For a considerable period of time, Indonesia has been renowned for the numerous high-profile figures who exert considerable influence on the global economy. Concurrently, Indonesia remains within the top 100 in terms of poverty incidence. Those at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder may be invisible to those at the top. This is evidenced by the growing inequality between the wealthy and the impoverished, as indicated by a ratio of 0.388 in 2023 (Primantoro & Theodora, 2023). Notwithstanding, the prevalence of poverty in Indonesia has exhibited a gradual decline, with 25 million individuals affected in 2023, a reduction from the 27 million in 2021 (BPS, 2023a). The widening economic gap in Indonesia may be attributed to a lack of access to education, employment, sanitation, and other basic necessities.
In Indonesia, disparities in access to health services serve as a salient illustration of the adverse consequences of inadequate attention to public services, particularly in remote regions. This ultimately contributes to the intensification of social and economic inequality (Sugiastuti & Pratama, 2022). Additionally, the level of education is influenced by economic factors. This is evidenced by data from the BPS indicating that children in quintile 1 expenditure groups are less likely to receive primary education. Moreover, these factors continue to exert a considerable and unresolved influence. Despite the government’s long-standing efforts to alleviate poverty through various initiatives, these measures have not significantly reduced existing inequalities. In addition, with poverty and high fertility rates, it will affect the behavior of parents and the future of children, where more and more families will be economically burdened so that they cannot provide basic rights to their children, such as education and health, so that child labor will be found. This then explains the importance of understanding childbirth limitation policies that can influence and be influenced by economic, social, cultural and human rights factors in Indonesia. For this reason, a family planning program through access to contraceptives is needed, which is expected to reduce poverty in Indonesia.
Family Planning Policies and Programs in Indonesia
The implementation of the Keluarga Berencana (KB) program occurred during the presidency of Soeharto, a period during which restrictions on the number of child allowances were in place, as outlined in Article 16 of Government Regulation No. 7 of 1977. This article establishes the limit on the number of children permitted for civil servants, namely a maximum of three children who will be provided with allowances. This policy aims to control population growth by offering incentives to civil servants who limit the number of their children (Kurniatul et al., 2023). However, the policy is considered incompatible with human rights, particularly for women, who should have the right to make choices regarding their own reproduction.
Based on Law No. 52 of 2009, the family planning program aims to form a small family in accordance with the socio-economic capacity of a family by regulating the birth of children in order to create a harmonious, happy family and, most importantly, a family that can meet its needs. With the end of the New Order era, the family planning program was given less attention by the government until the Joko Widodo era. The regulation of births is more “in line” with human rights principles, where the government makes efforts to provide health services for pregnant and lactating mothers, guidance for adolescents on reproductive counseling and family development, discussions on contraceptive use, increasing family participation, and increasing family income through the KB Village program. However, the impact of this program has not been fully realized (Kurniatul et al., 2023), as Indonesia’s fertility rate remains relatively high at 2.18, with the highest rate in East Nusa Tenggara (NTT) at 2.79 and the lowest in Jakarta at 1.75 (BPS, 2023b). It can be assumed that DKI Jakarta, with many young people with sufficient access to education, health and better economic opportunities, can control the birth rate itself. This means that younger and more educated people understand more about reproductive rights and change the factors that influence views and practices related to childbearing. Meanwhile, in NTT, the tendency to have high fertility rates can be attributed to several factors, namely cultural beliefs such as “many children, many sustenance,” and also the lack of education and access to reproductive rights for women. Reproductive rights themselves are the right of every individual to make decisions about their sexual and reproductive activities without discrimination, coercion or violence.
Relevance of Determinants in the Implementation of Birth Restriction Policy in Indonesia
The dynamics of family planning policy and reproductive rights can be explained by at least four factors. These include patriarchal culture, the perception that having many children provides greater sustenance, social change, and the gradual change in people’s perceptions of the cost of raising children. In Indonesia, patriarchal culture remains a pervasive influence, with women often regarded as the primary caregivers within the household and men as the primary breadwinners. This culture often leads to the perception of underage girls and women as mere sex objects, with minimal awareness of the long-term impact and responsibilities associated with their actions. Moreover, the pervasiveness of patriarchal culture in certain regions of Indonesia has resulted in the prevalence of early marriages among women. In 2015, the number of early marriages in Indonesia reached approximately 2 million, with projections indicating an anticipated increase by 2030. Of the numerous cases, approximately 50% of early marriages involve girls under the age of 18 and men over the age of 30. As a result, the freedom of these children is significantly constrained. Their status as wives restricts their activities to domestic tasks, precluding them from pursuing higher education and rendering them vulnerable to the prevailing social norms (Sakina & Siti, 2017). It is evident that children who are compelled to marry at an early age are deprived of the opportunity to comprehend their reproductive rights as women. In underdeveloped rural communities, raising the minimum legal age for marriage appears to be a more effective approach than providing contraceptive education (Tabbarah, 1964).
Furthermore, cultural beliefs such as “many children, many sustenance” have a detrimental impact on the practice of family planning. This phrase implies that each child will provide their own sustenance, which can lead to a lack of consideration for the potential challenges associated with raising a large family. In reality, however, the presence of unstable economic conditions will result in an increased burden on parents and children alike. To illustrate, children from impoverished households often opt to engage in labor over pursuing an education. This ultimately results in the exploitation of child labor and a clear violation of children’s rights in general. In accordance with the aforementioned, in underdeveloped rural communities, married couples are disinclined to limit their number of births. They are also skeptical about family planning programs, which renders them less receptive to initiatives related to birth control advice. It is therefore essential to conduct a further assessment of the desirability of birth control in the area and to provide comprehensive socialization before investing in birth control devices (Tabbarah, 1964).
On the other hand, social changes such as the influence of urbanization, increased education, and economic growth have significantly changed the views of families, at least in some strata of society, regarding the number of children. This is largely related to the social class of the community, where “efficacy” as something that is formed through the socialization process is dependent on social class. Efficacy itself is the willingness to plan, self-regulation, assertiveness, and belief in one’s ability to perform behaviors that will help achieve one’s goals. In addition, a woman’s economic prospects and level of education can be important motivators for contraceptive use and reproductive knowledge, as young women with higher education and established jobs have more financially stable futures and are more likely to use contraception and have better knowledge about reproductive rights (Zvavitch et al., 2020). This suggests that access to education and economic opportunity not only increases awareness and understanding of contraception, but also strengthens individual empowerment to make wiser reproductive decisions.
Moreover, the financial implications of raising a family, including the cost of living and the expense of raising children, also inform the decision-making process regarding the desired number of children. The increasing cost of essentials and basic expenses, such as education, necessitates that parents be more cognizant of the potential and impact they will have on their children in the future. The financial implications of raising children are shaped by a number of pivotal factors that inform decisions regarding the desired number of children. Firstly, it is evident that household income plays a significant role in this context. Families with higher incomes tend to have greater resources invested in children’s education and health, which can effectively reduce the financial burden associated with raising children. Furthermore, the cost of raising children tends to decrease with increasing family size due to economies of scale in expenses such as housing and transportation. For example, a family with one child may be able to afford to travel by motorcycle and a minimalist house may be sufficient. The decision to have fewer children per family is a strategy that is adopted in order to maintain a higher quality of children, given that the purchasing power parity of family income has been on a steady decline (Menon & Perali, 2019).
Family Planning and Human Rights
There is a legal basis related to birth control policy in Indonesia, especially in reproductive rights and its relation to international legal instruments such as UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human Rights) article 25 recognizes the right to an adequate standard of living including medical care and social services; ICESCR (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) article 12 recognizes the right to a standard of physical and mental health, which includes access to contraception as part of reproductive health; CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women) article 12 and 16 states that women have equal access to health services, including those related to family planning and is the right of women to decide freely and responsibly about the number and spacing of children supported by access to information, education, and facilities that enable them to exercise these rights; and CRC (Convention on the Rights of the Child) article 24 which recognizes the right of children to enjoy the highest standard of health without discrimination.
Birth restriction efforts relate to reproductive rights, women’s empowerment, and gender equality. In this context, the importance of considering human rights, including the rights of children and women, when reducing birth rates becomes very relevant. During the New Order era in Indonesia, there were similar efforts that were deemed less relevant after the period ended. As an alternative, a more inclusive KB program was implemented with a socialization approach on the importance of contraception and preparation before having children, rather than providing incentives. Despite its success in reducing the birth rate and improving socio-economic conditions without unduly burdening the community, the policy is still questioned for its adherence to human rights. This is because it does not give women the same choice to decide about their pregnancies. The importance of availability and accessibility of effective contraception is key in ensuring such freedom (Rampell, 2015).
Children from underprivileged families tend to face higher health and educational risks with long-term consequences in the form of lower academic grades, limited educational opportunities, and constrained earning potential as adults. In addition, parents with low incomes tend to have little investment in each of their children. However, family planning programs can increase this investment by reducing the relative cost of child quality and increasing parents’ average income. The implementation of family planning programs can reduce poverty by giving families more control over birth decisions, potentially increasing investments in children, and reducing the likelihood of children living in poverty in the future (Bailey et al., 2014). Improving legal and financial access to contraception can have significant impacts for women enabling them to plan pregnancies more effectively, as well as potentially improving their education and health and that of their children. Policies that support individual women’s education, economic security and reproductive control are also crucial to eliminating poverty (IWPR, 2020).
Conclusion
Indonesia has serious problems with poverty and inequality. While fewer people are poor, differences in access to education, jobs, and health care make the problem worse. Family planning policies that respect women’s rights are important in changing the idea that many children are a symbol of sustenance. Investing in education, health, and access to contraception is key to reducing poverty and improving well-being. Programs like Kampung KB show potential in helping families manage childbearing according to their circumstances. To reduce poverty and disparities in Indonesia, we need a comprehensive approach involving education, gender equality, reproductive rights, and sustainable economic policies.
