On The Reproductive Health Bill
Author: Brian Shane // Category: brian shane gorrell, catholic church, woman's reproductive health
we must all pay attention
Dear Readers,
This powerful commentary comes to me via a wonderful blogger and blog reader.
As this is a topic I'm passionate about, I am only too happy to post her story.
********************
I maintain a hard-line stance supporting the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill because of two incidents that have happened in my life.
At the age of 19, I had been bleeding for about a month and went to a private obstetrician’s office. I consulted about my condition as I concluded the worst. As the MD was taking my history, she learned that I was still single. I cannot describe the disbelief on her face as she learned of this fact. She then proceeded to ask me in a voice loud enough to be heard in the waiting room:
-And you’re still single?
Yes Doctor.
-And you’re here because you’ve been bleeding for a month?
Yes, Doctor.
-And you’ve been having sexual relations?
Yes, Doctor. (Repeat 5 times).
The second incident was when my daughter got pregnant at the age of 15. It was a scandal in our openly religious city. She was enrolled in a Catholic school and was, not surprisingly, promptly expelled. I had wanted her to remain in school but it was impossible to find one willing to accept her in this condition. Finally, a small Baptist school near the outskirts of the city took her in. They had exemplified what being Christian truly was. To this day, I am grateful for their unconditional acceptance.
Then the nuns from her old school made a strange request. They asked that my daughter’s attendance from their school be stricken from the transcript! I was supposed to ask the Baptists to LIE for them?
In
Catholic guilt makes it taboo to even talk about the subject of sexual relations. It’s a costly mistake I made, not speaking to health-care professionals or discussing these with my daughter or parents. Now I know that when intelligently and openly discussed, reproductive health care awareness will benefit everyone. Nobody can second-guess me, what if the atmosphere is finally right and I can openly teach abstinence to my children? It's the safest alternative, no doubt. There is a massive outcry on the Bill that most have yet to see. In other countries, this Bill is deemed anti-life. Worse yet, some have claimed that a "Two-Child policy" will be imposed, not unlike China's "one-child" policy. The ignorant are the most vocal about this, yet nowhere in the Bill is abortion or population control is mentioned. In fact the title of the Bill includes the words "Population Development."
The Church is obstinate regarding extramarital relations, which I totally accept as a Catholic Filipina. However, to deny the health care and information to all is to deny them their right to choose. This interference with legislation reeks of a modern-day Inquisition. Will the Church actually involve our Muslim sisters? How about those without access or unable to obtain quality service? The proposed Reproductive Health Care Bill is national in scope, providing for each Filipino regardless of age, religious affiliation or economic status.
Rather than following blindly, please make an informed choice by reading the Inquirer article Reproductive Health Bill: Facts, fallacies penned by the author of House Bill 00017, Rep. Edcel Lagman. The full text of this bill is still unavailable in the Philippine Congress website, but to view its history, please click here. Read the significance of "Humanae Vitae" on these events. Read articles for and against the controversial bill. Finally, read this eye-opening opinion which cites a problem far larger than the issues at hand.
This Online Petition supports the immediate passage of this Bill into law. Please sign up after reviewing all available opinions/facts.
One of the articles claims that Saint Thomas Aquinas had said "...anyone upon whom the ecclesiastical authority in ignorance of true fact imposes a demand that offends against his clear conscience, should perish in excommunication rather than violate his conscience."
Go ahead, excommunicate me.
RH is sugarcoated holocaust of a generation. think deeper people.
Liz
Liz, Can you please explain further?
i guess reproductive health bill is very interesting and would be a great help for our balloning population in Philippines. But if this "bill" has more than what it offers , its another thing.I understand that this bill was sponsored by big pharmaceutical companies whose motives is just doing business and earn profits , so therefore as I will qoute above comment , is really a sugarcoated holocaust of a generation".
that's silly. do you even know what the holocaust was? are these birth control drugs the same as putting 6 million humans on the gas chambers? what's the next conspiracy theory???...
Liz, I worked and lived with people who are holocaust survivors (there are now just a few of them left because of old age). Do you actually know what HOLOCAUST means? Have you talked to any one of these HOLOCAUST survivors? Have you read any of their accounts at all? These are people who lived through their childhood, teen-age lives, adulthood, who have livelihoods taken away from them, because of their religion. They were stripped off their valuables. The old, the very young and infirm grouped together, stripped off their clothings, crammed in train cars to be transported to gas chambers. The able bodied herded into labor camps, fed with not much food, forced to work in gruesome conditions. IT IS SUCH AN INSULT to the holocaust survivors and their families, for you to compare HEALTH REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS to the HOLOCAUST. It is Filipinos like you, who make the international community regard us as a BACKWARD society.
the time is ripe for this bill to be enacted into law. it is not just about controlling our growing population. it is about providing the people with the best sexual and reproductive health care possible. it is actually a comprehensive bill with components on prevention of violence against women and children, treatment of cancers and other gynecological concerns, etc. the bill does NOT call for the legalization of abortion.
here's a link to the full text of the bill: http://www.alfi.org.ph/article/articleprint/105/-1/50/
there's currently an online petition in support of the bill: http://www.petitiononline.com/rhan2008/petition.html
thanks brian, and to the writer of the srh blog.
Please view the videos in youtube below:
Dark story of Philippines -
illegal abortions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moMbnjh304Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT7JTW2pbnU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THv3chhb8WY
"The CATHOLIC GUILT"
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/node/6375/print
-------------------------------
http://www.remedios.com.ph/fhtml/mk2q2004_gsoo.htm
Sunday, 25 April, 2004
This was an interview just before the Philippine presidential election.
"This was not just to raise awareness about reproductive health among voters and candidates, but more important, to guide voters on who among the contenders are supportive of reproductive health and rights. I also said that these questions should be raised before candidates running for both national and local office, since local governments are now at the forefront of delivering health services, including those for reproductive health, to communities. "
------------------
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=101573
Manila Contraceptive Ban, reported by Al Jazheera :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_XZWhqlZ9E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVCGKt61ix8
an interview with former head of the Philippine's Department of Health, Juan Flavier, the doctor to the barrios. Topic: Population Explosion in the Philippines.
Juan Flavier (religion: United Methodist, as listed in wikipedia), was an advocate of artificial contraceptives. Was once part of a panel discussion on ARTIFICIAL CONTRACEPTIVES with Sonny de los Reyes and Kit Tatad (who are both against the use of artificial contraceptives) and Rina Jimenez David, an advocate for the Filipina women's Health Reproductive Rights.
Read comments of viewers here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnSLi3mx_9A
such as:
chesirekitkat saying: "People are going to have sex; and babies should not be used as punishment to sexuality. Baby's should be wanted not feared.I am willing to love a baby. I will have one child when I'm ready but until then I will have birth control and be loyal to one man."
i am pro-life, pro-QUALITY-life. i admit i have not read the bill yet in its entirety but here is my take: we have the right to choose on how to improve our lives, how to make it better for us, for our children, how to live our lives the best way we can. nobody can take that away from us, not those pharmaceutical companies, those politicians and definitely not even the church. each and every one of us is responsible for our own well being regardless of economic status.
the state can only do so much, let's say by some wonders the philippines can provide a better healthcare and information, still it is not a guarantee that it can a make a difference because everything depends on the people. education starts at home. as a parent it is my responsibility to educate my daughters to discuss honestly and intelligently sensitive matters like sex. but in the end they still get to decide what is best for themselves.
i remember eat bulaga's little miss philippines in the 80's...one candidate's quotation was "nasa Dios ang awa, nasa tao ang gawa, pero wag kayong gawa nang gawa kund di nyo kayang palakihin ang mga bata." i, thank you.
Under false premise:
Over population making our country more impoverished? .. Nope, please research more on this.
It is Unnecessary
Women who say they should be free to contracept (regardless of what the moral law or science says) are not being prevented from doing so, as witness the 50-percent contraceptive prevalence rate. It is a free market. But as we are not a welfare state, taxpayers have no duty to provide the contraceptives to try and cure pregnancy, which is not a disease.
The State’s duty is to protect women from real diseases. At least 80 women die every day from heart diseases, 63 from vascular diseases, 51 from cancer, 45 from pneumonia, 23 from tuberculosis, 22 from diabetes; 16 from lower chronic respiratory diseases. Why are our lawmakers not demanding free medicines and services for all those afflicted?
Indeed, maternal death could be brought down to zero just by providing adequate basic and emergency obstetrics-care facilities and skilled medical services to women. The local officials of Gattaran, Cagayan and Sorsogon City have shown this. Why do our lawmakers insist on stuffing our women with contraceptives and abortifacients instead?
In 2005, the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization concluded that oral contraceptives cause breast, liver and cervical cancer. Shouldn’t our lawmakers demand that contraceptives be banned or at least labeled as “cancer-causing,” or “dangerous to women’s health”? Why do they want them classified as “essential medicines” instead?
Birth control drugs are actually fine by me, as long as I dont have to pay taxes for their promulgation. Its a free market. Let those who need it get their own, educate themselves on it. I'd rather the taxes im paying be used for more important things, because this whole "we need to stop over-population" belief is FALSE. We are not over populated. And it is sheer laziness and ignorance on the part of politicians to blame poverty on this.
More serious matters have to be attended to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overpopulation
Overpopulation is not a function of the size or density of the population. Overpopulation is determined using the ratio of population to available sustainable resources.
If a given environment has a population of ten, but there is food or drinking water enough for only nine, then that environment is overpopulated;
xxx
There are an estimated 350 million women in the poorest countries of the world who either did not want their last child, do not want another child or want to space their pregnancies, but they lack access to information, affordable means and services to determine the size and spacing of their families. In the developing world, some 514,000 women die of complications from pregnancy and abortion on a yearly basis. Additionally, 8 million infants die, many because of malnutrition or preventable diseases.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761577020/Poverty.html
POVERTY, condition of having INSUFFICIENT resources or INCOME. In its most extreme form, poverty is a lack of basic human needs, such as adequate and nutritious food, clothing, housing, clean water, and health services. Extreme poverty can cause terrible suffering and death, and even modest levels of poverty can prevent people from realizing many of their desires. The world’s poorest people—many of whom live in developing areas of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and eastern Europe—struggle daily for food, shelter, and other necessities.
xxx
-------------
http://www.fightpoverty.mmbrico.com/poverty/reasons.html
OVERPOPULATION, the situation of having large numbers of people with too few resources (including not enough JOBS for its people) and too little space, IS CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH POVERTY.
xxx
A country’s level of poverty can depend greatly on its mix of population density and agricultural productivity. (Recall the RICE SHORTAGE in the Philippines.) Bangladesh, for example, has one of the world’s highest population densities, with 1,078 persons per sq km (2,791 persons per sq mi). A large majority of the people of Bangladesh engage in low-productivity manual farming, which contributes to the country’s extremely high level of poverty. Some of the smaller countries in western Europe, such as The Netherlands and Belgium, have high population densities as well. These countries practice mechanized farming and are involved in high-tech industries, however, and therefore have high standards of living.
xxx
High birth rates contribute to overpopulation in many developing countries.
xxx
from the National Cancer Institute,
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/oral-contraceptives
"Oral Contraceptives (OCs) did not increase the risk of liver cancer in Asian and African women, who are considered high risk for this disease."
xxx
Evidence shows that long-term use of OCs (5 or more years) may be associated with an increased risk of cancer of the cervix (the narrow, lower portion of the uterus) (12). Although OC use may increase the risk of cervical cancer, HUMAN PAPILLOMAVIRUS (HPV) is recognized as the MAJOR CAUSE of this disease. Approximately 14 types of HPV have been identified as having the potential to cause cancer, and HPVs HAVE BEEN FOUND IN 99 percent OF CERVICAL CANCER biopsy specimens worldwide (12).
xxx
The use of OCs has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of endometrial cancer.
xxx
Studies have consistently shown that using OCs reduces the risk of ovarian cancer.
xxx
breast cancers diagnosed in women after 10 or more years of not using OCs were less advanced than breast cancers diagnosed in women who had never used OCs.
xxx
The risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers is reduced with the use of OCs, while the risk of breast and cervical cancers is increased.
xxx
----------------------------
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/birth-control-pill/WO00098
xxx
How do birth control pills affect your risk of cancer?
Scientific evidence suggests using birth control pills for longer periods of time increases your risk of some cancers, such as cervical cancer and liver cancer, but it also decreases your risk of other types of cancer, including ovarian cancer and endometrial cancer.
THE EFFECT OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS ON BREAST CANCER RISK ISN'T QUITE CLEAR. However, some studies do show a link between pill use and breast cancer. Key factors seem to be how many years you take the pill and how recently you last used the pill. In one study, use of birth control pills led to a higher risk of premenopausal breast cancer in women who took the pill for four or more years before having a baby. Other evidence suggests that 10 or more years after you stop taking the pill, your breast cancer risk returns to the same level as if you had never taken birth control pills.
http://www.pcij.org/stories/2003/population.html
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo herself admitted that she used contraceptives when she was a young mother.
xxx
As an economist, President Arroyo is only too well aware that an exploding population puts undue stress on a weak economy, but as a Catholic whose rise to power was due in part to Church support, she is torn.
xxx
Such a conflicted approach has had dire consequences on poor women, like 14-year old Claudia, soon to be the mother of two. Claudia’s case, which is taken up in the series shows how the lack of access to contraceptives and lack of knowledge about birth control have limited women’s choices and confined them to serial child-bearing
In the end, the series explains, the result of an incoherent population policy is a large and permanent underclass. As the Population Commission warned, “Larger families among the poor make it more difficult for them to break out of poverty.”
xxx
The President, after all, is known as a devout Catholic who has defended the Catholic hierarchy’s position against artificial birth control. During the luncheon at Malacañang on February 28, Arroyo revealed that she went to confession after taking birth control pills, but the priest who heard her merely said, “It’s okay.”
xxx
“I guess at the back of our mind we were all thinking, ‘if you did it yourself, then why are you depriving women from having the same choices that you had’” said a legislator who was present at the luncheon.
xxx
such a weak population policy has helped create a country with a big and permanent underclass. The World Bank estimates that of the 80 million Filipinos today (2003 report), 40 percent are living on less than $1 a day. (How many more Filipinos had joined the PERMANENT UNDERCLASS today, 2008?)
xxx
In this 14th most populous country in the world, a myriad of socio-economic and cultural factors has ensured that each year, hundreds of thousands of women bear children they had not planned for and are most probably not ready to raise.
xxx
To Romualdez and population experts, the Philippines needs a population program that offers contraceptives. Gripes Romualdez: “You just can’t exclude contraceptives because the Church says so. That’s the worst part, being dictated by people who were never elected, never had the experience. They’re incompetent to make that decision.”
xxx
According to the study’s author, Professor Alex Herrin of the U.P. School of Economics, the “persistent and consistent opposition of the Catholic Church hierarchy to the government population policy of reducing population growth as well as the promotion of artificial family planning methods” is the “single most important factor influencing population policy-making” in the last three decades.
xxx
The population program under the Ramos administration fared a little better despite the strong opposition of the Church. Herrin says the program even underwent a “redefinition from population control to population management.”
Ramos, a Protestant, appointed Dr. Juan Flavier, a family planning advocate, to the Department of Health (DOH). Flavier managed to set aside some money for the purchase of birth control pills and other contraceptives. He even launched an anti-AIDS campaign that heavily featured condoms, which had Church leaders up in arms.
xxx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_contraception
Prior to the 20th century, contraception was generally condemned by all the major branches of Christianity, including the major reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin. This unified front no longer exists, however.
------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_birth_control
Religious views on birth control
----------------------
Are the elected officials in the Philippines pushing only for the interests of the Catholic Church and its doctrine ? 81% of the population in the Philippines are Roman Catholics. Do the non-Catholics in the Philippines irrelevant? How many of Catholics follow this no-to-artifical-contraceptives order of the Catholic Church ?
http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/news/op-eds/2008/FailureofHumanaeVitae.asp
Most Catholics use modern contraceptives and believe it is a moral choice. They are good Catholics and many wish the Catholic hierarchy would respect their decisions, taken in good conscience, about what is best for themselves, their relationships, families and children.
While it is clear that Humanae Vitae has been unsuccessful in convincing many Catholics to abandon modern methods of contraception, those of us who have access to healthcare, education, finances and support systems are not my greatest concern. We have the means to follow the dictates of our conscience. It would be disingenuous to think that everyone has these same benefits. Of greater concern to me are the women who are more persistently and detrimentally affected by the effects of Humanae Vitae.
The Catholic hierarchy actively lobbies around the world, in places like the Philippines, Nicaragua and Rwanda, from making family planning available. This is not just an internal church matter; it affects public health policy around the world. The ban has contributed to an unmet need for modern family planning methods around the world, in many areas leading to increased abortion and maternal death, and to avoidable difficulties for Catholic families.
xxx
Use of condom does not cause cancer.
Toothpaste does not cause cancer, too.
But it can not be used as a contraceptive.
-------------------------
Fourteen-year-old Claudia said she had urged her common-law husband to use condoms, but he refused, arguing that it was just going to get torn anyway. Instead, she told health worker Magdalena Bacalando, they used toothpaste, which the couple mistakenly believed would work as a spermicide. Now Claudia is three months pregnant with her second child and seems confused what to do next.
http://www.pcij.org/stories/2003/population2.html
------------
xxx
Several studies have shown that Filipino husbands often dictate what their wives can and cannot do with their bodies. And more often than not, they do not want their wives to resort to artificial birth control. In a 2000 report, the Population Commission (Popcom) says, “Husbands tend to view contraceptive as socially unacceptable and potentially damaging to women’s health. They believe use of contraceptives pose more hazards to women than do pregnancies.”
xxx
The Commission says that in the Philippines, “women have limited power to refuse sexual relations with husbands,” some of whom become violent when denied their “marital rights.”
xxx
The East West Center study says about 87 percent of Filipinos ages 15-24 had their first sexual experience outside of marriage. National data also show that more than one-third or 36 percent of young Filipino women ages 15 to 24 conceive before marriage.
“Teenage pregnancies often hinder and in some cases end a young mother’s education,” says the Popcom 2000 report. “The direct link between girls’ education and women’s ability to escape poverty are well-understood. Education enables women to respond to opportunities, challenge their traditional roles and change their life circumstances.”
The Popcom adds that the only way adolescents can be encouraged to delay marriage and child-bearing is by providing them with “appropriate, accurate sexual and reproductive health education, helping them make informed decisions about their sexuality and stressing the prevention of unplanned pregnancy, induced abortion and sexually-transmitted diseases.”
xxx
House Bill 4643, in particular, characterizes oral contraceptives, emergency contraception, injectables and intra-uterine devices as
“abortive” drugs and devices, a characterization that is scientifically and legally indefensible. A ban on these contraceptive methods would contradict the widely held opinions of the medical community, put the government of the Philippines in breach of its international legal obligations and, most importantly, result in egregious violations of women’s basic human rights
1. Oral contraceptives, emergency contraception, injectables and intra-uterine
devices are not abortifacients
2. Access to contraception is a basic human right
A. The rights to life and health
B. The right to make autonomous decisions in matters affecting reproduction
C. The right to freedom from discrimination
D. The right to benefit from scientific progress
http://www.reproductiverights.org/pdf/ww_PhilippinesLetter.pdf
Anonymous on September 13, 2008 10:09 AM
wrote: "Why do our lawmakers insist on stuffing our women with contraceptives and abortifacients instead?"
Stuffing? I have not seen women being forced to use contraceptives, yet. Which part of the Philippines do you live in? Maybe use of contraceptives is forced on women in your town or city.
But why is the Catholic church STUFFING the Catholic doctrines on us, non-Catholics in the Philippines? Do you think only Catholics are the children of God? Why don't you leave the government alone, and you take care of your own flock. Tell your flock not to come within 30-feet of any contraceptives or they will go to hell. That's what you do, don't you, promise eternal life after this earthly life, but condemn many of the Filipinos into life of hell while on earth. Shame on you, you fundamentalist Catholics, who think you are the only religion in the world. Your biggest Catholic follower, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, is also the biggest corrupt public official in the Philippines. Did you do anything at all to stop the greediness of Ate GLUE? No, because it is a "quid pro quo", favor for a favor. I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine. You keep her in power and she cut down health reproductive rights in return.
Why are you deceptively loading emotional words like "abortifacients" ? Abortifacients is a substance that induces abortion. Since when did condom become an abortifacient? Since when did condom, diaphragm, vaginal sponge, cervical cap, spermicidal foams, creams and suppositories induce abortion? "Barrier method", have you heard of it?
I concede that in hormonal contraceptives and IUD, Mr. Sperm Cell and Ms. Egg Cell meet and voila becomes "Blastocyst" (the new tiny human being, the pre-born child, as what Pro-Lifers call them). IUD and hormonal contraceptives prevent implantation of Blastocyst on the uterine wall. Would you promote the "barrier method" then and just ask for the removal of oral contraceptives and IUD, which you believe are abortifacients?
Why don't we require hospitals not to prescribe abortifacients to Catholics, and let the non-Catholics in the Philippines have it when they ask for it? Let us have a register of Catholics that health care professionals can check before prescribing abortifacients. (If you want, we can also require only non-Catholic healthcare professionals to prescribe abortifacients, so as not to condemn your Catholic healthcare professionals from your Catholic hell after your Catholic earthly life.) Let us call the Register as, "The Philippine National Regiser of Catholics". All Catholics who do not want to be prescribed abortifacients can register in the Philippine National Register of Catholics. They can also wear the equivalent of the "Star of David" for Catholics, like a cross pendant (ala Madonna Ciccone). Healthcare professionals can refuse giving abortifacients to anyone wearing a cross.
(Sounds crazy? Well, the Catholic church is crazy enough to impose their teachings on us non-Catholics anyway... so let us do it their crazy way.)
Seriously now,
the Catholic Church is now on a witch-hunt of Lagman, the author of the Health Reproductive Bill. Burning at the stakes. What century do we live in the Philippines? We are having a time travel to the past. Your Catholic church is burning Lagman at the stakes, for going against the Catholic church's teachings. Is burning those who believe in their reproductive rights, going to cleanse your soul? So you can go to the Catholic heaven? You want to burn at the stake all those who are not Catholics too? Like me? Do you miss 16th century England? Do you miss "Bloody Mary"? Do you long for the 17th century Spanish Inquisition again?
Stop stuffing your Catholic church doctrines on the rest of us Filipinos.
For the Catholics who fear excommunication for not following the Catholic church's teachings, if the Catholic church do that, who else will they ask donations from?