Norplant and Irresponsible Reproduction

Abstract

Norplant has been controversial because of attempts by judges and legislators to encourage or require that certain women use it to avoid reproduction which is considered socially irresponsible or harmful to children and society. There has been a wide range of response to proposals to control population growth among population subgroups considered to be socially unacceptable. While some would trust and support the state to take action to discourage or end irresponsible reproduction others argue that proposals to offer entice or compel women to use Norplant violate basic human rights and are a racist or elitist response to problems which should be resolved by other means. The author notes however that regardless of ones personal views about proposals regarding the application of Norplant one must acknowledge that this particular method of contraception has fomented considerable public debate over reproductive responsibility and the states role in regulating such responsibility. The author discusses reproductive responsibility the limits of social policy compulsory contraception to prevent congenital disease compulsory contraception for the retarded and encouraging procreative responsibility. He concludes that unless voluntarily chosen the use of Norplant can rarely be justified as a solution to problems of what some consider to be irresponsible reproduction. Neither the protection of future offspring nor the conservation of public funds is a good enough reason to justify abusing individuals right to procreate. A danger of discrimination or antipathy toward targeted groups also exists. That concluded the state should not be prevented from informing women about the availability of Norplant subsidizing its provision or offering incentives for its use.