In an effort to curb Vietnam’s longstanding birth‑sex‑ratio disparity, the Ministry of Health has drafted a circular that would extend material assistance to couples or individuals of reproductive age who have at least two daughters under sixteen, provided those daughters are healthy, well‑behaved and academically successful.

The draft, circulated for public comment until 8 October, stipulates that eligibility hinges on the children’s physical well‑being, conduct and scholastic performance, and it frames the incentive as part of a broader suite of reward and support policies for demographic objectives.

Compared with a July consultation, the revised text expands the beneficiary pool from “families with two daughters” to any reproductive‑age parents meeting the criteria, and it strips away previously listed measures such as tuition waivers, while retaining support for student health insurance and school‑milk programmes.

“Linking support to academic success unfairly commodifies girls,” complained L.N., a Hanoi resident, who questioned how ‘success’ could be measured for children under sixteen.

Critics argue the scheme may inadvertently cement gender bias. N.T., a 35‑year‑old Hanoi reader, noted that many families already desire daughters but cannot have them, and warned that a surplus of men could exacerbate marital market pressures. Both N.T. and L.N. contend that attaching state aid to ‘achievement’ risks creating a reverse inequality for boys.

Academics echo these concerns. Trinh Phuong Thao, PhD, lecturer at Hanoi National University of Education, stresses that the proposal should be one component of a comprehensive strategy that also tackles son preference, prenatal sex‑selection, and social security for the elderly. Giang Thanh Long, PhD, senior lecturer at the National Economics University, cautions that framing assistance as ‘compensation’ for daughters could reinforce the very notion that girls are a disadvantage, while acknowledging the fiscal dilemma of universal versus targeted support.

If the underlying cultural predilection for sons remains unaltered, the policy may yield only symbolic gains, underscoring the necessity of simultaneous normative change and robust enforcement mechanisms.