| Revision as of 15:37, 10 September 2010 editUncle G (talk | contribs)Administrators52,482 edits Improved citation.← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:16, 10 September 2010 edit undoSmackBot (talk | contribs)3,734,324 editsm Date maintenance tags and general fixes: build 514:, added orphan tagNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Orphan|date=September 2010}} | |||
| {{NPOV}} | |||
| ⚫ | '''Reproductive Health Bill (Philippines)''', or commonly known at the RH Bill, is one of the most contentious issues in the country, being a bill which proposes to “guarantee to universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable and quality ] care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information.” It seeks to promote “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life in conformity with internationally recognized human rights standards.” |
||
| {{POV|date=September 2010}} | |||
| The contentious aspect of the bill is its key proposal that the government undertakes widespread distribution of contraceptives, and widespread dissemination of information on its use, as a way of controlling the population of the Philippines, which its advocates deem to be growing disproportionately. The bill is premised in the concept that present population growth impedes economic development and exacerbates poverty. | |||
| ⚫ | '''Reproductive Health Bill (Philippines)''', or commonly known at the RH Bill, is one of the most contentious issues in the country, being a bill which proposes to “guarantee to universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable and quality ] care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information.” It seeks to promote “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life in conformity with internationally recognized human rights standards.” | ||
| Opposition to the bill is based on several views of the bill: (1) it pushes for contraceptives as “essential medicines”, when pregnancy or having a child is not a disease, and many contraceptives are cancerous, and there are higher priority medical needs among women, (2) it engenders a contraceptive mentality which eventually leads to ], a crime in the Philippines, (3) it promotes ] of the youth which is considered as having brought immorality, teenage pregnancies in other countries, (4) the bill has a wrong premise since there is no consensus among economists that rapid population growth constrains economic development. |
The contentious aspect of the bill is its key proposal that the government undertakes widespread distribution of contraceptives, and widespread dissemination of information on its use, as a way of controlling the population of the Philippines, which its advocates deem to be growing disproportionately. The bill is premised in the concept that present population growth impedes economic development and exacerbates poverty. | ||
| Opposition to the bill is based on several views of the bill: (1) it pushes for contraceptives as “essential medicines”, when pregnancy or having a child is not a disease, and many contraceptives are cancerous, and there are higher priority medical needs among women, (2) it engenders a contraceptive mentality which eventually leads to ], a crime in the Philippines, (3) it promotes ] of the youth which is considered as having brought immorality, teenage pregnancies in other countries, (4) the bill has a wrong premise since there is no consensus among economists that rapid population growth constrains economic development. | |||
| Proponents argue that poverty incidence is higher among big families, and that the lack of services and information regarding reproductive health results in the untimely death of women and children, and exacerbates the effects of economic crisis and poverty on millions of ordinary Filipinos, especially those with big families. They say that at the heart of the bill is the free choice given to people on th use of reproductive health. Presently, the main proponent of the bill — called Bill 96 — is Congressman ]. | Proponents argue that poverty incidence is higher among big families, and that the lack of services and information regarding reproductive health results in the untimely death of women and children, and exacerbates the effects of economic crisis and poverty on millions of ordinary Filipinos, especially those with big families. They say that at the heart of the bill is the free choice given to people on th use of reproductive health. Presently, the main proponent of the bill — called Bill 96 — is Congressman ]. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 14: | ||
| 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.” | 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 poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth.” And so it aims for improved quality of life through a “consistent and coherent national population policy.” | It also refers to studies which “show that rapid population growth exacerbates poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth.” And so it aims for improved quality of life through a “consistent and coherent national population policy.” | ||
| ⚫ | ==Arguments== | ||
| ⚫ | ==Arguments== | ||
| ===Economic and demographic reasons=== | ===Economic and demographic reasons=== | ||
| Line 26: | Line 28: | ||
| ====Oral contraceptives==== | ====Oral contraceptives==== | ||
| Opponents such as Angelita Miguel-Aguirre refers to scientific journals that show oral contraceptives (OCs) are unsafe. The '']'' said that OCs confer "risk of first ischemic stroke."<ref name=KemmerenEtAl2002 /> ''Monograph 91'' of The ] (IARC) stated that "there is ''sufficient evidence'' in humans for the carcinogecity of combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives."<ref name=IARC2007 /><ref name=Malec2005 /> |
Opponents such as Angelita Miguel-Aguirre refers to scientific journals that show oral contraceptives (OCs) are unsafe. The '']'' said that OCs confer "risk of first ischemic stroke."<ref name=KemmerenEtAl2002 /> ''Monograph 91'' of The ] (IARC) stated that "there is ''sufficient evidence'' in humans for the carcinogecity of combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives."<ref name=IARC2007 /><ref name=Malec2005 /> | ||
| ''The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism'' also concluded in 2005 that "a rigorous meta-analysis of the literature suggests that current use of low-dose OCs significantly increases the risk of both cardiac and vascular arterial events, including a significant risk of vascular arterial complications with third generation OCs."<ref name=BaillargeonMcClishEssahNestler2004 /> | ''The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism'' also concluded in 2005 that "a rigorous meta-analysis of the literature suggests that current use of low-dose OCs significantly increases the risk of both cardiac and vascular arterial events, including a significant risk of vascular arterial complications with third generation OCs."<ref name=BaillargeonMcClishEssahNestler2004 /> | ||
| Line 35: | Line 37: | ||
| The bill is "meant to prevent maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth," said Padilla. She reported that "Daily, there are 11 women dying while giving birth in the Philippines. These preventable deaths could have been avoided if more Filipino women have access to reproductive health information and healthcare." The Department of Health states that family planning can reduce maternal mortality by about 32 percent.<ref name=Angsioco2008 /> | The bill is "meant to prevent maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth," said Padilla. She reported that "Daily, there are 11 women dying while giving birth in the Philippines. These preventable deaths could have been avoided if more Filipino women have access to reproductive health information and healthcare." The Department of Health states that family planning can reduce maternal mortality by about 32 percent.<ref name=Angsioco2008 /> | ||
| Regarding these figures, Francisco Tatad of the International Right to Life Federation and former Senator said that "If correct, experience has shown (as in Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon, Sorsogon) that the incidence of maternal death arising from such complications could be fully mitigated and brought down to zero simply by providing adequate basic and emergency obstetrics care and skilled medical personnel and services," without any need for a law on the distribution of contraceptives.<ref name=Tatad2008 /> |
Regarding these figures, Francisco Tatad of the International Right to Life Federation and former Senator said that "If correct, experience has shown (as in Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon, Sorsogon) that the incidence of maternal death arising from such complications could be fully mitigated and brought down to zero simply by providing adequate basic and emergency obstetrics care and skilled medical personnel and services," without any need for a law on the distribution of contraceptives.<ref name=Tatad2008 /> | ||
| ====HIV/AIDS prevention==== | ====HIV/AIDS prevention==== | ||
| Line 63: | Line 65: | ||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
| {{Reflist|refs= | {{Reflist|refs= | ||
| <ref name=Angsioco2008>{{ |
<ref name=Angsioco2008>{{Cite news | ||
| |date=2008-10-08 | |date=2008-10-08 | ||
| |title=Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill | |title=Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill | ||
| Line 72: | Line 74: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=BaillargeonMcClishEssahNestler2004>{{ |
<ref name=BaillargeonMcClishEssahNestler2004>{{Cite journal | ||
| |journal=Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism | |journal=Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism | ||
| |doi=10.1210/jc.2004-1958 | |doi=10.1210/jc.2004-1958 | ||
| Line 81: | Line 83: | ||
| |title=Association between the Current Use of Low-Dose Oral Contraceptives and Cardiovascular Arterial Disease: A Meta-Analysis | |title=Association between the Current Use of Low-Dose Oral Contraceptives and Cardiovascular Arterial Disease: A Meta-Analysis | ||
| |author=Jean-Patrice Baillargeon, Donna K. McClish, Paulina A. Essah, and John E. Nestler | |author=Jean-Patrice Baillargeon, Donna K. McClish, Paulina A. Essah, and John E. Nestler | ||
| |pmid=15814774 |
|pmid=15814774 | ||
| |publisher=The Endocrine Society |
|publisher=The Endocrine Society | ||
| |url=http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/90/7/3863 | |url=http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/90/7/3863 | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Bullecer1>{{ |
<ref name=Bullecer1>{{Cite journal | ||
| |author=Rene Josef Bullecer | |author=Rene Josef Bullecer | ||
| |title=Telling the Truth: AIDS Rates for Thailand and the Philippines | |title=Telling the Truth: AIDS Rates for Thailand and the Philippines | ||
| |publisher=Human Life International | |publisher=Human Life International | ||
| |url=http://www.hli.org/thailand%20and%20philippines%20aids%20rates.html | |url=http://www.hli.org/thailand%20and%20philippines%20aids%20rates.html | ||
| }}{{ |
}}{{Dead link|date=September 2010}}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=CC1986>{{ |
<ref name=CC1986>{{Cite journal | ||
| |work=Records of the Constitutional Commission | |work=Records of the Constitutional Commission | ||
| |volume=IV | |volume=IV | ||
| Line 100: | Line 102: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Clowes2006>{{ |
<ref name=Clowes2006>{{Cite news | ||
| |author=Brian Clowes | |author=Brian Clowes | ||
| |title=Condoms, STD, Teenagers, and International Case Studies Showing Condom Ineffectiveness Against HIV/AIDS | |title=Condoms, STD, Teenagers, and International Case Studies Showing Condom Ineffectiveness Against HIV/AIDS | ||
| Line 109: | Line 111: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Imbong2008>{{ |
<ref name=Imbong2008>{{Cite news | ||
| |author=Jo Imbong | |author=Jo Imbong | ||
| |title= Church reply to reproductive health bill: facts, fallacies | |title= Church reply to reproductive health bill: facts, fallacies | ||
| Line 117: | Line 119: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=KemmerenEtAl2002>{{ |
<ref name=KemmerenEtAl2002>{{Cite journal | ||
| |journal=Stroke | |journal=Stroke | ||
| |year=2002 | |year=2002 | ||
| Line 125: | Line 127: | ||
| |title=Risk of Arterial Thrombosis in Relation to Oral Contraceptives (RATIO) Study: Oral Contraceptives and the Risk of Ischemic Stroke | |title=Risk of Arterial Thrombosis in Relation to Oral Contraceptives (RATIO) Study: Oral Contraceptives and the Risk of Ischemic Stroke | ||
| |author=Jeanet M. Kemmeren, Bea C. Tanis, Maurice A.A.J. van den Bosch, Edward L.E.M. Bollen, Frans M. Helmerhorst, Yolanda van der Graaf, Frits R. Rosendaal, and Ale Algra | |author=Jeanet M. Kemmeren, Bea C. Tanis, Maurice A.A.J. van den Bosch, Edward L.E.M. Bollen, Frans M. Helmerhorst, Yolanda van der Graaf, Frits R. Rosendaal, and Ale Algra | ||
| |pmid=11988591 |
|pmid=11988591 | ||
| |publisher=American Heart Association, Inc. |
|publisher=American Heart Association, Inc. | ||
| |url=http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/1202 | |url=http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/1202 | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Malec2005>{{cite press release | <ref name=Malec2005>{{cite press release | ||
| |url=http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/050831/index.htm |
|url=http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/news/050831/index.htm | ||
| |title=World Health Organization: Oral Contraceptives and Menopausal Therapy Are 'Carcinogenic to Humans'' / Scientists' Findings Provide Additional Biological Support for an Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Abortion Breast Cancer | |title=World Health Organization: Oral Contraceptives and Menopausal Therapy Are 'Carcinogenic to Humans'' / Scientists' Findings Provide Additional Biological Support for an Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Abortion Breast Cancer | ||
| |author=Karen Malec | |author=Karen Malec | ||
| Line 138: | Line 140: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=IARC2007>{{ |
<ref name=IARC2007>{{Cite journal | ||
| |publisher=] | |publisher=] | ||
| |work=IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans | |work=IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans | ||
| Line 148: | Line 150: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Lagman2008>{{ |
<ref name=Lagman2008>{{Cite news | ||
| |title=Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill | |title=Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill | ||
| |date=2008-08-03 | |date=2008-08-03 | ||
| Line 156: | Line 158: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Padilla2010>{{ |
<ref name=Padilla2010>{{Cite news | ||
| |author=Clara Padilla | |author=Clara Padilla | ||
| |title=Voting with our Gonads | |title=Voting with our Gonads | ||
| Line 164: | Line 166: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Sisante2008>{{ |
<ref name=Sisante2008>{{Cite news | ||
| |title=Solons laud SWS survey on family planning | |title=Solons laud SWS survey on family planning | ||
| |author=Johanna Camille Sisante | |author=Johanna Camille Sisante | ||
| Line 173: | Line 175: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=SOE2004>{{ |
<ref name=SOE2004>{{Cite journal | ||
| |title=Population and Poverty: the Real Score | |title=Population and Poverty: the Real Score | ||
| |author=Ruperto P. Alonzo, Arsenio M. Balisacan, Dante B. Canlas, Joseph J. Capuno, Ramon L. Clarete, Rolando A. Danao, Emmanuel S. de Dios, Benjamin E. Diokno, Emmanuel F. Esguerra, Raul V. Fabella, Ma. Socorro Gochoco-Bautista, Aleli P. Kraft, Felipe M. Medalla, Nimfa F. Mendoza, Solita C. Monsod, Cayetano W. Paderanga, Jr., Ernesto M. Pernia, Stella A. Quimbo, Gerardo P. Sicat, Orville C. Solon, Edita A. Tan, and Gwendolyn R. Tecson | |author=Ruperto P. Alonzo, Arsenio M. Balisacan, Dante B. Canlas, Joseph J. Capuno, Ramon L. Clarete, Rolando A. Danao, Emmanuel S. de Dios, Benjamin E. Diokno, Emmanuel F. Esguerra, Raul V. Fabella, Ma. Socorro Gochoco-Bautista, Aleli P. Kraft, Felipe M. Medalla, Nimfa F. Mendoza, Solita C. Monsod, Cayetano W. Paderanga, Jr., Ernesto M. Pernia, Stella A. Quimbo, Gerardo P. Sicat, Orville C. Solon, Edita A. Tan, and Gwendolyn R. Tecson | ||
| Line 183: | Line 185: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| <ref name=Tatad2008>{{ |
<ref name=Tatad2008>{{Cite web | ||
| |title=The Truths and Half Truths about Reproductive Health, The Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines | |title=The Truths and Half Truths about Reproductive Health, The Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines | ||
| |work=First Things First | |work=First Things First | ||
| Line 195: | Line 197: | ||
| == Further reading == | == Further reading == | ||
| *{{ |
*{{Cite news | ||
| |date=2008-10-08 | |date=2008-10-08 | ||
| |title=Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill | |title=Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill | ||
| Line 203: | Line 205: | ||
| |url=http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/oct/08/yehey/life/20081008lif2.html | |url=http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2008/oct/08/yehey/life/20081008lif2.html | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| *{{ |
*{{Cite news | ||
| |title=Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill | |title=Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill | ||
| |date=2008-08-03 | |date=2008-08-03 | ||
| Line 210: | Line 212: | ||
| |url=http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20080803-152296/Reproductive-health-bill-Facts-fallacies | |url=http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/talkofthetown/view/20080803-152296/Reproductive-health-bill-Facts-fallacies | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| *{{ |
*{{Cite web | ||
| |title=KALUSUGAN NG KABABAIHAN: Making Women Matter in the 2010 Elections | |title=KALUSUGAN NG KABABAIHAN: Making Women Matter in the 2010 Elections | ||
| |author=Elizabeth Angsioco | |author=Elizabeth Angsioco | ||
| Line 218: | Line 220: | ||
| |url=http://rationalhero.com/2010/03/04/kalusugan-ng-kababaihan/ | |url=http://rationalhero.com/2010/03/04/kalusugan-ng-kababaihan/ | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| *{{ |
*{{Cite web | ||
| |title=Full text of House Bill No. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008) | |title=Full text of House Bill No. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008) | ||
| |author=Fred Atty | |author=Fred Atty | ||
| Line 226: | Line 228: | ||
| |url=http://jlp-law.com/blog/full-text-of-house-bill-no-5043-reproductive-health-and-population-development-act-of-2008/ | |url=http://jlp-law.com/blog/full-text-of-house-bill-no-5043-reproductive-health-and-population-development-act-of-2008/ | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| *{{ |
*{{Cite journal | ||
| |publisher=] Economic Planning Office | |publisher=] Economic Planning Office | ||
| |title=Promoting Reproductive Health: A Unified Strategy to Achieve the MDGs | |title=Promoting Reproductive Health: A Unified Strategy to Achieve the MDGs | ||
Revision as of 17:16, 10 September 2010
 | This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (September 2010) |
 | The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Reproductive Health Bill (Philippines), or commonly known at the RH Bill, is one of the most contentious issues in the country, being a bill which proposes to “guarantee to universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information.” It seeks to promote “responsible parenthood, informed choice, birth spacing and respect for life in conformity with internationally recognized human rights standards.”
The contentious aspect of the bill is its key proposal that the government undertakes widespread distribution of contraceptives, and widespread dissemination of information on its use, as a way of controlling the population of the Philippines, which its advocates deem to be growing disproportionately. The bill is premised in the concept that present population growth impedes economic development and exacerbates poverty.
Opposition to the bill is based on several views of the bill: (1) it pushes for contraceptives as “essential medicines”, when pregnancy or having a child is not a disease, and many contraceptives are cancerous, and there are higher priority medical needs among women, (2) it engenders a contraceptive mentality which eventually leads to abortion, a crime in the Philippines, (3) it promotes sex education of the youth which is considered as having brought immorality, teenage pregnancies in other countries, (4) the bill has a wrong premise since there is no consensus among economists that rapid population growth constrains economic development.
Proponents argue that poverty incidence is higher among big families, and that the lack of services and information regarding reproductive health results in the untimely death of women and children, and exacerbates the effects of economic crisis and poverty on millions of ordinary Filipinos, especially those with big families. They say that at the heart of the bill is the free choice given to people on th use of reproductive health. Presently, the main proponent of the bill — called Bill 96 — is Congressman Edcel Lagman.
Background
Stated purpose
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 poverty while poverty spawns rapid population growth.” And so it aims for improved quality of life through a “consistent and coherent national population policy.”
Arguments
Economic and demographic reasons
Lagman states that the bill "recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. Unbridled population growth stunts socioeconomic development and aggravates poverty." According to UP professors, which include Solita Monsod, Gerardo Sicat, Cayetano Paderanga, "rapid population growth and high fertility rates, especially among the poor, do exacerbate poverty and make it harder for the government to address it," while at the same time clarifying that it would be extreme to view "population growth as the principal cause of poverty that would justify the government resorting to draconian and coercive measures to deal with the problem (e.g., denial of basic services and subsidies to families with more than two children)."
Opponents such UP trained economist Roberto de Vera refer to Nobel prize winner Simon Kuznets's study which says that “o clear association appears to exist in the present sample of countries, or is likely to exist in other developed countries, between rates of growth of population and of product per capita.”De Vera says that "similar conclusions have been arrived at by the US National Research Council in 1986 and in the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) Consultative Meeting of Economists in 1992."
Health reasons
The proponents state that RH will mean: (1) Information and access to natural and modern family planning (2) Maternal, infant and child health and nutrition (3) Promotion of breast feeding (4) Prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications (5) Adolescent and youth health (6) Prevention and management of reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS and STDs (7) Elimination of violence against women (8) Counseling on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health (9) Treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers (10) Male involvement and participation in RH; (11) Prevention and treatment of infertility and (12) RH education for the youth.
Oral contraceptives
Opponents such as Angelita Miguel-Aguirre refers to scientific journals that show oral contraceptives (OCs) are unsafe. The Stroke Journal said that OCs confer "risk of first ischemic stroke." Monograph 91 of The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) stated that "there is sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogecity of combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives." The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism also concluded in 2005 that "a rigorous meta-analysis of the literature suggests that current use of low-dose OCs significantly increases the risk of both cardiac and vascular arterial events, including a significant risk of vascular arterial complications with third generation OCs."
E. Ansioco of Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines argued that the "The World Health Organization (WHO) includes contraceptives in its Model Lists of Essential Drugs" and thus are safe medicines. "Medical and scientific evidence," says the main proponent, "shows that all the possible medical risks connected with contraceptives are infinitely lower than the risks of an actual pregnancy and everyday activities...The risk of dying within a year of using pills is 1 in 200,000. The risk of dying from a vasectomy is 1 in 1 million and the risk of dying from using an IUD is 1 in 10 million. ... But the risk of dying from a pregnancy is 1 in 10,000."
Maternal deaths
The bill is "meant to prevent maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth," said Padilla. She reported that "Daily, there are 11 women dying while giving birth in the Philippines. These preventable deaths could have been avoided if more Filipino women have access to reproductive health information and healthcare." The Department of Health states that family planning can reduce maternal mortality by about 32 percent.
Regarding these figures, Francisco Tatad of the International Right to Life Federation and former Senator said that "If correct, experience has shown (as in Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon, Sorsogon) that the incidence of maternal death arising from such complications could be fully mitigated and brought down to zero simply by providing adequate basic and emergency obstetrics care and skilled medical personnel and services," without any need for a law on the distribution of contraceptives.
HIV/AIDS prevention
The RH bill provides for "prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other, STIs/STDs," especially since the number of HIV cases among the young nearly tripled from 41 in 2007 to 110 in 2008.
According to Dr. Rene Josef Bullecer, Director of AIDS-Free Philippines, in 1987, Thailand had 112 AIDS cases, while the Philippines had 135 cases. By the year 2003, there were around 750,000 cases in Thailand, where the 100% Condom Use Program had relatively great success, while there were only 1,935 cases in the Philippines, whose population is around 30% greater than Thailand's.
Abortion
Jo Imbong, secretary of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, stressed that, according to the Records of the Constitutional Commission, “Human life begins at fertilization.” and thus the Philippine Constitution states “the State shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.” She reported that "Lagman said in a House hearing that the bill would protect human life 'from implantation.'" And so she accused the bill of promoting abortion because "Pills and the IUD hinder implantation of the embryo in the uterus, thereby precipitating the embryo’s destruction."
One of the bill's components is "prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications." It also states that "abortion remains a crime and is punishable." Lagman also states that "According to studies, correct and regular use of contraceptives reduces abortion rates by as much as 85 percent and negates the need to legalize abortion." The bill, said Clara Padilla of EnGender Rights Inc, will "help reduce the number of abortions by providing increased access to information and services on modern contraceptive methods, that in turn will reduce the number of unwanted --and often aborted-- pregnancies.
Morality of contraception
One of the concerns regarding this bill is the issue of morality of the use of contraception. Several professors from Ateneo de Manila University, a Catholic University, announced that they are convinced that there is nothing immoral in contraception, and that Catholics can freely dissent from official Catholic teaching. Lagman stressed that official Catholic teaching itself is not infallible.
RH Education
To achieve its goals, the bill provides that "Reproductive Health Education in an age-appropriate manner shall be taught by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School." According to the latest UNESCO study dated December 2009, sexuality education did not encourage early initiation into sex.
Opinion Surveys
Proponents refer to surveys conducted which show majority support for the bill. The Social Weather Station survey of 2008 showed that 68 percent of Filipinos agree that there should be a law requiring government to distribute legal contraceptives.
References
- ^ Edcel Lagman (2008-08-03). "Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
- Ruperto P. Alonzo, Arsenio M. Balisacan, Dante B. Canlas, Joseph J. Capuno, Ramon L. Clarete, Rolando A. Danao, Emmanuel S. de Dios, Benjamin E. Diokno, Emmanuel F. Esguerra, Raul V. Fabella, Ma. Socorro Gochoco-Bautista, Aleli P. Kraft, Felipe M. Medalla, Nimfa F. Mendoza, Solita C. Monsod, Cayetano W. Paderanga, Jr., Ernesto M. Pernia, Stella A. Quimbo, Gerardo P. Sicat, Orville C. Solon, Edita A. Tan, and Gwendolyn R. Tecson (December 2004). "Population and Poverty: the Real Score" (PDF). University of the Philippines School of Economics. DP2004-15.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Jeanet M. Kemmeren, Bea C. Tanis, Maurice A.A.J. van den Bosch, Edward L.E.M. Bollen, Frans M. Helmerhorst, Yolanda van der Graaf, Frits R. Rosendaal, and Ale Algra (2002). "Risk of Arterial Thrombosis in Relation to Oral Contraceptives (RATIO) Study: Oral Contraceptives and the Risk of Ischemic Stroke". Stroke. 33. American Heart Association, Inc.: 1202–1208. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000015345.61324.3F. PMID 11988591.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - "Combined Estrogen-Progestogen Contraceptives" (PDF). IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. 91. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2007.
- Karen Malec (2005-08-31). "World Health Organization: Oral Contraceptives and Menopausal Therapy Are 'Carcinogenic to Humans / Scientists' Findings Provide Additional Biological Support for an Abortion-Breast Cancer Link, Abortion Breast Cancer" (Press release). Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer.
- Jean-Patrice Baillargeon, Donna K. McClish, Paulina A. Essah, and John E. Nestler (2005). "Association between the Current Use of Low-Dose Oral Contraceptives and Cardiovascular Arterial Disease: A Meta-Analysis". Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 90 (7). The Endocrine Society: 3863–3870. doi:10.1210/jc.2004-1958. PMID 15814774.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Elizabeth Angsioco (2008-10-08). "Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill". The Manila Times. The Manila Times Publishing Corp.
- Francisco "Kit" Tatad (2008-09-14). "The Truths and Half Truths about Reproductive Health, The Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines". First Things First.
- ^ Clara Padilla (2010-04-11). "Voting with our Gonads". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
- Rene Josef Bullecer. "Telling the Truth: AIDS Rates for Thailand and the Philippines". Human Life International.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - Brian Clowes (2006). "Condoms, STD, Teenagers, and International Case Studies Showing Condom Ineffectiveness Against HIV/AIDS". Life Site News. Lifeissues.net.
- Records of the Constitutional Commission. IV: 761, 801. 1986-09-18.
{{cite journal}}: Missing or empty|title=(help) - Jo Imbong (2008-08-16). "Church reply to reproductive health bill: facts, fallacies". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
- UNESCO, Sexuality Education Guidelines
- Johanna Camille Sisante (2008-10-15). "Solons laud SWS survey on family planning". GMANews.TV. GMA.
Further reading
- Elizabeth Angsioco (2008-10-08). "Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill". The Manila Times. The Manila Times Publishing Corp.
- Edcel Lagman (2008-08-03). "Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
- Elizabeth Angsioco (2010-03-04). "KALUSUGAN NG KABABAIHAN: Making Women Matter in the 2010 Elections". Rational Hero. Oplan Pepe.
- Fred Atty (2008-09-22). "Full text of House Bill No. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008)". web log. Jaromay Laurente Pamaos Law Offices.
- "Promoting Reproductive Health: A Unified Strategy to Achieve the MDGs" (PDF). Senate of the Philippines Economic Planning Office. July 2009. PB-09-03.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help)