Reuters |
When Qu Di left for the United States in 2007 for a PhD program, her mother was certain that she would return. Qu, a 25-year-old math major, dreamed of being a university professor in her home province of Liaoning, in northeastern China, and obtaining a degree overseas was the last step in earning the teaching qualification. She never made it home. Qu's mother, who only gave her last name, Jiang, said she and her daughter used to chat everyday on QQ, a Chinese instant messaging service, when Qu studied at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Then one day in May of 2008, Jiang was unable to get ahold of her daughter. She scrambled to reach out to Qu's friends, who, despite having already seen the report of Qu's death at the school's office, were reluctant to tell her mother. This task was left to the local police, who attempted to reach Jiang with the assistance of a Chinese interpreter. But Jiang refused to answer the phone. Instead, she asked a relative to confirm the news that she couldn't bear to hear herself: her only child was killed in a car accident, along with two others, on a road trip back from the Grand Canyon. "It was over," Jiang said, sobbing uncontrollably. "I was never afraid of any difficulties because we had a child and she was our hope. Now everything has lost meaning to us." Jiang, 59, gave birth to Qu in 1983, making her part of the first generation of parents subject to China's one-child policy, which came into effect in 1980. Jiang was then an office worker at a state-owned steel factory in Benxi, a city 650 miles east of Beijing, and a place where the policy implementation was so strict, she was not even allowed to return to work after maternity leave without a certificate proving that she had been inserted with an intrauterine device for effective birth control. She never thought about violating the policy and having another child, even though she heard some people willingly paid a fine -- usually a matter of at most a couple thousand dollars -- to get past the quota. Jiang, until now, firmly believed what the government had told her: the country's prosperity depended upon reining in population growth. However, deep down, she knew her family was taking a risk. In a life full of uncertainty, Jiang and her husband had made only one single bet. "I felt like a soldier in the battlefield," she said, "You know there will be bullets ahead of you, but you can only proceed." *** Today in China, there are about one million such "shidu" families, the term for parents that have lost their only child, a number that grows by about 76,000 each year. Yet demographers said this is only the beginning of the real problem, because the percentage of one-child families across China has exploded in the past three decades as fertility restrictions spread from big cities to every corner of the country. A 2005 survey on the Chinese population, the most recent year available, showed that the country then had 210 million only children -- most of whom on the younger end of the spectrum. For the population group aged 25 to 29 (born between 1976 and 1980), only 15 percent were only children. However, for the generation born 25 years later, the percentage of only children nearlyquadrupled. "In the future, tens of millions of Chinese people will be affected by this phenomenon," said Yi Fuxian, a University of Wisconsin scientist whose book A Big Country in an Empty Nest describes the damage of China's family planning restrictions. "Parents will lose hope and when they get old, nobody will take care of them. Because every kid is exposed to deadly risks, every one-child family is walking a tightrope." Alas, the safety net that the Chinese government provides for these tightrope-walking families is full of holes. Since shidu families did not emerge on a large scale until a decade ago, when the first generation of parents affected by the one-child policy grew too old to have children, the regime has not evolved rapidly enough to support them. China's population and family planning law, implemented in 2002 by the National People's Congress, China's highest legislative body, stipulated that local governments "provide necessary assistance" to families whose only child was accidently injured or killed on the condition that the parents do not adopt or give birth to another one. However, the government neither specified how much was necessary nor clarified its role in such compensation cases. In China, central and local governments budget their finances separately. Therefore, because the central government failed to define its responsibilities to shidu families, childless parents are at the whim of local governments, which often base compensation on their financial resources instead of the family's actual needs. *** As a result of the vague wording in Jiang's case, the local government paid her nothing following her daughter's death. And even though the central government issued another directive in 2007, drawing the floor for such compensation at $16 per person per month, the local family planning office didn't send Jiang her deserved compensation until 2010. "We did what the government said," said Jiang, whose hair turned gray almost overnight after learning of her daughter's death. "If the one-child policy has led to economic prosperity, why can't they take a little money to compensate us for our loss? They can't only take the dividend, right?" In a country like China where the pension system is weak, parents and even grandparents count on their offspring to support them after they retire. Therefore, losing an only child has a devastating financial effect. The meager assistance that applies to just 10 provinces and cities is the only known form of compensation to shidu families today, and it covers about one-sixth of such families in the country. The amount paid out varies from $16 to $130. Jiang and her husband each gets $22. Even still, money is not Jiang's top concern. What she wants more is the recognition from the government that she and her peers have made a sacrifice for the country, not unlike families of deceased soldiers. However, Chinese society treats these two groups of families very differently: Families of slain veterans have access to benefits like shopping discounts and priority in applying for government-subsidized housing, both virtually unavailable for shidu families. When Jiang applied for a credit card to access supermarket discounts, she was told by the bank clerk that since she had retired, her best option was to become an authorized user of her child's card. Jiang, who spends 9 to 10 hours each day chatting with fellow shidu parents, turned away immediately. "We are sacrificing for the entire society," said Jiang, "We are Chinese citizens and now there are bad consequences for us because of national policy. The government should take more responsibility." |
據(jù)《大西洋月刊》報(bào)道,2007年曲笛(音)前往美國(guó)攻讀博士學(xué)位時(shí),她媽媽認(rèn)為她肯定會(huì)回來(lái)。25歲修讀數(shù)學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)的曲笛,夢(mèng)想是在她家鄉(xiāng),中國(guó)東北遼寧當(dāng)一名大學(xué)教師。去海外留學(xué),拿一個(gè)學(xué)位回來(lái)是她獲得大學(xué)教師資質(zhì)的最后一步。 但她再也沒(méi)能回家。 曲的母親,只愿意透露自己姓氏的姜女士說(shuō),在她女兒留學(xué)內(nèi)華達(dá)大學(xué)時(shí),她們每天用QQ進(jìn)行交流。在2008年5月的一天,姜女士突然聯(lián)系不到自己的女兒。她焦急地向曲的朋友詢問(wèn)消息。當(dāng)時(shí)他們已經(jīng)在學(xué)校的辦公室看到了曲的死亡報(bào)告書(shū),誰(shuí)都不忍心將這噩耗告訴給這位母親。這項(xiàng)任務(wù)交給了當(dāng)?shù)氐木臁K麄兺ㄟ^(guò)口譯員試圖通知曲的母親。但是她拒絕接電話,她叫來(lái)自己的一位親戚證實(shí)這個(gè)她自己無(wú)力承擔(dān)的噩耗:她唯一的孩子在一起車(chē)禍中喪生。一起遇難的還有兩位同伴,他們當(dāng)時(shí)在大峽谷旅游返回途中。 “一切都結(jié)束了,”姜女士難以抑制地抽泣著說(shuō),“我從不害怕任何困難,因?yàn)槲覀冇幸粋€(gè)孩子,她就是我們的希望?,F(xiàn)在所有一切對(duì)我們都失去了意義。” 今年59歲的姜,1983年產(chǎn)下曲笛,1980年中國(guó)開(kāi)始實(shí)施計(jì)劃生育政策,她算得上是政策實(shí)施后的第一代父母。當(dāng)時(shí)姜是本溪市一家國(guó)有鋼鐵廠的職員。本溪據(jù)北京650英里(約1046公里),當(dāng)?shù)赜?jì)劃生育政策落實(shí)得非常嚴(yán)格,在修完產(chǎn)假之后,她甚至必須證明自己帶上了能達(dá)到有效節(jié)育目的的宮內(nèi)避孕環(huán)才允許返回工作崗位。 她從沒(méi)想過(guò)要違反政策規(guī)定再生一個(gè)孩子,即使她聽(tīng)說(shuō)有人愿意繳納最多數(shù)千元的罰金多拿到一個(gè)配額。姜到現(xiàn)在依舊堅(jiān)定的相信政府所說(shuō)的:國(guó)家的繁榮依靠控制人口的增長(zhǎng)。然而,內(nèi)心深處,她明白她的家庭在冒險(xiǎn)。在充滿變數(shù)的一生,姜女士和她的丈夫只下了一個(gè)賭注。 “我感覺(jué)自己就像是戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)上的戰(zhàn)士,”她說(shuō),“你知道前方有子彈,但是你只能硬著頭皮走下去。” *** 在今天的中國(guó),像這樣失去獨(dú)生子女的“失獨(dú)”家庭約有100萬(wàn)戶,這個(gè)數(shù)字以每年7.6萬(wàn)的速度增長(zhǎng)。然而人口統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)家告訴我們這還只是問(wèn)題的開(kāi)始。因?yàn)橛?jì)劃生育政策已經(jīng)從大城市落實(shí)到了各個(gè)地方,獨(dú)生子女家庭的比例在過(guò)去的30年里出現(xiàn)了爆炸式的增長(zhǎng)。 2005年相關(guān)中國(guó)人口調(diào)查顯示,最近一年中國(guó)的獨(dú)生子女?dāng)?shù)量是2.1億——其中大多數(shù)尚處幼年。而在25-29歲(在1976年到1980年期間出生)的人群中,獨(dú)生子女的比例只有15%。然而,25年后出生的一代,獨(dú)生子女的比例將會(huì)翻兩番。 “在未來(lái),數(shù)以萬(wàn)計(jì)的中國(guó)人將會(huì)因此受到影響?!蓖箍敌链髮W(xué)教授易富賢,在他的著作《大國(guó)空巢》中,描寫(xiě)到中國(guó)計(jì)劃生育政策帶來(lái)的損害?!案改?jìng)儗?huì)失去希望,等到他們年老時(shí),也沒(méi)有人能照顧他們。因?yàn)槊總€(gè)孩子都處在致命性的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)中,獨(dú)生子女家庭就是在高空走鋼絲?!?/p> 然而可惜的是,中國(guó)政府為這些時(shí)刻走在鋼絲上的家庭所提供的社會(huì)保障體系充滿漏洞。十年之前,失獨(dú)家庭才開(kāi)始大規(guī)模涌現(xiàn),而第一代失獨(dú)父母也過(guò)了可以生孩子的年齡,政策并沒(méi)有能夠快速推進(jìn)來(lái)支持他們。 人民代表大會(huì)作為中國(guó)最高立法機(jī)關(guān),于2002年頒布了《中華人民共和國(guó)人口和計(jì)劃生育法》,規(guī)定地方政府為那些獨(dú)生子女意外受傷或是死亡的,并且沒(méi)有領(lǐng)養(yǎng)或再生一個(gè)的家庭“提供必要的援助”。然而,該法并沒(méi)有具體規(guī)定補(bǔ)助的數(shù)目也沒(méi)有在這類(lèi)賠償案中明確政府的角色。在中國(guó),中央政府和地方政府的財(cái)政獨(dú)立。由于中央政府沒(méi)能清晰地定義在面對(duì)失獨(dú)家庭時(shí)政府所承擔(dān)的責(zé)任,因此失獨(dú)家庭的補(bǔ)償完全是由地方政府自己拍案決定,地方財(cái)政而非失獨(dú)家庭正真需求往往決定了補(bǔ)貼數(shù)額。 *** 在姜失去唯一的女兒后,當(dāng)?shù)卣滢o沒(méi)有給予一點(diǎn)補(bǔ)償。即使中央政府在2007年頒布了另一項(xiàng)指令,規(guī)定失獨(dú)家庭的最低補(bǔ)償是每月每人16美元,當(dāng)?shù)氐挠?jì)劃生育辦公室在2010年之前也沒(méi)有給姜她應(yīng)有的補(bǔ)助。 “我們按照政府的要求做了,”姜說(shuō)道,她在得知女兒身亡后一夜白頭。“既然計(jì)劃生育政策帶來(lái)了經(jīng)濟(jì)的繁榮,為什么彌補(bǔ)我們損失的賠償如此之少?他們不能只顧著拿好處,不是嗎?” 像在中國(guó)這樣養(yǎng)老體系不完善的國(guó)家,父母甚至祖母父都指望他們的后代能在他們退休之后為其養(yǎng)老。因此,失去唯一的孩子會(huì)在經(jīng)濟(jì)上帶來(lái)毀滅性的影響。就了解目前只有十個(gè)省市的失獨(dú)家庭享有微不足道的補(bǔ)助,不到這類(lèi)家庭全部的六分之一。補(bǔ)助數(shù)目從16美元到130美元不等。姜女士和她的丈夫每人拿到22美元。 即使這樣,錢(qián)也不是姜最關(guān)心的問(wèn)題。她更希望從政府那得到認(rèn)可,她和她這一代的人為國(guó)家的發(fā)展做出了犧牲,他們的情況并非與那些已故軍人家屬有所不同。然而,這兩類(lèi)家庭在中國(guó)社會(huì)的待遇大不相同:烈士家庭有諸如購(gòu)物折扣,政府廉租房?jī)?yōu)先申請(qǐng)等福利,而這些失獨(dú)家庭則完全不享有。當(dāng)姜打算申請(qǐng)一張信用卡以享受超市折扣時(shí),銀行職員告訴她由于她已經(jīng)退休,姜最佳選擇是成為她孩子信用卡的授權(quán)用戶。姜女士,這位每天花9到10個(gè)小時(shí)與失獨(dú)父母聊天的母親,立刻扭頭就走。 “我們?yōu)檫@個(gè)社會(huì)做出了犧牲,”姜說(shuō)道,“我們是中國(guó)公民,現(xiàn)在因?yàn)閲?guó)家政策我們飽受痛苦。政府應(yīng)該擔(dān)負(fù)起更多的責(zé)任。” 相關(guān)閱讀 經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)人:文人為何愛(ài)飲酒 蘋(píng)果啟動(dòng)“山寨”充電器回收計(jì)劃 (譯者 judith4fff 編輯 齊磊) |