Who are we again?
Lately, I’ve been bothered by text messages regarding my stand on the ever-famous Reproductive Health Bill. This bill has caused such hysteria in the country that even foreign nationals are bulging in. I, for one, wouldn’t have wanted to give my statement because to do so would cause headaches. But, as a citizen of this country, it is my right to know what this bill is all about and how its approval or disapproval can affect me. It is after all stated in Article II, Section 11 of the Philippine Constitution that “The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights.”
Now that I have established my legal capacity to tackle with this issue, I shall try to come up with an unbiased statement. It certainly wouldn’t be as easy as making an essay about my summer vacation (although I wish it were). There are many factors that I would like to discuss. I’ll try to explain this in simple English. So, here it is.
What is the RH Bill?
According to Wikipedia, this is a Philippine bill aiming to guarantee universal access to methods and information on birth control and maternal care. To put it simply, this bill aims to promote better health to mothers and their children with a bonus in the form of information dissemination with regards to family planning. Family planning can be natural and artificial. This bill focuses more on the artificial methods of family planning. The RH Bill does sound convincing. What could be better than social concern for the promotion of health, right? But, AREN’T PROGRAMS LIKE THIS ALREADY BEING CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH? Hmmm… Let’s dig deeper.
One of the main concerns of the bill, according to the Explanatory Note, is that population of the Philippines makes it “the 12th most populous nation in the world today”, that the Filipino women’s fertility rate is “at the upper bracket of 206 countries.” It states that studies and surveys “show that the Filipinos are responsive to having smaller-sized families through free choice of family planning methods.” It also refers to studies which “show that rapid population growth exacerbates (worsens) poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth.” And so it aims for improved quality of life through a “consistent and coherent national population policy.” (Source: Wikipedia.com)
This gives a blatant and direct inference that overpopulation increases the poverty rate and poverty is the main cause of overpopulation; and so in order for the Philippines to progress, we must control the growth of our population. This is confusing! But it does make a lot of sense. How will the RH Bill control population growth? Well, by Information and access to natural and modern family planning. This includes condoms, contraceptives, pills and other artificial methods of family planning. This is exactly the reason why the Catholic Church is fuming. Why? Let’s try to analyze.
The majority of Filipinos are in favor of family planning. The Catholic Church teaches the necessity of responsible parenthood and correct family planning (one child at a time depending on one's circumstances), while at the same time teaching that large families are a sign of God's blessings. It teaches that modern natural family planning, a method of fertility awareness, is in accord with God's design, as couples give themselves to each other as they are. The RH bill intends to help couples to have government funded access to artificial contraception methods as well.
The Philippines is mainly (based on statistics) a country dominated by Catholics. The Catholic faith believes in the natural method of family planning and that has always been the church’s stand ever since time immemorial. Condoms, contraceptives and pills (to name some) are artificial methods of family planning. The Catholic Church prohibits its worshippers to use the artificial meth. In short, the Church only wants what’s good for the people. The RH Bill is also construed for the benefit of the people. But why is the church strongly protesting against it? This is because the RH bill gives a direct implication of the legalization of condoms, contraceptives and pills. These are after all what the government is planning to distribute to the people in their respective communities. If all these artificial method become legal, it would give a suggestion that it’s ok to have sex because the government will provide the condoms. From whom? From the taxpayer’s money, of course. So it’s like we are paying for their condoms and pills.
But despite not being legal, condoms, pills and other contraceptives are already available in the market, in drugstores, and in even at the front desk of the motel. The opposition argues that "Access to contraceptives is free and unrestricted" and that the proposed law is pushing an already open door. They say that these family planning items are available to the citizens and many local government units and NGOs provide these for free. There is definitely no use for us to provide for this vanity items. “Poor people can buy their own condoms since they can pay for such items as cellphone loads” (Congressman Teddyboy Locsin). The ironic part of it all is that even before this bill was created, people (especially Catholics) were already aware and are already using condoms, pills, IUDs and contraceptives.
One study shows that women are having more children than they desire, implying a significant unmet need for reproductive health services. In short, there is a lack of information dissemination to mothers, and that’s one of the reasons why the population is growing. The RH bill has a solution to this. It adduces that the State shall assist couples, parents and individuals to achieve their desired family size within the context of responsible parenthood for sustainable development and encourage them to have two children as the ideal family size. That is indeed a great proposition! It is only imperative that the people should be given the privilege of better access for reproductive health services. This is done so that the couple will be able to have their desired number of children. AREN’T PROGRAMS LIKE THIS ONE ALREADY BEING DONE IN HEALTH CENTERS?
From what I’ve analyzed so far, it seems like the Department of Health and all its employees are sleeping on the job for failure of having the initiative of creating programs for civic awareness in terms of family planning, health care services, maternal and child care and etc. Or maybe the politicians who made this bill are unaware that reproductive health programs are already present and are being implemented in health centers and hospitals. It seems to create an impression that the RH Bill is our only hope if we want to lessen our population. Maybe I’m just being shallow and narrow-minded today. Let’s not wait for the grass to grow. Let’s continue.
One of the provisions of the RH Bill is that “the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.” The keyword here is abortion. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy by the removal or expulsion of a fetus or embryo from the uterus, resulting in or caused by its death. In the Philippines, abortion is considered taboo. That is why Article II, Section 12 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution says, in part that the State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.
The act is criminalized by the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, which was enacted in 1930 and remains in effect today. Articles 256, 258 and 259 of the Code mandate imprisonment for the woman who undergoes the abortion, as well as for any person who assists in the procedure, even if they be the woman's parents, a physician or midwife. Article 258 further imposes a higher prison term on the woman or her parents if the abortion is undertaken "in order to conceal [the woman's] dishonor". Need I say more?
That specific phrase in the RH Bill which states that the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner is also one of the reasons why the church is infuriated. It once again created a direct implication that the government recognizes the intensity of abortion; and since they are deemed incapable of stopping this, a post-abortion response will just then be created. The government will not be legalizing abortion per se but it recognizes its existence. But despite this phrase, I believe that women who are contemplating in subjecting themselves into abortion or have tried abortion are women who are in need of utmost care in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner. I think we don’t have to legalize care in order to do it. Filipinos are known to be compassionate. Furthermore, the underlying argument here focuses on the role of the family, especially that of the parents, or of any elder, to be partly responsible for not educating their son or daughter about the sanctity/value of life. If the woman has strong family ties, she would think twice about having her child aborted. The same goes to the man who caused the abortion. Life, mo matter how we put it, is precious.
Lastly, the RH Bill proposes that age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education is required from grade five to fourth year high school using “life-skills and other approaches.
THIS IS THE PART OF MY ARTICLE WHERE I JUST STOP WRITING. I THINK I HAVE ALREADY MADE MY STAND.
No comments:
Post a Comment