Should new parents get a cash reward?

From midnight on 1 July, all new parents in Australia will be given a maternity bonus of A$3,000.

The government has introduced the so-called baby bonus amid concerns about the country's declining birth-rate.

Doctors at several city hospitals said there was scramble by women to delay the arrival of their babies until after the midnight cut-off.

And Glen Sargent, a school principal in Sydney, claims the A$3,000 payment is encouraging teenagers at his school to fall pregnant.

Do you think the 'baby bonus' is a good idea? Is it encouraging teenage pregnancies?

This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

---

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:

To financially encourage just one stage in the development of a productive human being is counter-productive when you view the large overpopulation elsewhere in the world. Australia should take the American approach - immigration and naturalization of energetic and educated people to revitalize and rejuvenate an aging society.
Ian, Austin, Texas, USA

I think the money would be put to better use by giving it to organizations that help severely overpopulated countries deal with birth control issues.
Jeff Stevens, Seattle, USA

And what about women who are unable to have babies? What do they get? A sympathy card?
ME, Portland, USA

I don't think it is a good idea. The only incentive for having a child should be a strong desire to nurture another human being. Why not encourage people to adopt children?
Rebecca, USA

I think this is good incentive for couples who want children, but not for the teenagers in school - or people looking for some quick money!
Shannon, NYC, USA

We'll save the money in the child's name, a nest egg for his/her future Greg, Brisbane, Australia

My wife and I are both in our late 20's and are considering having our first child in the near future. The $3000 hasn't influenced our decision, but we just feel we'd like to have children, after all, having children is a selfish act. Parents choose to have children, never the other way around. Anyway, personally, we'll save the money in the child's name, a nest egg for his/her future. I think the baby bonus is a great idea as it helps growing the Australia population, which will help develop Australia's economy in the long term. It also helps maintain/develop our Australian culture and values, of which immigration may not.
Greg, Brisbane, Australia

Adopt, foster, revamp the maternity and paternity rights of employees but don't pay for children. It's like surrogate parenting on a national scale.
Kaz, Hull, UK

You can see it can't you, the whole thing is going to hell; paying women to have babies, "parenting" lessons, women quotas from the boardroom to the military, the increasing irrelevance of marriage, state run childcare, state funded child support....
Steve, UK

A good psychological incentive as well Christopher Xaphakdy, Minnesota, USA

Oh, obviously yes, the baby bonus is an excellent notion once country is being faced with a gradually declined birth rate. The "baby bonus" renders not only financial incentive to the young couples, but also provides a good psychological incentive as well.
Christopher Xaphakdy, Minnesota, USA

We are paying our population to breed, because our government claims our birth-rate is too low. This is the same government that throws men, women and children behind barbed wire fences for years at a time because they are fleeing disaster and oppression overseas only to find worse in Australia. Maybe if they were allowed into society they could contribute towards it? Sometimes I am embarrassed at the way the rest of the world must see our hypocrisy.
Peter , Perth, Australia

Some of you don't get it. Increasing immigration will increase the birth rate for the first generation, but then it quickly drops off in the second generation. Then you simply have the same problem, and the vacuum never ends. A subsidy could be encouraging to young couples that may have only wanted one kid but instead now will have two. Vouchers for baby supplies is still a better idea though.
Bryan Short, Bemidji, MN, USA

This is the best government idea I've heard of in years. Western countries need to get serious about stopping population decline before they go extinct. The maternity bonus should be much bigger than $3000.
John, USA

The Australian government could ease visa requirements for Asian countries Gaurav Arora, Amritsar, India

Instead of using abrupt means of promoting the birth rate it will be much better if the Australian government could ease visa requirements for Asian countries, especially India and Pakistan. This means those countries population will be spread out to Australia and on the other Australians will be getting more people to join them in their country.
Gaurav Arora, Amritsar- India

With 6,000,000,000 people in the world, we don't need to encourage breeding!
Charles Barnard, Menomonie, Wisconsin, USA

How about 5k to people who adopt instead of increasing the worlds population?
Duncan, Richmond, VA, USA

Family planning should not be based on near-term monetary objectives Jeremy, Los Angeles, California

"Baby bonus" will only encourage irresponsible parenthood. Family planning should not be based on near-term monetary objectives. Those parents who make baby decisions based on $3,000 bonus are likely to be ones who are not fit for parenting. How about providing more government assistance for child caring as an alternative?
Jeremy, Los Angeles, California

It would be a good idea for happily married mothers who already have one child and for whom a means test would make them eligible. If given to unmarried women, or those who have no stable environment into which they can bring another child then the result will be extra load on care homes and social workers. If given for third and subsequent children families will get far too big. If given irrespective of means it will help the rich more than the poor.
Phil, UK

Don't encourage the wrong people Grace Wirth, Hockessin, USA

As an Australian I think it's insane. I can just imagine the number of young girls who will think this is a wonderful idea and then line up for social welfare to boot. Perhaps if couples have been married for two years minimum and prove that they have been working saving. Then and only then. Don't encourage the wrong people.
Grace Wirth, Hockessin USA

If the issue it not enough procreation occurring in Australia, why not fund international adoption instead of encouraging more births on an already over populated world?
Jen, Orlando, USA

Childless people are already marginalised. It's time we got a few cosy tax benefits ourselves.
Jake Goretzki, London, UK

Every little bit helps Ryan, New Orleans, USA

I think that sounds like a wonderful idea. For some people, every little bit helps. This is especially true when it comes to the expenses of having a baby.
Ryan, New Orleans, USA

Yes, give them a bonus with the stipulation that they must attend parenting classes in order to get the bonus. Let's get something positive out of this for society as well.
Zo, Cobham, UK

I believe many of the people are missing the point as to why this is being introduced. Funding an ageing population is difficult and Australia's demographic mix has to be addressed otherwise the government will have very little choice other than to raise taxes or cut retirement benefits.
James, London

Having children should be a privilege, not a right. Rewarding people for making the world's chronic overpopulation worse is just madness. If Australia think they have a low population problem, then they should accept more people into the country from elsewhere.
John, Southampton, UK

This cynical ploy won't buy votes G.P. Russell, Peterborough, England

The Australian Federal elections are soon. This cynical ploy won't buy votes but will cause problems, particularly with teenage pregnancies. The Australian welfare system is more bizarre than the UK's. This is reflected in the high Australian tax rates.
G.P. Russell, Peterborough, England

In the USA, $3000 (Australian) would maybe just about pay for the hospital stay involved in a birth without complications.
Alice, Chicago, USA

If the British government wanted to encourage more women to have children, I think they should start by providing a lot more cheap nursery places and child minding facilities.
Pascal Jacquemain, Welwyn Garden City, UK

This is about choice. Parents choose to have kids. If they cannot afford to have them without some form of state assistance, they shouldn't be having them. Pay for your own breeding and stop relying on everyone else subsidising you!
Mark H, UK

To stop opportunism and try to ensure responsible parenting, the offer should only be open to couples who have been married for, say, five years.
Dave, Nottingham

How about providing parents with $3,000 worth of vouchers? Kat Wesley, Derby, UK

Fine in theory, a little worrying in practice. How about providing parents with $3,000 worth of vouchers which can only be spent in certain baby care stores? That would still help out new parents, but ensure the money is spent on the child.
Kat Wesley, Derby, UK

As with the $600 payments for each child, the $3000 baby bonus will be mainly spent on new wide screen TV sets, gambling and holidays.
J. Johnson, Melbourne, Australia

$3000 (Australian) isn't that much money, only about £800. That barely covers the cost of a buggy, cot, some baby clothes and nappies. Having children is expensive.
Peter, Nottingham, UK

If the Australian government wants to increase the population, why not improve the current immigration system? All paying for births will do is encourage the desperate to commit to children, offering a short term financial reward, but what price the child once the $3000 is spent? I hope the Australian government is bolstering their welfare homes for the inevitable influx.
Frank, London, England

I think it's a great idea! Parents are hard hit by loss of income when they have children and anything that eases the burden is very welcome. Financial worries are a big cause of stress, so if a country can afford to help, it should. Well done Australia!
Anthony, Germany (UK)

It all sounds a bit strange really. If you want a family you don't require sponsorship from the government! Who would pay for this??? As a tax payer who had children in the eighties I would not wish to fund others for something that people should fund themselves. What next? Fined if you don't succeed in producing a live healthy infant?
Anon, Scotland