10. This section was based primarily on Robert F. Murray, Jr., M.D., "The Ethical and Moral Values of Black Americans and Population Policy," and J. Mayone Stycos, "Some Minority Opinions on Birth Control: Blacks, Women's Liberation, and the New Left" (unpublished papers prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 11. William A. Darity et al., Population Reference Bureau Selection No. 37, June 1971, pp. 5-12. 12. This section was based primarily on Donald P. Warwick and Nancy Williamson, "Population Policy and Spanish-Speaking Americans" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 13. This section was based primarily on Emily C. Moore, "Native American Indian Values: Their Relation to Suggested Population Control Proposals" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastingson-Hudson, New York, 1971). 14. This section was based primarily on Stycos, op. cit. 15. Ibid. 16. This section was based primarily on Arthur J. Dyck, "Religious Views and United States Population Policy" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 17. See Judith Blake, "Abortion and Public Opinion: The 1960-1970 Decade," Science, 1971, Vol. 171, pp. 540-549. 18. J. F. Kantner, "American Attitudes on Population Policy: Recent Trends," Studies in Family Planning, May 1968, pp. 1-12. 19. U.S. Congress, Senate, An Act to Establish a Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, Pub. L. 91-213, 91st Cong., 2nd sess., 1970, S. 2701. 20. This section was based primarily on Robert M. Veatch, “An Ethical Analysis of Population Policy Proposals" (unpublished paper prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 21. See "Criteria" section above. 22. This section was based primarily on Edgar and Greenawalt, op. cit.; Sadler, op. cit.; and Brown and Corfman, op. cit. 23. This section was based primarily on Stycos, op. cit.; Warwick and Williamson, op. cit.; Moore, op. cit.; Murray, "Some Aspects of Population Policy...," op. cit.; Dyck, op. cit.; Ralph B. Potter, "The Simple Structure of the Population Debate: The Logic of the Ecology Movement"; M. Sharmon Sollitto and Stephen Viederman, "The Business Community and Population Policy"; and Robert M. Veatch and Thomas F. Draper, M.D., "Population Policy and the Values of Physicians" (unpublished papers prepared for the Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Hastings-on-Hudson, New York, 1971). 24. The following arguments are meant to point out some special aspects of these programs. Of course, many of the general objections which may be raised against them (mentioned in the introduction) could be applicable-for example, the dangers of harm to innocent children, blame for bearing children, and so forth. 25. To be sure, in a society where there is an exceedingly great variation in inherited and acquired wealth, an equal distribution and an equitable scale are very hard to devise short of a total change in the social structure. 26. With reference to American population policy, immigration should be viewed as a demographic factor affecting size as well as distribution, while on a world-wide scale it is essentially a dimension of population distribution. 27. The ethical analysis of such a proposal hinges in part upon the means of regulation and the penalties for producing a child without a license. Modifications include a nonmarketable license and a marketable license with a ceiling on the market price. In effect, a marketable license would be logically little different from a government flat fee, where the fee is regulated according to the desire for children. 28. Of course, the immediate demographic impact of a policy of this kind would, in any event, be nil if the crisis was caused by an already excessive number of people. If the crisis was imminent (for example, five to 10 years), it is doubtful that any population policy could solve it-short of simply killing whole categories of those already born. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY The preceding report was prepared from published material, testimony before the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, and personal interviews. This bibliography is not meant to be a complete bibliography of all the material covered in the report, but is meant only to be a list of suggested readings. "A Crowding Hemisphere: Population Change in the Americas." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 1958, Vol. 316. Adair, John; Kurt Deuschle; and Walsh McDermott. "Patterns of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Executive Human Reproduction. "Control of Fertility." Journal of the American Medical Association, 1965, Vol. 194, pp. 230-238. Bajema, Carl H. "The Genetic Implications of Population Control." Bioscience, 1971, Vol. 21, pp. 71-75. Bakker, Cornelis B., and Cameron R. Dightman. "Physicians and Family Planning: A Persistent Ambivalence." Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1965, Vol. 25, pp. 279-284. Barclay, W.; J. Enright; and R. Reynolds. "Population Control in the Third World." NACLA Newsletter, December 1970. Barnes, Peter. "The Great American Land Grab." The New Republic, June 5, 1971. ----. "The Vanishing Small Farmer." The New Republic. June 12, 1971. "Land Reform in America." The New Republic, June 19, 1971. Barrett, D. N., ed. The Problem of Population, Vols. 1, 2. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964. Bay, Christian. The Structure of Freedom. New York: Atheneum, 1965. Bennett, Marian T. American Immigration Policies. Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press, n.d. Berelson, Bernard. "Beyond Family Planning." Studies in Family Planning, 1969, No. 38. Berlin, Isaiah. "Two Concepts of Liberty." Political Philosophy. Edited by Anthony Quinton. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. Bogue, Donald J. The Population of the United States. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1959. Bleich, J. D. "Abortion in Halakhic Literature." Tradition, 1968, Vol. 10, No. 20, pp. 72-120. Bokser, Ben Zion. "The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards: Statement on Birth Control." Conservative Judaism, 1961, Vol. 15, pp. 32-35. Brandt, Richard B. Ethical Theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1959. Hopi Ethics: A Theoretical Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954. Blake, Judith. “Abortion and Public Opinion: The 1960-1970 Decade." Science, 1971, Vol. 171, pp. 540-549. Bumpass, Larry and Charles F. Westoff. "The Perfect Contraceptive Population." Science, 1970, Vol. 169, pp. 1177-1180. Burch, T. K. and G. A. Shea. "Catholic Parish Priests and Birth Control: A Comparative Study of Opinion in Colombia, the United States, and the Netherlands." Studies in Family Planning, June 1971, pp. 121-136. Cade, Toni. "The Pill: Genocide or Liberation." Onyx Magazine, August 1969. Callahan, Daniel. Abortion: Law, Choice and Morality. New York: Macmillan Company, 1970. Ethics and Population Limitation. New York: The Population Council, 1971. Carter, Elmer A. "Eugenics for the Negro." Birth Control Review, June 1932. Cisler, Lucinda. "Abortion Reform: The New Tokenism." Notes from the Second Year, May 1970. Cohen, Meyer. "Statement on Abortion on Behalf of Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the United States and Canada," New York, 1971. Cooke, R. E.; A. E. Hellegers; R. G. Hoyt; and H. W. Richardson. The Terrible Choice: The Abortion Dilemma. New York: Bantam Books, Inc., 1968. Comish, Mary J.; Florence A. Ruderman; and Sydney S. Spivack. Doctors and Family Planning. New York: National Committee on Maternal Health, Inc., 1963. Corson, John J. Business in the Humane Society. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1971. Cox, Archibald. "Constitutional Adjudication and the Promotion of Human Rights." Harvard Law Review, November 1966. Darity, William A.; Castellano B. Turner; and H. Jean Thiebaux. "An Exploratory Study of Barriers to Family Planning: Race Consciousness and Fears of Black Genocide as a Basis." Paper presented at Ninth Annual Meeting of the American Association of Planned Parenthood Physicians, April 1971. Davis, Kingsley. "Population Policy: Will Current Programs and Anne Ehrlich. Population, Resources, Environment. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1970. Eldridge, Hope T., and Dorothy S. Thomas. Population Redistribution and Economic Growth, United States, 1870-1950, Vol. III. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1964. Fagley, R. M. The Population Explosion and Christian Responsibility, New York: Oxford University Press, 1960. "The Population Problem and Family Planning." Social Action, 1958, Vol. 25, pp. 3-17. "Family Planning Program for American Indians." Public Health Reports, 1969, Vol. 84, p. 205. Feldman, D.M. Birth Control in Jewish Law. New York: New York University Press, 1968. Felleenes, George. "Sterilization and the Law." New Dimen sions in Criminal Justice. Edited by H. K. Becker, et al. New Jersey: Scarecrow Press, 1968. Fitzpatrick, J. P. General Background Paper on Puerto Rican Culture and Organized Social Services. New York: Puerto Rican Services Institute, 1966. Freedman, R.; P. K. Whelpton; and A. A. Campbell. Family Planning, Sterility and Population Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959. Fromm, Erich. Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1941. Gates, Paul W. History of Public Land Development. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, November 1968. Golding, Martin P., and Naomi H. Golding. "Ethical and Value Issues in Population Limitation and Distribution in the United States." Vanderbilt Law Review, 1971, Vol. 24, pp. 495-523. Grebler, L.; J. W. Moore; and R. Guzman. The Mexican American People: The Nation's Second Largest Minority. Greenwood, Michael J., and Patrick J. Gormely. "A Comparison of the Determinants of White and Nonwhite Interstate Migration." Demography, Vol. 8, 1971. Hadley, J. Nixon. "The Demography of the American Indians." The Annals of the American Academy, 1957, Vol. 311, pp. 23-30. Haldane, J.B.S. "Biological Possibilities in the Next 10,000 ----. -. "The Tragedy of the Commons." Science, 1968, Vol. 162, pp. 1243-1248. "Health Conditions among Navajo Indians." Public Health Reports, 1955, Vol. 70, pp. 831-836. Held, Virginia. The Public Interest and Individual Interest. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1970. Hibbard, H. I. Public Land Policies. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965. Hill, R.; J. M. Stycos; and K. W. Back. The Family and Population Control: A Puerto Rican Experiment in Social Change. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959. Hoffman, Frederick L. "The Navajo Population Problem." Stone and Webster Journal, 1929, Vol. 44, pp. 650-672. Holder, Angela R. "Minors and Contraception." Journal of the American Medical Association, 1971, Vol. 216, pp. 2059-2060. Hoyt, R. G. The Birth Control Debate. Kansas City, Mo.: The National Catholic Reporter Publishing Company, 1968. Jacobovits, Immanuel. Jewish Medical Ethics. New York: Bloch Publishing Company, 1967. Jones, Gavin, and Dorothy Nortman. “Roman Catholic Fertility and Family Planning: A Comparative Review of the Research Literature." Studies in Family Planning, October 1968, pp. 1-27. Kantner, J. F. "American Attitudes on Population Policy: Recent Trends." Studies in Family Planning, May 1968, pp. 1-12. ----, and Melvin Zelnik. "United States: Exploratory Studies of Negro Family Formation-Common Conceptions About Birth Control." Studies in Family Planning, November 1969. Kass, Leon, and Daniel Callahan, eds. Freedom, Coercion and the Life Sciences, forthcoming. Kazen, P. M., and H. L. Browning. Sociological Aspects of the High Fertility of the U.S. Mexican-descent Population: An Exploratory Study. Austin, Texas: Population Research Center, Department of Sociology, University of Texas, n.d. Kim, Yun, and Gary Shaffer. "Fertility and the Size of Family Among Navajos in Southeastern Utah.” Proceedings of the Utah Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. Spring 1969. Klein, Isaac. "Abortion and Jewish Tradition." Conservative Judaism, 1970, Vol. 24, pp. 26-33. Koval, Patricia. "Women in a Contraceptive Culture." Commonwealth, December 22, 1967. Lees, Hannah. "The Negro Response to Birth Control." The Reporter, May 19, 1971. "Legal Analysis and Population Control: The Problem of Coercion." Harvard Law Review, Vol. 84. Lejeune, Jerome. "On the Nature of Man." Paper presented to the American Society of Human Genetics, October 1969. Meier, Richard L. Modern Science and the Human Fertility Problem. New York: Wiley, 1959. Mill, J.S. "On Liberty." English Philosophers from Bacon to Mill. New York: Modern Library, 1939. Moore, Emily C. "Population Problems from a Woman's Perspective." Cornell International Population Program Conference, October 16, 1970. National Academy of Sciences. Rapid Population Growth: Consequences and Policy Implications. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1971. National Council of The Church of Christ in the U.S.A. Responsible Parenthood. New York: Commission on Marriage and Family Life, 1961. Noonan, J. T., Jr. "An Almost Absolute Value in History." The Morality of Abortion. Edited by J. T. Noonan, Jr. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970. Contraception. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965. North American Congress on Latin America Newsletter, 1970, Vol. 4. Olafson, Frederick. Society, Law and Morality. Englewood, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. Paul, Julius. "The Return of Punitive Sterilization Proposals." Law and Society Review, 1968, Vol. 3. Pohlman, Edward. Incentives and Compensation in Birth Planning. Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Carolina Population Center, 1971. Pope Paul VI. Humanae Vitae. Boston: Daughters of St. Paul, 1968. Pope Pius XI. Casti Connubii. 1930. Presser, H.B. "Puerto Rico: The Role of Sterilization in Controlling Fertility." Studies in Family Planning, 1969, Vol. 45, pp. 8-12. Ramsey, Paul. "Feticide/Infanticide Upon Request.” Religion in Life Summer, 1970. Rescher, Nicholas. Distributive Justice. New York: BobbsMerrill Co., Inc., 1966. Introduction to Value Theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969. Ridker, Ronald G. "Synopsis of a Proposal for a Family Planning Bond." Studies in Family Planning, 1969, Vol. 43, pp. 11-16. Ridley, Jeanne C. "The Changing Position of American Women: Education, Labor Force Participation and Fertility." The Family in Transition. Edited by J. L. Fogarty. Forthcoming. Robbins, Roy M. Our Landed Heritage. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1952. Rosner, Fred. "The Jewish Attitude Toward Abortion." Tradition, 1968, Vol. 10, pp. 48-71. Sager, Lawrence G. "Tight Little Islands: Exclusionary Zoning, Equal Protection and the Indigent." Stanford Law Review, April 1969. Scrimshaw, Susan C., and Bernard Pasquariella. "Obstacles to Sterilization in One Community." Family Planning Perspectives, 1970, Vol. 2, pp. 40-42. Southern Baptist Convention. Issues and Answers: Population Explosion. Nashville, Tennessee: The Christian Life Commission, n.d. Spengler, Joseph J. "Population Problem in Search of a Stucki, Larry. "The Case Against Population Control: The Stycos, J. M. Family and Fertility in Puerto Rico. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955. "Opinion, Ideology, and Population Problems-Some United Church of Christ. Report of the Work of the Task Force U.S. Congress. Senate. A Bill... to Limit the Number of Veatch, Robert M. “Experimental Pregnancy: The Ethical Complexities of Experimentation with Oral Contraceptives. The Hastings Center Report, Vol. 1. Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, 1971, pp. 2-3. "A Proposal for Taxing Childbearing: Can It Be Just?" Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences, Working Paper Series, July 1971. "Value Freedom in Science and Technology: A Study of the Religious, Ethical and Other Socio-Cultural Factors in Selected Medical Decisions Regarding Birth Control." Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University, 1971. Warwick, Donald P. "Human Freedom and National Development." Cross Currents, 1968, Vol. 18, pp. 495-517. Wattenberg, Ben. "The Nonsense Explosion." The New Republic, April 4 and 11, 1970. Weissman, Steve. "Why the Population Bomb is a Rockefeller Baby." Ramparts, May 1970. Westoff, C. F.; R. G. Potter, Jr.; and P. C. Sagi. The Third Child. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1963. and N. B. Ryder. "United States: Methods of Fertility Control, 1955, 1960 and 1965." Studies in Family Planning, February 1967, pp. 1-5. "United States: The Papal Encyclical and Catholic Practice and Attitudes, 1969." Studies in Family Planning, February 1970, pp. 1-12. |