I have such mixed opinions on this. I think at this moment right now it doesn't have to be changed, but we'll have to look into (collectively that is) to population control and the health and opportunities of future generations.
I think this is something that we should start to address now. If life-expectancy continues to rise with improvements in modern medicines, etc. then starting now will help to preserve our future. From a less...charitable standpoint, I feel that if you're not capable of financially supporting yourself, you shouldn't be able to have a child that you will not be able to support. 13% Percent of children are born poor, and of these an estimated 49% will remain poor for at least half of their lifetimes. While there are success stories, this creates more problems than it is worth.
Some developed countries have a declining population, particularly when you account for the impact of immigration. This has been achieved through improved healthcare (knowing that your children will survive/access to contraception), improved education (sexual eduction/access to better jobs), free commerce and media (increased importance of lifestyle and material possessions), equal rights (women in control of their own future). Therefore, I think the focus should be on sustainable development. On your second point, I don't understand why those from more affluent backgrounds, with access to a better education and opportunities, should ultimately be provided rights that are not afforded to other less fortunate people.
Birth control is huge. Widespread access and a focus on birth control/contraceptives as opposed to abstinence in public education could do wonders in the long run.