Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eppur_se_muova

(41,025 posts)
31. The Soviet Union, especially under Stalin, did the same thing.
Thu Jan 8, 2026, 04:31 PM
Thursday
Family Code of 1936

Unlike earlier codes that arranged for temporary and transitive laws as a step toward the revolutionary vision of family; the Code of 1936 marked an ideological shift away from Marxist / revolutionary visions of the nuclear family.[12] Coinciding with the rise of Stalinism, the law demanded the stabilizing and strengthening of the family. "The "withering-away" doctrine, once central to socialist understand of the family, law, and the state, was anathematized."[5]

The 1936 code emerged along with an eruption of pro-family propaganda.[12] For the first time, the code put restrictions on abortion and imposed fines and jail time for any that received or performed the service. The code also enacted a bevy of laws aimed to encourage pregnancy and child birth. Insurance stipends, pregnancy leave, job security, light duty, child care services and payments for large families. In another drastic move, the code made it more difficult to obtain a divorce. Under the code, both parties would need to be present for a divorce and pay a fine. There could be harsh penalties for those who failed to pay alimony and child-support payments.[5]

"Our demands grow day to day. We need fighters, they build this life. We need people."[5] The wider campaign to encourage the family unit elevated motherhood to a form of Stakhanovite labor. During this time, motherhood was celebrated as patriotic and the joys of children and family were extolled by the country's leaders.

Family Edict of 1944

The Family Edict of 1944 would be a continuation of the conservative trending of the 1936 code. Citing the heavy manpower losses and social disruption following World War II, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet enacted laws that would further encourage marriage and childbirth.

The 1944 Edict offered greater state-sponsored benefits to mothers, including: Extended maternity leave, increased family allowances even to unmarried mothers, promises of burgeoning child care services, targeted labor protections, and most notably, state recognition and the honorary title "Mother Heroine" for mothers who could produce large families.[13]

The edict also sought to preserve the family unit by making divorces even more difficult to obtain. Fines were increased and the parties were often ordered to attempt reconciliation. Divorce also became a public matter. Divorcees were required to appear in public court and their intent was published in the local newspaper.[14]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_in_the_Soviet_Union#Family_Code_of_1936



"Large" families meant at least 10 children.

I hope this was referenced in footnotes in the "Project 2025" paper. Credit should go where credit is due, and Stalin's contribution was substantial.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Just what sane people don't need or want - Think Tanks in their bedrooms bucolic_frolic Thursday #1
How About A "Mind Your Own Fucking Business" Bootcamp for the Heritage Foundation . . . hatrack Thursday #2
would they please stop meddling with american families. rampartd Thursday #3
Germany had similar stuff 90 years ago IronLionZion Thursday #4
The Soviet Union, especially under Stalin, did the same thing. eppur_se_muova Thursday #31
After killing off millions of people they didn't like through starvation IronLionZion Thursday #35
Children for Hitler dalton99a Thursday #5
Sonnenkinder get the red out Thursday #23
"...racially valuable stock" 3catwoman3 Thursday #27
"Heritage paper on families calls for 'marriage bootcamp,' more white babies" Ray Bruns Thursday #6
aka forcible rape centers. nt Javaman Thursday #7
I got my vasectomy at Planned Parenthood for only $400. saved me millions. multigraincracker Thursday #8
Free daycare ... kerouac2 Thursday #9
Exactly this Ferryboat Thursday #21
No, they will just make it illegal for women with young children to work outside the home DBoon Thursday #28
Fewer women are bothering with marriage and kids, period. valleyrogue Thursday #39
But only for white people Ferrets are Cool Thursday #10
This came right out of the nazi playbook. MLWR Thursday #11
Hey, give Stalin his due ! (see my post #31) eppur_se_muova Thursday #32
Any solution except raising salaries for working families Random Boomer Thursday #12
Excellent point PatSeg Thursday #17
Many young women aren't bothering to marry, let alone want kids. valleyrogue Thursday #40
And there are many people who should PatSeg Thursday #42
Absoluely! get the red out Thursday #24
This proves the value of history. ReRe Thursday #13
Another step toward a fascist dictatorship. patphil Thursday #14
How about encouraging more births by giving young couples hope that their children will not inherit a destroyed country LaMouffette Thursday #15
This... Ollie Garkie Thursday #34
I decided I didn't want kids, then later in life I regretted it (just a little bit), but NOW I'm glad I never brought LaMouffette Friday #44
Fewer and fewer women are bothering to marry and have kids. They LIKE being alone and having their own valleyrogue Thursday #38
Yup! I can't blame them. Patriarchy is an evil force. This is why the white Christian nationalist racists are so worried LaMouffette Friday #43
They seem to forget we are Americans and all during our lives we have been told samnsara Thursday #16
Incel think tanks Historic NY Thursday #18
The Heritage foundation was always an anti-communist right wing propaganda outlet. the irony here is that they are Martin68 Thursday #19
Some say no to kids because of 1) life and health of mother is being disregarded, 2) economy and 3) fascism lostnfound Thursday #20
To be fair angrychair Thursday #22
In other words... OldBaldy1701E Thursday #25
I've always wondered how that building is still standing tonekat Thursday #26
Immigrants tend to have more kids than native-born Americans Jose Garcia Thursday #29
They're forgetting one important point. No sane woman wants to hop in the sack with a Republican. Vinca Thursday #30
Sadly, there's no big shortage of insane women -- just look at Trmp's cabinet. eppur_se_muova Thursday #33
It is a deal breaker for many, many single women, both younger and older. valleyrogue Thursday #41
Under His Eye NickB79 Thursday #36
There's no going back to the 1950s, valleyrogue Thursday #37
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Heritage paper on familie...»Reply #31