No university education after 18, no marriages after 25, and no uteruses after 30.

Naoki Hyakuta, leader of the Conservative Party of Japan, suggested these policies as a response to Japan’s declining birth rate. After receiving backlash, he apologized and said that it was meant as a “science-fiction storyline” (Sharma). This appears similar to Badenoch, who after her comments on maternity pay led to backlash, said that her comments were misrepresented. Hyakuta’s comments are much more extreme than Badenoch’s, but similarly he failed to realize the fallacy in his apology. While he may say that he does not advocate for such measures, believing that policies that go that far are necessary for change means that Hyakuta sees similar policies as needed.

Sparking a Debate

While Hyakuta allegedly wanted to start a debate, I do not think that politicians in positions of power who have the ability to make laws have the luxury to suggest such policies without the public believing that this represents their views. While this may not be the case if the context was clear, the backlash that ensued shows that it was not. Further, while this may start a debate on how to solve the declining birth rate, starting a debate on restricting women’s autonomy by using forced hysterectomies suggests that that the policy is one that can be defended. I think this is especially problematic in a country that places 120 out of 153 countries in gender equality (Ipsos). When women are already not being treated as equal to men, presenting the idea that their rights to marriage, to reproduction, and to education can be stripped away in the name of national concerns is problematic. Hyakuta is a lawmaker, a Party leader, and has a large audience and so these “hypothetical debates” could lead to worsening inequality.

Restricting Autonomy

The policies that Hyakuta suggested are those that would strip women’s rights and limit their autonomy. It would be ridiculous to suggest that autonomy is the be-all and end-all right. Western countries are the ones that have recently been placing importance on autonomy and respecting autonomy, but even they limit it. People tend to have their right to autonomy as long as it does not harm another person, if it does not interfere with national security, etc. Limitations on autonomy are normal because the law cannot place one value above everything else. Legal systems have numerous rules and values that may conflict with each other, and so a balancing exercise ensues where each is weighed against each other in specific contexts.

For instance, it is important for most countries to have a military and in order to have people in the army, countries globally have mandatory service. This includes countries like Greece, Thailand, Sweden, Iran, etc. In these situations, autonomy is limited for the good of the country. The importance of autonomy may potentially be more limited in collectivist cultures which prioritizes the good of the community over the individual, but autonomy will always have limitations regardless of the country due to the importance of other values or concerns.

National Concerns over Decreasing Birth Rate

What is Causing It

These policies were suggested as part of debate in order to spark conversation on how to solve Japan’s decreasing birth rate. This is because a popular belief is that Japan’s population is shrinking because women are putting their careers first (Semuels). Hence, Hyakuta’s suggestions of restricting access to higher education and putting a time limit on marriage and children are so that women are more likely to focus on their families.

However, a major reason for the low birth rate is economic instability. With high living costs, bleak job prospects, and a tough work culture, people are reluctant to get married and have children (Economic Times). They know that it would be difficult to afford to raise children and the current corporate culture in Japan is not conducive to raising a family. Moreover, the bleak job prospects means that most young men are not attractive marriage prospects (East-West Center). As men are widely expected to be the breadwinners in Japan, a lack of employment opportunities means there are less marriages occurring (Semuels). Most of Japan’s current policies focus on supporting married couples with raising a family, and so this aspect of the declining birth rate is not being tackled as extensively (Economic Times).

The Impact This Has

This has presented two main issues for Japan. The first is that Japan is looking to fortify its military, which will be difficult with an aging population (Economic Times). The second is the economic implications of having a shrinking workforce and fewer adults in the future to support the economy.

Why Women’s Autonomy Is More Important

Are those concerns more important than the autonomy of women? More specifically, are the severe restrictions that Hyakuta’s policies would implement on women justifiable in the name of improving Japan’s birth rate. This is because while we have established that restrictions on autonomy are common in legal systems, there is a difference between that and the extreme measures that Hyakuta suggested.

Access to Higher Education

While Hyakuta suggested barring women from higher education, the fact that he did not suggest completely removing their access to education makes me presume that he either understood that education was important or he thought that suggesting it would be so extreme that it would take away from the point he was attempting to make. Removing women’s access to higher education makes them more unemployable in a country that already has bleak job prospects. Considering Japan wants to increase the birth rate and studies show higher female employment rates lead to higher birth rates, it may be counterproductive to make women focus on families at the expense of their careers without their consent (Wingfield-Hayes). Moreover, 70% of women quit working after their first child and will need to rely on their husband’s salary (Semuels). Hence, while removing women’s job prospects may force them to turn to raising a family due to a lack of other options, this does not change the fact that the economic climate in Japan means many people do not want to marry and many men are considered unsuitable marriage partners. The issue would still prevail.

Time Limit On Marriage and Childbirth

Japan has few out-of-wedlock births due to the importance of traditional family values (Yamaguchi). Therefore, if people are not getting married as stated above, then the birth rate is not going to improve. Adding a time limit on when a woman should get married does not remove the fact that she may not want to get married for the reasons we’ve discussed.

Moreover, sterilizing women does not increase the birth rate although it may force women to consider children at an earlier stage in their life. However, considering that the mean age of childbearing in Japan is over 30 and only increasing recently, I do not see how sterilization at such an early age helps the birth rate (Statista). Clearly many women are having their children after 30, and by sterilizing them at 30, this policy may in fact reduce the birth rate.

As a result, regardless of what Hyakuta meant with the policies he suggested, I think implementing them or any measure similar would not make sense. While I have stated that restrictions on autonomy are simply part of how a legal system works, there is no counterweight in this example that explains why these rights would be restricted. As I have explained, Japan’s declining birth rate is due to other causes and so limiting women’s rights and restricting their autonomy would have no real benefit.