IT challenges reflection that a lawyer, instead of a doctor, is the chief architect and single strong advocate of House Bill 5043 which actually consolidated into one, House Bills 17, 812, 2753 and 3920 in this 14th Congress. The simple idea of gender equality easily permits room for women proponents themselves, in either House or Senate, to be the mouthpiece as well as the voice behind such a now controversial bill that is met with so much opposition from not few traditional groups — not Rep. Edcel Lagman — unless otherwise no other proponent from the female species is available. Women issues are the exclusive domain of women, or so I thought?
Offhand, HB 5043 pretentiously placed reproductive health, responsible parenthood, and population development under its policy framework. Good. But let us be reminded that a single legislative measure such as HB 5043 that carries more than three subject matters is actually “violative” of “overloading.” Bottomline: that is the way professors of law teaching on “How a Bill becomes a Law” always teach us. Where will HB 5043 all transport us to? Such a would-be law that prohibits and in fact penalizes any healthcare service provider who refuses to perform medically safe reproductive health care services in the absence of spousal consent or authorization is revolting. What is this?
Boldly, the bill claims the policy is anchored on the rationale of sustainable development with a manageable population of healthy, educated and productive citizens. Truly, this carries some kind of racist bias against those otherwise unhealthy, uneducated, and unproductive in our realpolitik. Is this Hitler’s idea of a “super race?” What about China with approximately two billion in population that has managed equitably well without compromising its position as the next economic superpower? I say as anecdotal the sweet claim of a population management stratagem of a two-child policy. The proponent himself has more than two of his own, doesn’t he?
If we have higher population than any developing country in the world, it is a blessing especially so that all developing countries, no exception, are now suffering from a graying population and are now in search of manpower to replace their aging manpower base. Where then do they have to import human capital? Where will they recruit the Industrial Reserve Army but from the Philippines? Have we as much as forget that OFW remittances of our fellow Filipinos buoys up an otherwise fledging economy? The next generation of overseas workers to fill the great demand of manpower from the global market has to be born now — beyond the two-child limit. This kind of thinking might run counter to the bill’s claim that manpower is the principal asset of every country.
If there will be a universal access to quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information, this means that a whole range of options is at anybody’s disposal. Studies have already validated that reproductive health care as practiced in the more developed societies already negative impacted upon the home, family life, career, social milieu, culture, and society as a whole. It has been shown that women committed suicides. It has been shown that the incidence of broken families rose. It has been shown that children from broken homes are what triggered dramatic rise in the crime statistical chart. As divorces multiply, broken homes multiply just as well. Medically, a lot of these so-called contraceptive pills are not safe and just how many pills are manufactured in a minute and at what cost?
Shotgun approach has been the design of HB 5043 — it will kill all birds that took flight — adults, adolescents, children – without distinction. It sounds crazy for the bill to claim that women seeking care from post-abortion complications shall be treated and consoled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner without being guilty of doing abortion in the unseen process. This kind of intended access opens the door wide to a lot of other possibilities in need of reproductive health care attention, not to be excluded, would be abortion itself at its initial stage. To give people the freedom to decide, if, when and how often to have a satisfying and safe sex life, as claimed, tears at the very moral fabric of our social existence.
What then constitute as reproductive health-related problems that the bill aims to prevent and avoid — reason for a full range of options? Openly enough, the bill espouses making available all methods and techniques to prevent unwanted, unplanned, and mistimed pregnancies but what exactly are these? Pregnancies – whether or not wanted, planned, or timed – are pregnancies. Any act or means to be sought to prevent it should be called as what? It would not be abortion, would it? Whoever invented these labels without any scientific basis ought to be a murderer?
It is noticeable how a proviso has been carried that would, in effect, expand the coverage of the National Health Insurance Program or NHIP especially to many poor and marginalized women to include a full range of reproductive health care services and supplies as health insurance benefits. Will money be inserted in another else’s pocket? How much in State subsidies will be infused into a supposed-to-be existing program or agency, again and again?
Rider or not to a proposed bill, the creation of a Board of Commissioners of POPCOM (or Population Commission) of 14 heads of agencies plus 3 representatives from the private sector ought to be the subject matter of another and separate bill yet to be proposed and filed in Congress considering that when a board meets, honoraria are given. At the very least, their appointment by the President for a term of 3 years means that some people get to be employed, first and second, time. Even the Department of Agriculture and the Commission on Higher Education will be members thereof make for Ripleys.
Again, more midwives or skilled attendants need to be employed in every municipality or city based on some ideal ratio. More qualified personnel in each city or province will have to be employed in hospitals to provide emergency obstetric care, again, based on ideal ratio of say one such hospital for every 500,000 population. How good indeed those indigent patients will be covered by PhilHealth insurance benefits for hospital services related to family planning? Again, are we putting money in another else’s pocket?
Another apparent caveat of the proposed HB 5043 is the fact that every congressional district will be provided a van for Mobile Health Care Service from their PDAF but it is not stated too clear if this means an additional budget to their PDAF. A mandatory health reproductive education will be required of those from Grade V to Fourth Year High School. Will parents agree to this law? Inserting 10 percent additional increase in the honoraria of barangay health workers is truly an inducement. Will not barangay captains or mayors agree to this scheme and its pecuniary benefits?
From where I stand, readers of HB 5043 can read with caution the corpus of purely statistical data in the explanatory note of the bill from which it based its goal to erect a law that is always met with extreme opposition from those thought to become its beneficiaries as well as to its intended victims. In the end, adults, adolescents, and children that the bill purports to help will be the true victims of a law that is easy enough to approve given that it has “strings attached” to it. Not remotely, some laws really self-destruct as soon as they get implemented and this proposed measure shall be one of them. Since coins will be dropped in the vendo machine, many legislators might tend to stamp their own approval of HB 5043, irrespective of dictates of conscience – and so be it.
Primer C. Pagunuran, via reader’s comment
October 9th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Almost all doctors and other health physicians, businessmen, economists and other academicians, professional managers in government and private sector, population scientists both local and foreign acknowledge and say that overpopulation is a problem and a major cause of poverty in this country. Those who preach otherwise - what are you credentials?
October 9th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Lets not inject religion into this matter. Its the religious who have the many broods and their gods must have given up on them.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:35 am
ONEMORE, I find your post 28, and the others, interesting and intriguing. In your illustration it is clearly the fault of that father for being irresponsible in raising a big family he cannot sustain. Now he is in a mess and realizes rather too late that he needs help.
Man is governed by two laws. There is the fundamental law the Creator has given man to guide his moral life. But man is weak and must be restrained, thus, man made laws to keep him from his wicked ways. One of these laws is about population control. Sex is a means for procreation and it is beautiful. But man’s insatiable quest for personal gratification and irresponsible parenting has led to population explosion and it is beginning to threaten the survival of mankind. Today man realizes he must act and make drastic laws because he foresees the inevitability of the destruction of mankind as man has failed to maintain self-discipline.
To the moralist and those deeply rooted in religious adherence, the laws being passed by man are unacceptable because they are contrary to the fundamental laws of the Creator. But governments have responsibilities too towards the people they govern. It is their duty to initiate means by which population may be sustained within the nation’s capacity and resources to sustain them. To the government, it is no longer a matter of moral issue. It is a matter of the nation’s survival and the economic life of its people. There lies the burden of responsibility on the government leaders.
The disciplined and moralist should have no problem following the fundamental law given them by the Creator. But the undisciplined, the non-believers, and non-conformists, who obviously are the ones which the laws of man were especially designed for, are free to choose what they think is better for them. Man is thus given two options. Choose self-discipline or enjoy sex to its fullest without adding any more to the population problem. Hence, it boils down to one’s moral conscience as to which one is preferable. The issue is now a matter between man and his Creator.
A reproductive law may be repulsive to some, just as the law pardoning an unrepentant plunderer is disgusting to many, but it becomes a necessity when the demand requires it. While I approve of legislating laws on reproductive health, I do not subscribe to following it. I would think it should serve those who need it more.
October 8th, 2008 at 10:58 am
it’s a pity that arguments raised by the author are in many ways faulty, wreckless and absurdly irresponsible, much like the arguments of church leaders and others so-called and self-imposed “guardians of morality” in our society.
i’ve been involved in NGO and social development work for since 1998 and it pains me to see that the church hasn’t done any actionalbe and sustainable action to address the very issues they are raising against the controversial bill. they say the bill is immoral, when there are people among their ranks who have multiple children which they can barely give proper education and sustenance. they say they are looking after the welfare of the poor, when they don’t provide tangible assistance to the less fortunate that will sustain them. they act like the great prophets of old, playing with prose and parables to sway the emotions of the masses, while failing to realize that real economic and social reforms have to be enacted against real economic and social problems that are inflicting society today. why are they so scared to give the people the necessary means and information that “can” empower the latter to have a more decent and comfortable life? this is not anymore a question of morality or religious beliefs, but of social welfare and survival.
silence the narrow-minded religious who are to fragmented in their beliefs. they don’t see the real problems of poor people. let them come down from the safety and comfort of their palaces, and see for themselves what the real problems of poor people deal with every hour of their waking day.
October 8th, 2008 at 6:23 am
To ACS
Hi, you mention that OFW’s are wanted all over the world for their perfect skills. But sorry, the real reason is that they are easy to get and theyare cheap. What the Gov. is trying, to dictate foreign employers how much they have to pay is just a nonsense joke.
That OFW’s, maybe excluding doctors and nurses from some colleges, are NOT so very skilled shows the fact that the majority of them have to work at low level jobs or they have first to be trained by the employer. It is not their fault, but the fault of the poor phil. education system. Even studying at a college does not mean a really good skill. Many colleges offer courses without to have the practical facilities for it. Is there any phil. seafarer who has any real knowledge of a modern, computerized ship like tankers, container ships etc.? No, that is not existing in RP. There are There are colleges offering courses for airplane maintenance and for cabin personnel but have nothing real for training. Computer engeneerin courses where are vert few PCs and often outdated software for a big number of students. In addition, too many classes have 59, 60 and more students, how a teacher can really care for them and really know what they need? Compare with the system like in most Europesn countries: Studyinf for engineer, doctor, lawyer, is at universities and needsusually 4 years more of higher education for to enter an university. Professionals learn at businesses or factories with the wanted jobs sothat the apprentice really work at his future profession. With additional special schools and usually 3 to 4 years of apprenticeship. After, there is an exam which folows government rules so that all must have the same knowledge for to pass. And all of them have also 3 or 4 years practicum included.
That is, why phil. OFWs can hardly compete without first to be trained or to work at low levels. Not the OFWs are to blame but the system. Instead of offering an competitive education, the government let the people go abroad, as many as possible, because they fill the reserves of the Central Bank and help therefor to keep the Peso high which in turn means they get less Pesos for their Dollars while all Peso prices increas and increase, no matter the Peso goes up or down. That is the thanking of the government to its “modern heroes” who then have to send more and more money hme.