Here’s a quote…

Strictly enforced population control

Forced abortions in China are not a thing of the past. Under the one child policy, many women in late term pregnancy are still forced to abort their children. Chinese provincial authorities are responsible for mass forced sterilizations, and abortions are often performed by people with inadequate training in unsterile conditions.

[…]

China Daily, a state-controlled newspaper, recently published annual abortion figures of 13 million and a live birth rate of 20 million, as recorded by China’s National Family Planning Commission.

The recent China Daily article, echoed by a BBC report, attributes the high number of abortions to lack of education on contraception. However, experts say that most of the abortions are due to the one child policy.

“[We are] fairly certain most of [the 13 million] are forced abortions,” says Colin Mason, who conducted field work in Guangdong and Guangxi Provinces in March this year for the nonprofit Virginia-based Population Research Institute. The two provinces are “models” in China, where the one child policy is strictly enforced and all birth quotas are met. Based on his experience in China, he said most people would have more than one child if they could.

[…]

Under China’s one child policy, couples must apply for a birth permit before having a child. Single women are forbidden to bear children, married women with one child are given an Intra-Uterine Device (IUD), and women with two or more children or a single son are sometimes forcibly sterilized.

[…]

Punitive measures taken to enforce the one child policy include exorbitant fines, coerced abortions and sterilizations, arbitrary detention, torture, and sometimes child abduction. A social compensation fee is the most common method; those who have unplanned pregnancies can be fined from one half to ten times their annual salary, according to Littlejohn.

[…]

The one child policy is enforced at a local, province-by-province level. The policy at the national level extends to every level of government. Local officials in Gansu Province were reportedly promised promotions and monetary rewards for performing a target number of sterilizations in their area, according to the 2008 annual report by the U.S. State Department’s Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC).

[…]

If one person in a family is accused of an unplanned pregnancy, the rest of family is also liable—neighbors, parents, grandparents can all be caught and put in jail or pressured economically.

[…]

The number of abandoned children is also mounting. Parents who get divorced sometimes abandon their child because policy prevents parents from having another child in a new marriage. Abandoned children become destitute and illegal, with no access to health care or education. The same happens to children whose parents did not obtain a birth permit.

That video I just posted titled “Overpopulation: The Making of a Myth” mentioned the UNFPA.  I did a little Google searching, and came across this on the LRC blog by Anthony Gregory from back in October 31st, 2004…

Regardless of one’s views on abortion, forced abortion is obviously neither “pro-choice” nor “pro-life.” This didn’t stop 211 Congresscritters, including 31 members of the “pro-life” Republican Party, from voting to fund “population control” programs in China, which include forced abortion. Of course, the Republicans have good reason:

When Tom Davis (R-VA), one of 31 Republicans voting against the bill amendment (i.e. in favor of funding the UNFPA), came to town, I asked him why he voted that way. He didn’t understand the question, and thought I was talking about the Mexico City policy. I got a call later from his office to “clarify” his answer. The answer, it turns out, was just that he felt population control was very important and that’s why he voted that way.

(I replaced the link, in the quote, with a link to archive.org, since the website being linked to is no longer up.)

Here’s an excerpt from the article linked to from that post…

Report of the China UNFPA Independent Assessment Team

[…] Dear Secretary Powell,

We have just completed an intensive 14 day visit (May 13-26) to the People’s Republic of China. […]

First Finding

We find no evidence that UNFPA has knowingly supported or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization in the PRC.

First Recommendation

We therefore recommend that not more than $34 million which has already been appropriated be released to UNFPA.

Second Finding

We find that notwithstanding some relaxation in the 32 counties in which UNFPA is involved the population programs of the PRC retain coercive elements in law and in practice.

Second Recommendation

We therefore recommend that unless and until all forms of coercion in the PRC law and in practice are eliminated, no U.S. Government funds be allocated for population programs in the PRC.

[1] The full name of the “UNFPA” is currently the “United Nations Population Fund”, which doesn’t actually fit the initialization. However, the initialization makes sense if you know tht the old name of this organization was the “United Nations Fund for Population Activities”.

CNN reports about genetics tests for children…

At the Chongqing Children’s Palace, experts are hoping to revolutionize child-rearing with the help of science. About 30 children aged 3 to 12 years old and their parents are participating in a new program that uses DNA testing to identify genetic gifts and predict the future.

…

The test is conducted by the Shanghai Biochip Corporation. Scientists claim a simple saliva swab collects as many as 10,000 cells that enable them to isolate eleven different genes. By taking a closer look at the genetic codes, they say they can extract information about a child’s IQ, emotional control, focus, memory, athletic ability and more.

…

For about $880, Chinese parents can sign their kids up for the test and five days of summer camp in Chongqing, where the children will be evaluated in various settings from sports to art. The scientific results, combined with observations by experts throughout the week, will be used to make recommendations to parents about what their child should pursue.

…

“China is different from Western countries,” said Yang Yangqing, the lab’s technical director. “There is only one child in our families so more and more parents focus on their children’s education and they want to give them the best education.”

Along with parents, the Chinese government is also interested in giving talented children an early start on their careers. Children as young as two are regularly hand-picked by the government to represent China on the international stage.

Future gymnasts, musicians, and basketball players are sent to rigorous training camps and specialized sports schools, and sometimes paid a government salary.

There has been speculation China’s basketball hero, Yao Ming, was born of an arranged marriage between two well-known basketball players, in hopes of bearing an athletic superstar. Yao and his family have denied these reports. In an autobiography, Yao wrote that his parents actually discouraged him from playing the sport.

…

Yao’s family reportedly received special stipends from the government to purchase extra food. His success story may well be on the minds of parents in Chongqing.

(Emphasis mine.)

Read the rest of the article…

Based on what the article says, it doesn’t look like these DNA tests are forced.  Although the government in China does has their forced one child policy.

UPDATE: Daniel MacArthur of Genetic Future gives his 2 cents on genetic testing kids for IQ, athletic performance, and emotional control.  Razib Khan actually finds the key quote on Daneils comment…

Unlike a lot of commentators on this story, I’ve got nothing fundamentally against the idea of using genetics to make predictions about a child’s future, and on guiding the activities a child engages in based on those predictions. Here’s the thing, though: this only makes sense if the predictions are both accurate and relevant, and right now the predictions from genetics regarding complex traits are neither. Parents should save their money for more useful ways to enrich their children’s lives.