One of the advantages of population growth control is the possible reduction of poverty. There is no doubt that vastly over-populated areas suffer from greater degrees of poverty.
As populations grow, resources are over-stretched and many end up in situations where they have to rely on state benefits in order to survive. This in turn puts further strain on resources. Controlling population growth could result in more evenly spread resources.
There are, however, certain disadvantages to a growth controlling program, as has been proven in the Chinese example. Laws enforcing a single child policy can lead to all sorts of problems, from forced abortions to involuntary sterilisations.
Women accidentally becoming pregnant a second time face having to lose their child or a life in hiding, possibly resulting in great poverty.
Some argue that control would allow governments to decide who is allowed to reproduce. This could ensure only those of 'worthy' parenting material would be allowed to reproduce.
The question is, where would the lines be drawn? Would only the wealthy be allowed to have children, while others are forced to be sterilised or abort possible pregnancies?
Who would decide who is or isn't worthy of becoming a parent? Unacceptable race issues may surface in certain countries, with only those conforming to a certain type or standard being allowed to raise children.
The consequences of such laws and regulations could become catastrophic, to say the least. In addition, there are also certain religious points of view to be considered.
Many churches do not condone contraception. This could prove to be a major stumbling point for the introduction of any kind of control program.
The only way for poverty to be reduced by controlling population growth is with incentives for smaller families, rather than punishment for the larger ones.