Individual rights. Individual rights must be bal-
anced against the power of the government to control
human Some people—respected legisla-
tots, judges, and lawyers included—have viewed the
right to have children as a fundamental and inalienable
right. Yet neither the Declaration Of Independence nor
the Constitution mentions a right to reproduce. Nor does
the UN Charter describe such a right, although a
resolution of the United Nations amrms the "right
responsibly to choose" the number and spacing Of chil-
dren (our emphasis). In the United States, individuals
have a constitutional right to privacy and it has been held
that the right to privacy includes the right to choose
whether or not to have children, at least to the extent that
a woman has a right to choose nor to have children. But
the right is not unlimited. Where the society has a
"compelling, subordinating interest" in regulating pop-
ulation size, the right of the individual may be curtailed.
If society's survival depended on haying more children,
women could required to bear children, just as men
can constitutionally be required to serve in the armed
forces. Similarly, given a crisis caused by overpopula-
tion, reasonably necessary laws to control
reproduction could be enactcd.
It is Often argued that the right to have children is So
personal that the go vernrnent should not regulate it. In an
ideal society, no doubt the state should leave family size
and composition solely to the desires of the parents. In
today's world, however, the number Of children in a
family is a nutter of profound public concern. The law
regulates Other highly personal matters. For example, no
one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time.
Why should the law not be able to prevent a from
having more than two children?
psu.edu