Absolutely, this is a human right. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, "The Right to Decide the Number and Spacing of Children" is one of 12 basic human rights (see http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/V4Repro%20Rights%20Are%20Human%20Rights%20-%20FINAL.pdf ). Reading further in the source we find the following quote building on a statement from the 1994 International
Conference on Population and Development (ICPD).

- quote -
All individuals have reproductive rights, which are grounded in a constellation of fundamental human rights guarantees. These guarantees are found in the oldest and most accepted human rights instruments, as well as in more recently adopted international and regional treaties. A series of documents adopted at United Nations conferences, most notably the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), have explicitly linked governments’ duties under international treaties to their obligations to uphold reproductive rights. As stated in Paragraph 7.3 of the ICPD Programme of Action:

Reproductive rights embrace certain human rights that are already recognized in national laws, international human rights documents and other consensus documents. These rights rest on the recognition of the basic right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and the right to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. It also includes their right to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence, as expressed in human rights documents.22 These legal principles have been given added force and depth in a series of interpretations made by UN and regional human rights bodies in groundbreaking cases. In addition, the UN treaty monitoring bodies, which are charged with monitoring government compliance with major human rights treaties, now routinely recommend that governments take action to ensure sexual and reproductive rights for women.
- end quote -

Having stated all that, the next question is, what does this mean, and more importantly, what does it not mean. What it means is that the state, society, or any other external entity has no right to force a woman (or a couple) to have a child, or to not have a child (or several).

What it does not mean is that society or the state are not allowed to encourage responsible reproductive behavior. For example, in a country where there are too many children born into squalor and poverty, and where population growth is threatening the very health and safety of society in general, it is perfectly acceptable to provide incentives to women (or couples) who choose to remain child-less, or limit themselves to one child. Such incentives might be monetary, educational, or other. As long as folks who choose to have more kids are not punished or coerced for their decision, it is acceptable to reward others for a more socially responsible choice.

I believe it is a basic human right and one of the most important ones. In addition to whatever my friends said here, it is a must to mention here that If this very right is denied or human are debarred from it, then the whole human race may become extinct.

@opher also gave a very good answer, and a very informative and detailed one. Great job @opher.

Thanks

Legally, in the US at least people do have the right to reproduce. A better question is should they? I definitely see a problem with people who are on drugs or who drink too much, becoming responsible for the care and feeding of an innocent little baby. I don't really see how that would work, though. That is probably why nothing gets done on this issue.

Yes. I believe it is a basic human right. It's the only way to maintain life. Without reproduction, there would be no life existing in this Earth as no one can exist forever. And it's there given included in the package for being a member of the animal kingdom. And biblically speaking, we're being told to go and multiply. I hope this would not be misunderstood, too.

And I think that people have the right to have children when they're responsible enough to feed, educate, and raise them as good citizens. But the sad thing is, the poorest families are the ones who often have lots of children when they don't have nothing to support them all. It's really difficult to be parents that is why the government is there to guide its people in order to have a better living. Our economic problems just rooted from overpopulation. If we can control it then we are minimizing the problems also.

Yes, all people have the right to reproduce and just like animals it is part of the overall scheme of life on this planet. The question really is do all people have the moral right to reproduce. If they cannot live up to their responsibility as parents they do not. Even with high death rates in certain countries should they not reproduce and carry on their seed? Going back in history there were plenty of times high death rates were the norm. The policies of certain countries to limit reproduction are communist or dictatorship countries that limit a multitued of human rights. It has also been the reverse in history when Germany paid citizens to have more children. But Government policy does not limit basic rights it only curtails them illegally.

I would have to say, yes, to an extent. Natural resources are limited and overpopulation is a real and global threat. We also have to think about the livelihood of the child aside from the right of the parents. If the children are born in impoverished family or even from drug addict parents who can't take care of the children, they become the responsibility of the states, so the states should also have the right not to allow certain people to have children unless they meet basic criteria to be able to provide the children with basic needs and affection.

I would say that the government should take every step to ensure that there are no unplanned pregnancies that can worsen the situation. Only after this step is taken and that the government can think of restricting reproduction of their citizens.

NO! It's a basic instinct and desire that is pretty much uncontrollable in all animals.

The "true" answer to the question lies in the text opher quoted, but my personal answer would be that situations can arise that should preclude a person's right to have as many babies as they want. The global threat of overpopulation comes immediately to mind...

If a country (or specified urban area) is overpopulated, placing a limitation on how many children a couple should have seems a logical decision to make. I don't see a problem with a country having a one-child policy so long as it is a rule made without exception based on any given individual's income, race, social status or other factors.

That said, I hit a bit of a wall in trying to come up with a way to enforce such a rule that isn't a bit creepy. Forcing women to have abortions is a horrid thing to do. Some articles on China's rule suggest infanticide is also going on, which is an extremely disturbing thing to consider. The best I could come up with re: a way to enforce would be to sterilize women after they give birth to a healthy child. It might seem harsh, but I think it would be the most humane of all possible solutions ...