In 1789, an attempt to control population by the Chinese government introduced a one-child policy which stated that most couples could have a maximum of one child (Clarke). This policy completely bottlenecked the population and set the social norm of a family to have only one child. The biggest problem this policy caused, regarding child neglect, is the following thought process: “Well, if I only get one child, who is supposed to support my spouse and I in our old age, I do not want him to be disabled!” It also had detrimental effects on the economy, as a smaller number of children now means a smaller workforce twenty years from now (Ahmed). Recently, in response to population decline occurring at an alarming rate, China has lifted the almost forty-year-old one-child policy. However, it is likely too little, too late as the social norm is now a one-child family. Also, most middle class families in China simply cannot afford to support two children and are, therefore, forced to stop at one, or have no children at all! This presents the same predicament for parents of a newly-born disabled child, often resulting in the abandonment of the …show more content…
As a foster home, they are technically not an orphanage, though one would have a hard time identifying the difference. Their classification as a “foster home” is different from an orphanage only nominally. The country-run orphanage cannot accommodate the millions of orphans in China. They take only the ones for whom they can provide care and rely on independently-run “foster homes” to take care of the others. Shepherd’s Field takes in the disabled children that the government-run orphanages reject, shows them love, and teaches them the gospel. They exclusively help special-needs orphans, of whom there is no shortage, as they are most likely to be rejected by the government-run