Latanya Mapp Frett’s article “The End of China’s One-Child Policy Isn’t Enough” leaves some unanswered questions. She argues that “[n]o government should interfere with the decisions women make about whether or when to have children.” Yet the UN projected that if world average fertility remained at 1995 levels (about three children per woman), the world population would soar to 256 billion by 2150. Does Frett mean that governments — who have the obligation to maximize our quality of life — would have to stand by and let that happen? What if they used non-coercive methods or urged smaller families? Frett argues that no government “should interfere with the deeply personal decisions women make about whether or when to have children—period.” But is the decision to have a child the same as the decision to not have a child? Doesn’t the former involve the interests of the child that will exist and the society that child will join? We have the opportunity to create a better future for every child by encouraging smaller families and stronger communities.