Some critical comments are made on a paper entitled "Factors Affecting Fertility in Pakistan." The 60-page paper is considered too long and taxing for the reader with 20 tables and 8 appendix tables. The extensive literature review needs to be updated to refer to the objective of the study. Only conventional sociodemographic variables were considered, omitting information on the supply side and contraceptive use. The results on work status and fertility were ambiguous, indicating that salaried employees with higher education had higher fertility than those with lower education engaged in family business. The statement that perhaps a trend of declining fertility started in Baluchistan based on the mean number of children was contradicted by the figure for children ever born standardized by age, which indicated a slightly higher number. No substantial difference was found in urban and rural fertility, yet the author kept referring to this marginal difference by age in a detailed table. The rationale of running four separate models for four dependent variables when mean desired and ideal number of children do not differ much from each other was questioned. It would be more useful to present the results of only one dependent variable. The variation explained by the independent variables was as low as 8% in the model on children ever born and between 25% and 50% in the other 3 models. This suggests that when there is little variation in fertility, the analysis of factors explaining fertility differentials is not of much value. The conclusion that fertility transition has not started yet in Pakistan is also debatable in view of some recent evidence of fertility decline in the Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey of 1990-91 indicating that urban, educated groups of women are in the vanguard. A more precise discussion of the results would have made the study more meaningful.