Vietnam has long wrestled with the silent challenge of sex selection — a social undercurrent that reshapes families before birth. With the country’s recent efforts to “incentivize daughters” and crack down on prenatal gender screening, the spotlight is shining again on how deeply ethnic traditions, economic pressures and modern medicine intersect to influence who gets born. This surge of attention comes at a moment when demographers warn that persistent sex-selection is distorting the natural balance of births and threatening social stability.
The Vietnamese media report that the Hanoi government is now considering new policies to discourage sex-selection practices. Under the proposed measures, families that have daughters may receive incentives, while medical professionals caught revealing fetal sex or facilitating sex-selective abortions could face heavier penalties. Critics say the policy aims to reverse decades of male-biased birth statistics, but it also underscores how widespread and entrenched son preference has become.
The imbalance is not trivial. According to the 2019 census, the sex ratio at birth (SRB) in Viet Nam was around 111.5 boys for every 100 girls — up from the globally recognized “natural” range of about 104 to 106 boys per 100 girls. In some provinces, especially in the north and the Red River Delta, the SRB has exceeded 120 — a dramatic skew. Analysts warn that if this trend persists, the nation may face a “surplus” of millions of men unable to find spouses; earlier projections flagged a shortfall of approximately 1.5 million adult males by 2034.
Why does sex selection persist in Vietnam? Much of it traces back to traditional values shaped by centuries of Confucian-rooted patriarchal kinship. In many families, a son is not only viewed as a bearer of the family name — vital for ancestral worship and lineage continuity — but also as a lifeline in old age, a provider of labor, and a social insurance in rural communities. This “son preference” is embedded in cultural norms (nếp sống, quan niệm “truyền thống”) that elevate male children over daughters.
The demographic shift only gained momentum with improved access to prenatal ultrasound and legal abortion. As fertility rates dropped — driven historically by population-control policies like the Two‑Child Policy — families with one or two children felt heightened pressure to ensure their child was a boy. With smaller family sizes, the perceived “risk” of remaining without a son grew. In that environment, prenatal gender screening combined with abortion became tools for ensuring the birth of sons rather than girls.
But sex-selective abortion doesn’t just produce statistical distortions — it reflects persistent devaluation of girls and perpetuates gender inequality. As noted by UNFPA and other gender-advocacy bodies, this imbalance is a “powerful manifestation of gender inequality,” deeply undermining the status of women in Vietnamese society and limiting gender parity in opportunity and rights.
The new 2025 initiative to “incentivize daughters” (khuyến khích sinh con gái) signals a shift in policy intent: to rebalance SRB not simply by prohibiting harmful practices, but by encouraging a cultural revaluation of girl children. Government statements echo a recognition that son preference is not merely a personal choice, but a societal pattern harmful at scale. As one senior official noted recently, “we need to reduce gender imbalance at birth,” warning that failure to act could threaten long-term population stability. Vietnam+ (VietnamPlus)+1
Yet transforming centuries of lived values won’t be easy. In regions with economic growth and higher educational attainment, the SRB imbalance is often stronger — a paradox that reveals how modernization can coincide with entrenched gender bias. Emerging research suggests that meaningful change will require not just legal deterrence, but deep cultural shifts: challenging the idea that sons are indispensable, promoting daughters’ value equally (giá trị của con gái), and dismantling the link between childbearing and social insurance or family honor.
Vietnam’s journey toward gender equality may now pass through the womb, as policies try to correct what decades of tradition and demographic pressures created. If the 2025 proposals succeed, future generations might know a country where both sons and daughters are welcomed — not as a matter of chance, but as a reflection of real equality.
Vietnam, Vietnam, my beautiful, vibrant, caffeinated-on-iced-coffee Vietnam. We need to talk — and yes, Auntie has taken off her heels and put on her “I’m disappointed but not surprised” face.
Sex selection. Choosing sons before birth. Quiet ultrasounds, coded whispers in clinics, and decisions framed as “family matters” while millions of girls quietly vanish from the statistics. It’s always presented as tradition, isn’t it? Truyền thống (tradition). Gia đình (family). Thờ cúng tổ tiên (ancestor worship). Funny how tradition almost always seems to benefit men who are already alive.
Let’s be very clear: this is not about loving sons too much. This is about valuing daughters too little. If you truly believed con gái (daughters) and con trai (sons) were equal, there would be no need for technology-assisted masculinity insurance policies. Nobody is forcing families to select boys — they are doing it because patriarchy told them girls are a risk.
And here’s the part that really makes Auntie roll her eyes so hard I can see my feminist ancestors: much of this is happening among educated, urban, middle-class families. Not the uneducated rural stereotype that elites love to blame. No, this is done by people with smartphones, careers, and opinions about modernity. Progress outside, feudal logic inside.
The government’s new idea to “incentivize daughters”? Nice. A step. But let’s not pretend cash, certificates, or tax breaks can compensate for decades of treating women as temporary guests in their own families. You don’t fix misogyny with coupons. You fix it by changing inheritance laws, eldercare systems, workplace discrimination, and — radical idea — making sons responsible for caregiving too.
Because let’s talk about the future nobody seems eager to imagine. Millions of surplus men. Fewer women. Rising trafficking. Forced marriages. Imported brides. Increased violence. Societies don’t just “absorb” gender imbalance — they fracture under it. Asia has seen this movie before, and the ending is ugly.
Also, a special note for doctors who discreetly reveal fetal sex with a wink and a nod: congratulations, you’re not neutral technicians, you’re active participants in structural violence. White coats don’t make dirty practices clean.
What bothers Auntie most is the absolute lack of romance in son preference. Sons are loved as investments, daughters feared as liabilities. Where is the joy? Where is the imagination? Women are not financial instruments. We are not backup plans. We are not mistakes.
Vietnam doesn’t need fewer girls. It needs fewer excuses.
And to every family nervously asking, “But who will carry the family name?” Auntie answers gently but firmly: names do not keep you warm at night, children do. And daughters, I promise, remember exactly who loved them unconditionally.