... This is worth sharing ...
Aura Azarcon (auraroo) wrote,
@ 2009-12-16 10:19:00
http://auraroo.livejournal.com/34438.html?view=251782#t251782
The Philippine RH Bill: Responsive and Progressive
My englcom argumentative essay.
The Reproductive Health Bill and Population Development Act of 2008 (hereafter RH Bill) is an act providing for a national policy on reproductive health, responsible parenthood and population development, and for other purposes. It was primarily authored by Albay First District Representative Edcel Lagman and is now co-authored by about 130 more lawmakers. The bill covers the following aspects: "information and access to natural and modern family planning; maternal, infant and child health and nutrition; promotion of breast feeding; prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications; adolescent and youth health; prevention and management of reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases; elimination of violence against women; counseling on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health; treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers; male involvement and participation in reproductive health; prevention and treatment of infertility; and reproductive health education for the youth." (House Bill No. 5043 Sections I-III, 2008) More than a year has passed since the bill's original authorship, but it still remains a controversial issue in the legislative assembly. Consequently, it has also sparked debates among economists, sociologists, health experts, religious organizations and ordinary members of the community. This is why it is only appropriate for me, a concerned student and Filipino citizen, to offer my assessment. After reading the full text of the bill and the opposing arguments among different sectors, I am now brought to an unwavering stand. The RH Bill must be immediately legislated because as clearly stated in its policies and objectives, it promotes awareness and education, ensures public health and disease prevention and enables the government to play its role in the overall welfare of the citizens.
One of the reasons why our countrymen still has not experienced the intended benefits of this bill is the continuing campaign of the Catholic Church to discredit it. According to them, the promotion of artificial contraceptives and sex education will eventually lead to threatening accounts of divorce, euthanasia, abortion, total contraception methods and homosexual marriage (D.E.A.T.H.). In an interview with Catholic-run Veritas 846 Radio, Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines' (CBCP) Commision on Family Life Chairperson and Pampanga Archbishop Paciano Aniceto, counts that the bill is “anti-poor and anti-life”. According to him, human resources are a great advantage. The government should focus on programs that would make them useful and productive. Obviously, sick and uneducated humans are not the resources we would like to have. They cannot be dynamic if they are devoid of information, inflicted with diseases that can be prevented and treated, or worried about a family of ten that they cannot support. These can all be avoided upon the approval of the RH Bill, which, as we will soon after see, is not just pro-life but pro-quality life.
First of all, the RH Bill promotes awareness and education, which are the initial steps to creating a well-founded society. One of the key components of this bill is the advocacy of family-planning for couples. This way, they can decide on the proper timing, spacing and number of their children, according to what their family can support. Included in this clause is the recommendation of the ideal family size to have two children only, but it is still for the family to decide for their own welfare. This will inhibit the rapid growth of our population, and all the negative implications of this on our society as a whole. Aside from this, campaigns and counseling will be funded in order to provide parents with appropriate methodologies and information regarding sexuality and sexual health. Men and women alike will be more aware of their rights and responsibilities, and will therefore become equal contributors to their families and communities. Even the youth at their curious, growing years will benefit, as sex education will be incorporated in their school curriculum. This will ensure that their questions will be properly addressed, their changing bodies will be better understood and take care of, and their future decisions will be based on the rational teachings inculcated onto them early on. In effect, this can also prevent cases of unplanned pregnancies, sexual abuse and bodily disorders, all because the citizens are fully equipped with the right information.
Another objective of this bill is to ensure public health and disease prevention. Researches show that only 60 percent of the births in the Philippines are properly supervised by a skilled attendant, and some 160 women die every 100,000 births. (United Nations Population Fund, 2009) Through this bill, proper funding will be allotted to ensure the accessibility of vaccinations, consultations and safer deliveries from professional midwives, especially in rural areas. This will decrease infant mortality rates and other deaths caused by complications during pregnancy. After the passage of this bill, gynaecological and reproductive tract diseases will also be given attention and treatment. Citizens will be assisted with proper diagnosis, treatment and prevention. Some Filipinos do not even know that they are already sick, or are usually afraid to ask. Through mobile health centers and campaigns, they will be properly educated by health experts. Another controversial clause is about the prevention and management of abortion and its complications. Abortion is undeniably present in the black market, but with proper treatment and information against it, it will less likely prevail. Lastly, infertility and sexual dysfunctions will also be solved. There are couples who want to have a family but cannot, and through modern medicine and technology, they can now gain access to this possibility.
The third and most time-appropriate advantage of the RH Bill is the fact that it enables the government to play its role in the overall welfare of the citizens. As expected by the citizens, the government must be the first to see the realities of our society today. People are having unprotected sex. Couples need effective contraceptives. Parents are not ready for ten children that they cannot feed, clothe and send to school. The youth learn about sex from incompetent sources like the internet, teen shows and their “experienced” peers. People are getting sick and spreading diseases without them knowing or admitting it. It is appropriate for a central body such as the government to intervene. They are not being intrusive; they are only ensuring that they are able to seek and address our best interests. This way, they are making sure that we become responsible for ourselves. Is this not what we need? Is this not what we want from our officials? Evidently, it must be. According to the Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Stations Report, 71 percent favor passage of the RH Bill. That is seven out of ten Filipinos, Catholics and non-Catholics alike. This is the reality today, and we must soon take action.
It is true that the RH Bill does not directly solve poverty or protect us from killings and wars. However, it still brings us one step closer to our goal. With the passage of this bill, we can be rich with information. We can be safe from health risks. We can be truly empowered as individuals. After that, we will be able to contribute better to our own communities. Although the bill is strongly discouraged by the Catholic church, we must not be easily convinced by misinformation. As responsible citizens, we must look deep into present issues and evaluate how it affects us individually and as a whole. We may see that the realities today encompass our traditional beliefs; however, we must be responsive to the call of the times. This way, we can face our present problems with modern, and possibly more effective solutions.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
US Urologists to conduct FREE No-Needle NSV Mission in the Phils.
NSV International, Inc. (USA) will conduct FREE No-Needle / No-
Scalpel Vasectomy Mission, in Cebu, Negros & Leyte, in coordination
with the Bisaya Medical Association, this Feb 2010..
This will be conducted by the President, Dr. Ramon U. Suarez,M.D.
F.A.C.S. Diplomate,American Board of Urology, ( Pennsylvania, USA)
with another Urologists, Dr. Douglas G.Stein, one of America’s top
Doctors, (Florida, USA) affiliated with 4 star hospital and 4 star medical
school. Dr. Stein (www.vasweb.com) has performed over 20,300
vasectomies, as of July 2009 ). Another practicing physician in New
York, Dr. Ron Suarez, the son of Dr. Ramon Suarez,will also join the
NSV Team. Both father and son have undergone vasectomy and are
satisfied, thus actively promoting NSV.
No-Needle NSV, was first introduced in the Phils by NSV International Inc.Jan 2009. It is a modern technique of permanent Family Planning which is a Safe, Simple & Quick (15 min. ave.) procedure, entails no incision, no suture, just Band-Aid! and No-Needle, only spray applicator for anesthesia. NSV is 99% effective if instructions are followed. Vasectomized men will notice: No change in the semen, No change in sex drive, No change in climax sensation, No change in the testes or scrotum, No change in erections.
The Founders of NSV International Inc, Dr. Ramon Suarez and Engr. Bob Kiamco and their spouses Dr. Nenita Suarez and Dr. Benie Kiamco are Filipino-Americans residing in the U.S. They consider it their Social Responsibility to help fellow Filipinos particularly the low income families with several children who don’t intend to have children anymore. For a number of years now, they have been subsidizing the expense of NSV at Sacred Heart Hospital and providing it for FREE to those who need them, (in other private clinics it is P3,000+per procedure).The Founders themselves and their family members/relatives have undergone vasectomy.
NSV is voluntary and intended only for those who are interested to avail of it, however it is important for them to know the facts as well as the misconceptions of NSV for them to properly decide. From Nov-Dec, 2009, Pro QUALITY LIFE Training & Dev’t.(Q_Life) will be conducting NN/NSV Orientation in the barangays, companies and various groups.
For NN/NSV Orientation or other inquiries, pls contact: Ms. Frohnie D. Cagalitan T 06332-2590989, 0927 5719399, e-add: proqualitylife@gmail.com or for NSV before the Mission, pls call: Ms. Myrna H. Danuco,Sacred Heart Hospital, Urgello St. Cebu City Tel 063-32-4188980.
Friday, October 9, 2009
RH Bill, Is there a Catholic Vote?
Carvajal: Pact with the devil
SunStar Cebu
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
HOPELESSLY out of touch with the reality of their constituents, the Catholic hierarchy thought of a Catholic vote to lure politicians into voting against the Reproductive Health Bill.
The bishops have since expressed their veiled threat of a disappointment over Sen. Noynoy Aquino for his pro RH stance.
Most recently, they dangled a Catholic vote for the administration candidate, Secretary Gilberto Teodoro, as they asked him to withdraw his support of the bill.
I was riding a taxi home from the airport the other day and my usual small talk with the driver somehow drifted towards the Simala shrine scandal. I soon realized I was dealing with someone who was rabidly anti-clergy. He denounced the whole clergy as only interested in money; and he had an interesting reason for it. He said that if they are not just after money, why are they opposed to population control? Why are they against the Reproductive Health Bill “nga gikinahanglan namong mga pobre?”
St. Paul said the greatest of the three virtues (Faith, Hope and Love) is Love. The Church seems to forget that in the controversial Reproductive Health Bill issue. It is very clear in their stand against the Reproductive Health Bill that they’d rather see the death rate of poor mothers and children continue than have their doctrine on natural law be defiled. With bloc voting, it seems that they’d vote for devils in politics who oppose with them the RH Bill.
The Reproductive Health Bill represents Hope for poor families whose mothers and children die at an alarmingly fast rate.
Above all, the Reproductive Health Bill is an act of kindness on ignorant and poor mothers and their children, both born and unborn, who are dying prematurely for lack of proper reproductive health care.
Many of us cannot see the dreaded phantoms the hierarchy sees in the bill. If the bishops are really pro-life, the least they can do is give the concern for the poor supporters of the bill the benefit of the doubt and not condemn them as evil. Opposing it now is to oppose the intention of well meaning officials and citizens to help and serve that the bill epitomizes. They should oppose the actual implementation later should they find it immoral.
Furthermore, if the bishops are really pro-life, they should denounce the perpetrators in high places of extra-judicial killings and of graft and corruption and not dangle the Catholic vote before these people in exchange for a vote against the Reproductive Health Bill. This could mean making a pact with the devil. We want leaders who will serve. We do not want leaders who will do anything, including oppose the RH bill, in order to get elected and then run this country to the ground.
Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on September 23, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re-posted by; Catholics for Reproductive Health (C4RH) Cebu
* Orlando P. Carvajal is the President of the Phil. Federation of
Married Catholic Priest, Inc.
SunStar Cebu
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
HOPELESSLY out of touch with the reality of their constituents, the Catholic hierarchy thought of a Catholic vote to lure politicians into voting against the Reproductive Health Bill.
The bishops have since expressed their veiled threat of a disappointment over Sen. Noynoy Aquino for his pro RH stance.
Most recently, they dangled a Catholic vote for the administration candidate, Secretary Gilberto Teodoro, as they asked him to withdraw his support of the bill.
I was riding a taxi home from the airport the other day and my usual small talk with the driver somehow drifted towards the Simala shrine scandal. I soon realized I was dealing with someone who was rabidly anti-clergy. He denounced the whole clergy as only interested in money; and he had an interesting reason for it. He said that if they are not just after money, why are they opposed to population control? Why are they against the Reproductive Health Bill “nga gikinahanglan namong mga pobre?”
St. Paul said the greatest of the three virtues (Faith, Hope and Love) is Love. The Church seems to forget that in the controversial Reproductive Health Bill issue. It is very clear in their stand against the Reproductive Health Bill that they’d rather see the death rate of poor mothers and children continue than have their doctrine on natural law be defiled. With bloc voting, it seems that they’d vote for devils in politics who oppose with them the RH Bill.
The Reproductive Health Bill represents Hope for poor families whose mothers and children die at an alarmingly fast rate.
Above all, the Reproductive Health Bill is an act of kindness on ignorant and poor mothers and their children, both born and unborn, who are dying prematurely for lack of proper reproductive health care.
Many of us cannot see the dreaded phantoms the hierarchy sees in the bill. If the bishops are really pro-life, the least they can do is give the concern for the poor supporters of the bill the benefit of the doubt and not condemn them as evil. Opposing it now is to oppose the intention of well meaning officials and citizens to help and serve that the bill epitomizes. They should oppose the actual implementation later should they find it immoral.
Furthermore, if the bishops are really pro-life, they should denounce the perpetrators in high places of extra-judicial killings and of graft and corruption and not dangle the Catholic vote before these people in exchange for a vote against the Reproductive Health Bill. This could mean making a pact with the devil. We want leaders who will serve. We do not want leaders who will do anything, including oppose the RH bill, in order to get elected and then run this country to the ground.
Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on September 23, 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re-posted by; Catholics for Reproductive Health (C4RH) Cebu
* Orlando P. Carvajal is the President of the Phil. Federation of
Married Catholic Priest, Inc.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Feature: Reproductive Health as an Electoral Issue
PIA Press Release 2009/09/29
Re-posted by: Catholics for REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH (C4RH) Cebu
Koronadal City (29 September) -- The FORUM for Family Planning and Development, Inc. (FORUM) and the Philippine Legislators' Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) in a joint statement laud presidential candidates expressing support for family planning and the reproductive health bill.
"Presidential candidates supporting reproductive health show that they are aware of the people's needs and the duty of government to provide the right information and services on reproductive health. This will be to their advantage," said Ben De Leon, President of the FORUM.
He explains "contrary to what the oppositionists are saying, reproductive health promotes the freedom of an individual to found a family. Reproductive health does not promote abortion but rather prevents it."
He cites vasectomy and tubal ligation as an example. "Anti-RH claims it to be abortifacient, but the truth is that, these are safe and legal methods of family planning."
"Congress should now approve House Bill 5043 and Senate Bill 3122 because the people demands for family planning and reproductive health education and services," the FORUM stressed.
Various surveys conducted since 1991 and until 2009 reveal that 87% of Filipinos say that family planning is important while 74% believe that the government should provide budget for family planning education and services.
"We are glad to hear prominent presidential candidates openly discussing family issues, and explicitly declaring their support for the RH bill. Policymakers must listen to the overwhelming call of the Filipino people that seek reproductive health education and services and not to the few who are distorting the truth and insists on blackmailing presidential candidates supportive of the RH measure," De Leon concluded.
Together with a growing number of supportive organizations in the country, both non-government organizations are actively pushing for the passage of the pending House Bill 5043 or the "Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2009" and its Senate counterpart, Senate Bill 3122. (aca PIA 12) [top]
Re-posted by: Catholics for REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH (C4RH) Cebu
Koronadal City (29 September) -- The FORUM for Family Planning and Development, Inc. (FORUM) and the Philippine Legislators' Committee on Population and Development Foundation, Inc. (PLCPD) in a joint statement laud presidential candidates expressing support for family planning and the reproductive health bill.
"Presidential candidates supporting reproductive health show that they are aware of the people's needs and the duty of government to provide the right information and services on reproductive health. This will be to their advantage," said Ben De Leon, President of the FORUM.
He explains "contrary to what the oppositionists are saying, reproductive health promotes the freedom of an individual to found a family. Reproductive health does not promote abortion but rather prevents it."
He cites vasectomy and tubal ligation as an example. "Anti-RH claims it to be abortifacient, but the truth is that, these are safe and legal methods of family planning."
"Congress should now approve House Bill 5043 and Senate Bill 3122 because the people demands for family planning and reproductive health education and services," the FORUM stressed.
Various surveys conducted since 1991 and until 2009 reveal that 87% of Filipinos say that family planning is important while 74% believe that the government should provide budget for family planning education and services.
"We are glad to hear prominent presidential candidates openly discussing family issues, and explicitly declaring their support for the RH bill. Policymakers must listen to the overwhelming call of the Filipino people that seek reproductive health education and services and not to the few who are distorting the truth and insists on blackmailing presidential candidates supportive of the RH measure," De Leon concluded.
Together with a growing number of supportive organizations in the country, both non-government organizations are actively pushing for the passage of the pending House Bill 5043 or the "Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2009" and its Senate counterpart, Senate Bill 3122. (aca PIA 12) [top]
Presidentiable Noy Aquino defies church, backs RH Bill
Aquino defies Church, backs controversial bill
Posted by quintessentialy in INQUIRER.net, Philippines.
By Anna Valmero INQUIRER.net
First Posted 17:07:00 09/28/2009 Filed Under: Politics, Health
MANILA, Philippines – Senator Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III said on Monday he remains firm in supporting the passage of House Bill 5043 or proposed Reproductive Health and Population Development Act even if it means the Catholic church and pro-life groups will not support his presidential bid for 2010.
Aquino said the bill can pave the way for parents’ education in taking responsibility for the growth of their children. The country’s population can balloon to more than 92 million, according to a forecast by the National Statistics Office.
“Whatever they say about my position on the RH bill, I am sticking to it despite the pressure from certain quarters. If I get the support or not of the Church and pro-life groups [for my presidential bid in 2010], it is secondary for my advocacy to get everybody educated on reproductive health,” he said.
“Parents must be reminded they have a responsibility with their children,” Aquino stressed. “I need not go far to see a mother with children having only 10 months gap in between and with the next generation suffering the same poor conditions.”
But even with a law on reproductive health, Aquino said parents should be given independence to decide on how many children they want and whether or not to use natural or artificial methods of contraception.
Aquino said he is not “comfortable” that the government will provide a specific budget in support of artificial family planning. “And it is not right to tell patients that only artificial methods can be used for family planning,” he added.
Posted by quintessentialy in INQUIRER.net, Philippines.
By Anna Valmero INQUIRER.net
First Posted 17:07:00 09/28/2009 Filed Under: Politics, Health
MANILA, Philippines – Senator Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III said on Monday he remains firm in supporting the passage of House Bill 5043 or proposed Reproductive Health and Population Development Act even if it means the Catholic church and pro-life groups will not support his presidential bid for 2010.
Aquino said the bill can pave the way for parents’ education in taking responsibility for the growth of their children. The country’s population can balloon to more than 92 million, according to a forecast by the National Statistics Office.
“Whatever they say about my position on the RH bill, I am sticking to it despite the pressure from certain quarters. If I get the support or not of the Church and pro-life groups [for my presidential bid in 2010], it is secondary for my advocacy to get everybody educated on reproductive health,” he said.
“Parents must be reminded they have a responsibility with their children,” Aquino stressed. “I need not go far to see a mother with children having only 10 months gap in between and with the next generation suffering the same poor conditions.”
But even with a law on reproductive health, Aquino said parents should be given independence to decide on how many children they want and whether or not to use natural or artificial methods of contraception.
Aquino said he is not “comfortable” that the government will provide a specific budget in support of artificial family planning. “And it is not right to tell patients that only artificial methods can be used for family planning,” he added.
Monday, September 7, 2009
Is the RH Bill Necessary?
September 7, 2009...11:41 PM
To Control Or Not to Control: Is the RH Bill Necessary?
Who will win the fiery battle on the passage of the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill now pending in both houses of Congress?
The “stubbornness” of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) hierarchy, said the proponents and supporters of the bill, hinders the passage of the said important piece of legislation, initiated in the House of Representatives by Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel C. Lagman with a counterpart bill in the Senate, authored by Sen. Rodolfo Biazon.
As of this writing, the RH bill in the Lower House is “unfinished business” while in the Senate, the Biazon bill is being reviewed, commented upon and is soon to be amended.
Last February 18, the Forum for Family Planning and Development (FFPD) and the Social Weather Station (SWS) publicized the results of the latest survey showing the “clamor” of the public, particularly the residents of Manila, for the bill’s passage.
However, the RCC’s Episcopal Commission on Family and Life (ECFL) belittled the results of the FFPD-commissioned survey, which involved 600 residents of Manila’s Districts 1 and 5. Based on 2007 data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), Manila has a total population of 1.66 million,Manila had been the focus of the debates on the issues surrounding RH, especially since former Mayor and now Environment Secretary Lito L. Atienza issued Executive Order No. 003 which implicitly “bans” the sale of contraceptives such as condoms, intrauterine device (IUD), and other materials, and the provision of medical services to women suspected to have undergone abortion.
The former Manila government chief has been said to be giving cash gifts to families that have more children.
Some of the NGOs (non-government organization) working in Manila even went “underground”, said the FFPD and its partner women’s NGO, Linangan ng Kababaihan (Likhaan) Center for Women.
Fe Nicodemous, an NGO worker working closely with migrants and families of migrants, said that she had been harassed by some people allegedly connected with the former mayor when she and her colleagues were giving free contraceptives in one of the slum areas of Manila years ago.
Pro-poor or anti-poor?
Using poverty and women’s health as the primary basis for promoting the RH bill, the FFPD released on Sept. 3, 2008 its official statement the issue:
“An effective population management is the road to development. This is not a myth, but a hard fact that has been the subject of numerous researches and studies which revealed that rapid population growth has an adverse impact on economic development. It is also a fact that the very core of a sound population control lies in the implementation of a sustainable family planning program capable of providing much-needed information and supplies to those who need these,” read the first line of the position paper of the FFPD published on their official website (insert URL: http://www.forum4fp.org/html/the-forum-position-paper.html).
FFPD believes that, beyond the glaring indicators related to the current state of reproductive health in the Philippines – the high maternal mortality rate, the rising number of abortion, the increasing child mortality, the growing number of people without access to basic health and social services – the only solution is the enactment and implementation of a Reproductive Health Law that “will enable each Filipino to be accorded the right to information, the right to choose how many children to have and when to have them.”
The position paper further read, “The Forum for Family Planning and Development joins hands with other NGOS in expressing our strong support for the urgent passage of the bill on Reproductive Health. The measure goes beyond its purpose of improving reproductive health and implementing a nationwide program on family planning as it creates a path towards a sound economic policy that will improve the lives of millions of Filipino households.”
The FFPD paper added that couples, but most especially the women, should be given the freedom to choose the path they will take in raising their family.
“We have been waiting for decades for our country to honor its commitments to the world – to make real its promise to uphold our people’s right to reproductive health and family planning. While we have waited and debated for decades on the matter, our women and young girls have been suffering and thousands have lost their lives – 10 women are dying every 24 hours due to pregnancy related complications, while young girls as young as 13 years old are getting pregnant. This because they lack the information and family planning supplies that would have provided them with an option,” the FFPD’s paper further read.
However, the RCC hierarchy does not believe that a big population breeds poverty.
Earlier this year, in his New Year’s message, Pope Benedict XVI said poverty is often considered a consequence of demographic change. “For this reason, there are international campaigns afoot to reduce birth rates, sometimes using methods that respect neither the dignity of the woman, nor the right of parents to choose responsibly how many children to have; graver still, these methods often fail to respect even the right to life,” the Holy Pontiff said in his message.
Furthermore, the Holy Pontiff said there are still millions of people who had escaped from poverty despite experiencing substantial demographic growth.
Based on the 1981 statistics of world poverty incidence, 40 percent of the world’s population is in penury; however, after several years, that number had been halved, the Pope pointed out. “This achievement goes to show that resources to solve the problem of poverty do exist, even in the face of an increasing population,” the Pontiff said.
Good for or detrimental to women’s health?
While proponents and supporters of the bill say that use of artificial contraceptives do not endanger women’s overall health, there are medical experts who say it does.
Dr. Angelita Miguel-Aguirre, head of the Makati Medical Society’s Committee on Ethics, said in a statement that contraceptives inhibit and interfere with normal and healthy reproductive processes, resulting in serious complications and side effects. She added that women pay a high price for “tampering with nature.”
Lagman’s bill promotes the use of birth control pills, patch or injectable hormones, intrauterine device (IUD), barrier methods (condoms/diaphragms) and sterilization (ligation for women and vasectomy for men).
Aguirre said hormonal contraceptives such as pills, injectables (DEPO-Provera), implants and patches that contain estrogens and progestins have been classified as carcinogenic, thus raising breast, cervical and liver cancer risks, as well as increasing the possibility of premature hypertension and coronary artery disease resulting to heart attacks and strokes, and thromboembolism/pulmonary embolism.
In addition to these, decreased libido, infertility, cramps, gallstone formation, nausea and bloating are said to be the other side effects of hormonal pills.
Condoms also cannot prevent the spread of sexually-transmitted infections such as the human immune-deficiency virus (HIV) and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
The rubber comprising latex condoms has intrinsic voids about five micra whereas the HIV is only 0.1 micra. Since this is a factor of 50 smaller than the intrinsic voids, the HIV can pass through the condom, she explained.
“The condom and other barrier methods have the highest failure rate in preventing pregnancy and in protecting against sexually transmitted infections (STI) especially the human papilloma virus which is the major cause of cervical cancer in women,” said Aguirre.
However, the RH bill’s advocates say these are not true. The side effects of pills, they say, are just temporary and some of them do even prevent cervical cancer.
Will it promote promiscuity or not?
One of the fears of the conservative Church is that after the passage of the bill, promiscuity will be rampant among the youth.
Rev. Fr. Gregory D. Gaston, academic dean of the Holy Apostles Senior Seminary, Makati City, said that the RH bill seeks to establish a national family planning program that would include mandatory sex education and instruction on use of birth control for students in Grade V and higher levels in all public schools. The Catholic Church, he said, considers this “immoral”.
“The so-called sex-education programs promote promiscuity under the guise of reproductive health and reproductive rights. Children and adolescents will be taught to have satisfying and safe sexual experiences outside marriage. This is exactly the opposite of the virtues of holy purity, modesty and respect for oneself and others being taught by the Holy Church,” he said in a statement.
On the other hand, Emee Lei Albano, a Catholic and a youth advocate of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in the Philippines, said in an interview with Bulatlat that the youth nowadays are more intelligent and responsible enough to know what is right and what is wrong for them.
“I think the RH bill will just protect them and won’t make them immoral, unlike what some people wants us to believe,” she said.
Will it solve the Philippines’ problems?
Some experts on bioethics say that while they commend efforts to improve the quality of life of the Filipino people and that they agree that there is a need to address present problems in reproductive health, they do not think House Bill No. 5043 address these in a holistic manner for it focuses mainly on pregnancy prevention.
A statement titled “Consensus Statement on Reproductive Bill 5043”, which was signed and approved by Southeast Asian Center for Bioethics, argued that while sex education is an important part in the integral development of the child, the responsibility lies first with the parents.
The statement was signed by Fr. Fausto B. Gomez, OP; Angeles T. Alora, MD; Edna Monzon, MD, president of the Catholic Physicians’ Guild of the Philippines and chairman of Faculty of Medicine and Surgery of Dominican-run University of Santo Tomas, chair of the Department of Bioethics at the University of Santo Tomas (UST) Faculty of Medicine and Surgery; Mayumi Bismark, MD, president of the Bioethics Society of the Philippines; and Mrs. Lucia V. Soltes of the Catholic Nurses Guild of the Philippines in 2008.
“Their role should be stressed. It should also involve the school with teachers who should be educated. The absence of content regarding values in the way sex education is being taught gives an impression that there is no universal value, human sexuality, not sex education, should be taught,” the statement reads.
“The program should provide information and definitions which are accurate and free of contradictions: the antiabortion stance of the bill is contraindicated by the promotion of contractive agents (IUD and hormonal contraceptives) which actually act after fertilization and are potentially abortifacient agents,” the statement further read.
“Nevertheless, clinical decisions, as permeated by RH, cannot be mandated (refusing to refer patients to family planning services based on conscientious objection is penalized) but must be left to the informed conscience of the health practitioner.”
“Human freedom is a universal right. Health professionals and educators should be free to conscientiously object without fear of penalty and sanction,” the statement stressed.
However, the FFPD and other RH advocates maintained:
We strongly believe that couples, especially women, should be given the freedom to choose the path they will take in raising their family. This is a commitment our country made several times. We affirmed this right in 1968, during the International Year for Human Rights where United Nations Member States recognized the right of individuals and couples to decide their family size.
In August 1981, the Philippines ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) which clearly upholds women’s right to reproductive health services and education. And in 1995, we again made a promise to the rest of the world to provide our people with access to reproductive health services when we signed the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of Action and the Beijing Conference on Women Programme of Action.
We have been waiting for decades for our country to honor its commitments to the world – to make real its promise to uphold our people’s right to reproductive health and family planning. While we have waited and debated for decades on the matter, our women and young girls have been suffering and thousands have lost their lives – 10 women are dying every 24 hours due to pregnancy related complications, while young girls as young as 13 years old are getting pregnant. This because they lack the information and family planning supplies that would have provided them with an option.
We need to join hands for this national legislation that will bring tremendous improvements in the lives of our people. This is not about politics or religion. This is about, believing that each one of us should have the chance to live a healthy and dignified life, a human right that must be upheld regardless of one’s faith and belief.
The latest SWS survey about the acceptance of the bill showed that 71 percent of respondents are in favor of the pending RH bill, while 76 percent support the bill’s provision requiring public schools to teach family planning education. (First appeared at Bulatlat.com, February 21, 2009)
To Control Or Not to Control: Is the RH Bill Necessary?
Who will win the fiery battle on the passage of the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill now pending in both houses of Congress?
The “stubbornness” of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) hierarchy, said the proponents and supporters of the bill, hinders the passage of the said important piece of legislation, initiated in the House of Representatives by Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel C. Lagman with a counterpart bill in the Senate, authored by Sen. Rodolfo Biazon.
As of this writing, the RH bill in the Lower House is “unfinished business” while in the Senate, the Biazon bill is being reviewed, commented upon and is soon to be amended.
Last February 18, the Forum for Family Planning and Development (FFPD) and the Social Weather Station (SWS) publicized the results of the latest survey showing the “clamor” of the public, particularly the residents of Manila, for the bill’s passage.
However, the RCC’s Episcopal Commission on Family and Life (ECFL) belittled the results of the FFPD-commissioned survey, which involved 600 residents of Manila’s Districts 1 and 5. Based on 2007 data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), Manila has a total population of 1.66 million,Manila had been the focus of the debates on the issues surrounding RH, especially since former Mayor and now Environment Secretary Lito L. Atienza issued Executive Order No. 003 which implicitly “bans” the sale of contraceptives such as condoms, intrauterine device (IUD), and other materials, and the provision of medical services to women suspected to have undergone abortion.
The former Manila government chief has been said to be giving cash gifts to families that have more children.
Some of the NGOs (non-government organization) working in Manila even went “underground”, said the FFPD and its partner women’s NGO, Linangan ng Kababaihan (Likhaan) Center for Women.
Fe Nicodemous, an NGO worker working closely with migrants and families of migrants, said that she had been harassed by some people allegedly connected with the former mayor when she and her colleagues were giving free contraceptives in one of the slum areas of Manila years ago.
Pro-poor or anti-poor?
Using poverty and women’s health as the primary basis for promoting the RH bill, the FFPD released on Sept. 3, 2008 its official statement the issue:
“An effective population management is the road to development. This is not a myth, but a hard fact that has been the subject of numerous researches and studies which revealed that rapid population growth has an adverse impact on economic development. It is also a fact that the very core of a sound population control lies in the implementation of a sustainable family planning program capable of providing much-needed information and supplies to those who need these,” read the first line of the position paper of the FFPD published on their official website (insert URL: http://www.forum4fp.org/html/the-forum-position-paper.html).
FFPD believes that, beyond the glaring indicators related to the current state of reproductive health in the Philippines – the high maternal mortality rate, the rising number of abortion, the increasing child mortality, the growing number of people without access to basic health and social services – the only solution is the enactment and implementation of a Reproductive Health Law that “will enable each Filipino to be accorded the right to information, the right to choose how many children to have and when to have them.”
The position paper further read, “The Forum for Family Planning and Development joins hands with other NGOS in expressing our strong support for the urgent passage of the bill on Reproductive Health. The measure goes beyond its purpose of improving reproductive health and implementing a nationwide program on family planning as it creates a path towards a sound economic policy that will improve the lives of millions of Filipino households.”
The FFPD paper added that couples, but most especially the women, should be given the freedom to choose the path they will take in raising their family.
“We have been waiting for decades for our country to honor its commitments to the world – to make real its promise to uphold our people’s right to reproductive health and family planning. While we have waited and debated for decades on the matter, our women and young girls have been suffering and thousands have lost their lives – 10 women are dying every 24 hours due to pregnancy related complications, while young girls as young as 13 years old are getting pregnant. This because they lack the information and family planning supplies that would have provided them with an option,” the FFPD’s paper further read.
However, the RCC hierarchy does not believe that a big population breeds poverty.
Earlier this year, in his New Year’s message, Pope Benedict XVI said poverty is often considered a consequence of demographic change. “For this reason, there are international campaigns afoot to reduce birth rates, sometimes using methods that respect neither the dignity of the woman, nor the right of parents to choose responsibly how many children to have; graver still, these methods often fail to respect even the right to life,” the Holy Pontiff said in his message.
Furthermore, the Holy Pontiff said there are still millions of people who had escaped from poverty despite experiencing substantial demographic growth.
Based on the 1981 statistics of world poverty incidence, 40 percent of the world’s population is in penury; however, after several years, that number had been halved, the Pope pointed out. “This achievement goes to show that resources to solve the problem of poverty do exist, even in the face of an increasing population,” the Pontiff said.
Good for or detrimental to women’s health?
While proponents and supporters of the bill say that use of artificial contraceptives do not endanger women’s overall health, there are medical experts who say it does.
Dr. Angelita Miguel-Aguirre, head of the Makati Medical Society’s Committee on Ethics, said in a statement that contraceptives inhibit and interfere with normal and healthy reproductive processes, resulting in serious complications and side effects. She added that women pay a high price for “tampering with nature.”
Lagman’s bill promotes the use of birth control pills, patch or injectable hormones, intrauterine device (IUD), barrier methods (condoms/diaphragms) and sterilization (ligation for women and vasectomy for men).
Aguirre said hormonal contraceptives such as pills, injectables (DEPO-Provera), implants and patches that contain estrogens and progestins have been classified as carcinogenic, thus raising breast, cervical and liver cancer risks, as well as increasing the possibility of premature hypertension and coronary artery disease resulting to heart attacks and strokes, and thromboembolism/pulmonary embolism.
In addition to these, decreased libido, infertility, cramps, gallstone formation, nausea and bloating are said to be the other side effects of hormonal pills.
Condoms also cannot prevent the spread of sexually-transmitted infections such as the human immune-deficiency virus (HIV) and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
The rubber comprising latex condoms has intrinsic voids about five micra whereas the HIV is only 0.1 micra. Since this is a factor of 50 smaller than the intrinsic voids, the HIV can pass through the condom, she explained.
“The condom and other barrier methods have the highest failure rate in preventing pregnancy and in protecting against sexually transmitted infections (STI) especially the human papilloma virus which is the major cause of cervical cancer in women,” said Aguirre.
However, the RH bill’s advocates say these are not true. The side effects of pills, they say, are just temporary and some of them do even prevent cervical cancer.
Will it promote promiscuity or not?
One of the fears of the conservative Church is that after the passage of the bill, promiscuity will be rampant among the youth.
Rev. Fr. Gregory D. Gaston, academic dean of the Holy Apostles Senior Seminary, Makati City, said that the RH bill seeks to establish a national family planning program that would include mandatory sex education and instruction on use of birth control for students in Grade V and higher levels in all public schools. The Catholic Church, he said, considers this “immoral”.
“The so-called sex-education programs promote promiscuity under the guise of reproductive health and reproductive rights. Children and adolescents will be taught to have satisfying and safe sexual experiences outside marriage. This is exactly the opposite of the virtues of holy purity, modesty and respect for oneself and others being taught by the Holy Church,” he said in a statement.
On the other hand, Emee Lei Albano, a Catholic and a youth advocate of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) in the Philippines, said in an interview with Bulatlat that the youth nowadays are more intelligent and responsible enough to know what is right and what is wrong for them.
“I think the RH bill will just protect them and won’t make them immoral, unlike what some people wants us to believe,” she said.
Will it solve the Philippines’ problems?
Some experts on bioethics say that while they commend efforts to improve the quality of life of the Filipino people and that they agree that there is a need to address present problems in reproductive health, they do not think House Bill No. 5043 address these in a holistic manner for it focuses mainly on pregnancy prevention.
A statement titled “Consensus Statement on Reproductive Bill 5043”, which was signed and approved by Southeast Asian Center for Bioethics, argued that while sex education is an important part in the integral development of the child, the responsibility lies first with the parents.
The statement was signed by Fr. Fausto B. Gomez, OP; Angeles T. Alora, MD; Edna Monzon, MD, president of the Catholic Physicians’ Guild of the Philippines and chairman of Faculty of Medicine and Surgery of Dominican-run University of Santo Tomas, chair of the Department of Bioethics at the University of Santo Tomas (UST) Faculty of Medicine and Surgery; Mayumi Bismark, MD, president of the Bioethics Society of the Philippines; and Mrs. Lucia V. Soltes of the Catholic Nurses Guild of the Philippines in 2008.
“Their role should be stressed. It should also involve the school with teachers who should be educated. The absence of content regarding values in the way sex education is being taught gives an impression that there is no universal value, human sexuality, not sex education, should be taught,” the statement reads.
“The program should provide information and definitions which are accurate and free of contradictions: the antiabortion stance of the bill is contraindicated by the promotion of contractive agents (IUD and hormonal contraceptives) which actually act after fertilization and are potentially abortifacient agents,” the statement further read.
“Nevertheless, clinical decisions, as permeated by RH, cannot be mandated (refusing to refer patients to family planning services based on conscientious objection is penalized) but must be left to the informed conscience of the health practitioner.”
“Human freedom is a universal right. Health professionals and educators should be free to conscientiously object without fear of penalty and sanction,” the statement stressed.
However, the FFPD and other RH advocates maintained:
We strongly believe that couples, especially women, should be given the freedom to choose the path they will take in raising their family. This is a commitment our country made several times. We affirmed this right in 1968, during the International Year for Human Rights where United Nations Member States recognized the right of individuals and couples to decide their family size.
In August 1981, the Philippines ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) which clearly upholds women’s right to reproductive health services and education. And in 1995, we again made a promise to the rest of the world to provide our people with access to reproductive health services when we signed the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Programme of Action and the Beijing Conference on Women Programme of Action.
We have been waiting for decades for our country to honor its commitments to the world – to make real its promise to uphold our people’s right to reproductive health and family planning. While we have waited and debated for decades on the matter, our women and young girls have been suffering and thousands have lost their lives – 10 women are dying every 24 hours due to pregnancy related complications, while young girls as young as 13 years old are getting pregnant. This because they lack the information and family planning supplies that would have provided them with an option.
We need to join hands for this national legislation that will bring tremendous improvements in the lives of our people. This is not about politics or religion. This is about, believing that each one of us should have the chance to live a healthy and dignified life, a human right that must be upheld regardless of one’s faith and belief.
The latest SWS survey about the acceptance of the bill showed that 71 percent of respondents are in favor of the pending RH bill, while 76 percent support the bill’s provision requiring public schools to teach family planning education. (First appeared at Bulatlat.com, February 21, 2009)
Monday, July 20, 2009
The Pope and the President's meeting
Washington DC - Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice, issued the following statement about the meeting today between President Barack Obama and Pope Benedict XVI in Rome.
"In the last few weeks, many have speculated about the first meeting between President Barack Obama and Pope Benedict XVI. We at Catholics for Choice have repeatedly been asked about our take on this meeting. Certainly, for US Catholics it is an exciting moment to see our pope and our president meet.
"It is worth noting, however, that earlier this week, in his social encyclical 'Caritas in Veritate,' Pope Benedict claimed that the church does not "interfere in any way in the politics of States." These words are especially pertinent for Friday's meeting.
"While both men are world leaders, the pope and the president maintain distinctly different roles as a religious leader and a political leader, respectively. We must be clear that the pope does not command the same type of global responsibility as a member of the Group of Eight, such as the United States, and to expect G8-type political outcomes from this meeting would be unrealistic and wrong.
"Although Pope Benedict and President Obama play different roles in the world, there are undoubtedly valuable issues that the two men can and should discuss. Taking even a quick look at this week's encyclical, one will find many examples of the similar outlooks the two leaders share on issues pertaining to poverty, the rights of immigrants and the benefits of scientific progress. Both men strive for an end to war and hunger. Both aim to safeguard the environment and protect religious freedoms. The pope may have the moral stature to promote these causes but the president has the political power to effect change at a policy level.
"The common views the pope and president share affect the lives of people in the US and around the world, especially those living in poverty. As such, it would be beneficial for them to discuss these issues. With several wars on and financial crises overwhelming us, it is always positive when people of good will and good intent can agree, discuss and inspire one another to work even harder to better our world.
"At their meeting, President Obama certainly need not lecture the pope about the inner workings of the Catholic church. It is a widely known fact that Catholics the world over disagree with the dictates of the Vatican on issues pertaining to sexual and reproductive health and rights. Catholics must let the pope and other members of the church hierarchy know that the Vatican is out of touch, the teachings are flawed and that people suffer as a result. That message need not come from President Obama; rather, it is up to Catholics to raise these concerns..
"In the same vein, Pope Benedict should not lecture the president about the needs of people in the US. This nation was founded by those who suffered from religious persecution and fled to America to be free to practice religion as they saw fit. It is therefore no surprise that the separation of church and state was and continues to be a cornerstone of US democracy. Politics should not interfere with religion nor should religion interfere with politics. People of every religion and no religion should be equally represented; freedom of religion and freedom from religion must be guaranteed. With this in mind, the pope should not feel the need to lecture President Obama on matters of internal US policy.
"However, recent evidence suggests that the pope's claims that church does not "interfere in any way in the politics of States" are more than a little disingenuous.
"In the United States alone, we have several examples. Take, for instance, when the US bishops successfully lobbied to strip life-saving family planning measures from the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) bill. Moreover, the bishops continue to lobby for conscience clauses (or, more correctly, refusal clauses) that protect entire institutions- not individuals- and exclude abortion and contraception from healthcare reform. Both measures would limit access to vital reproductive healthcare services.. These are all classic examples of how the pope, through the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, interferes in US politics.
"When Pope Benedict and President Obama meet, the president should not tell the pope how to run his church nor should the pope tell the president how to run his country. In reality, this meeting is more about symbolism and respect for each other and the institutions they represent than anything else. As Pope Benedict is a religious leader and does not take on the responsibilities that President Obama has as a political leader, we cannot and should not expect any substantial outcomes. However, the two men can definitely discuss what they agree on and inspire one another to move forward doing good work."
Post-Meeting Update
The meeting today between Pope Benedict XVI and President Obama was, by all accounts, cordial, despite the fact that the two men discussed many issues, some of which they agree about, others not.
According to the Vatican’s chief spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, their conversation started with “the defense and promotion of life and the right to abide by one’s conscience,” and also encompassed a host of other topics including the Middle East peace process, the economic crisis, food security and immigration.
They are both men of principle who are convinced that the policies they support are the correct ones. While there are many issues on which they agree, it is refreshing to see that it is possible to have discussions about abortion and stem-cell research that do not descend into shrill protests.
The pope and the president’s cordial meeting should be an example to the loud minority that opposed the very idea of Obama’s presence at the University of Notre Dame in the US earlier this year.
It is also very refreshing to hear that the pope acknowledged the importance of conscience in making decisions that have ethical and moral consequences. Catholic teachings place a high value on an individual’s conscience, and we hope that the reference to this teaching reminds the pope, the president and everybody else to respect the conscientious decisions of others.
Source: Press Release by Catholics for Choice 10 July 2009
http://www.cath4cho ice.org/PopeMeet sObama.asp
"In the last few weeks, many have speculated about the first meeting between President Barack Obama and Pope Benedict XVI. We at Catholics for Choice have repeatedly been asked about our take on this meeting. Certainly, for US Catholics it is an exciting moment to see our pope and our president meet.
"It is worth noting, however, that earlier this week, in his social encyclical 'Caritas in Veritate,' Pope Benedict claimed that the church does not "interfere in any way in the politics of States." These words are especially pertinent for Friday's meeting.
"While both men are world leaders, the pope and the president maintain distinctly different roles as a religious leader and a political leader, respectively. We must be clear that the pope does not command the same type of global responsibility as a member of the Group of Eight, such as the United States, and to expect G8-type political outcomes from this meeting would be unrealistic and wrong.
"Although Pope Benedict and President Obama play different roles in the world, there are undoubtedly valuable issues that the two men can and should discuss. Taking even a quick look at this week's encyclical, one will find many examples of the similar outlooks the two leaders share on issues pertaining to poverty, the rights of immigrants and the benefits of scientific progress. Both men strive for an end to war and hunger. Both aim to safeguard the environment and protect religious freedoms. The pope may have the moral stature to promote these causes but the president has the political power to effect change at a policy level.
"The common views the pope and president share affect the lives of people in the US and around the world, especially those living in poverty. As such, it would be beneficial for them to discuss these issues. With several wars on and financial crises overwhelming us, it is always positive when people of good will and good intent can agree, discuss and inspire one another to work even harder to better our world.
"At their meeting, President Obama certainly need not lecture the pope about the inner workings of the Catholic church. It is a widely known fact that Catholics the world over disagree with the dictates of the Vatican on issues pertaining to sexual and reproductive health and rights. Catholics must let the pope and other members of the church hierarchy know that the Vatican is out of touch, the teachings are flawed and that people suffer as a result. That message need not come from President Obama; rather, it is up to Catholics to raise these concerns..
"In the same vein, Pope Benedict should not lecture the president about the needs of people in the US. This nation was founded by those who suffered from religious persecution and fled to America to be free to practice religion as they saw fit. It is therefore no surprise that the separation of church and state was and continues to be a cornerstone of US democracy. Politics should not interfere with religion nor should religion interfere with politics. People of every religion and no religion should be equally represented; freedom of religion and freedom from religion must be guaranteed. With this in mind, the pope should not feel the need to lecture President Obama on matters of internal US policy.
"However, recent evidence suggests that the pope's claims that church does not "interfere in any way in the politics of States" are more than a little disingenuous.
"In the United States alone, we have several examples. Take, for instance, when the US bishops successfully lobbied to strip life-saving family planning measures from the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) bill. Moreover, the bishops continue to lobby for conscience clauses (or, more correctly, refusal clauses) that protect entire institutions- not individuals- and exclude abortion and contraception from healthcare reform. Both measures would limit access to vital reproductive healthcare services.. These are all classic examples of how the pope, through the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, interferes in US politics.
"When Pope Benedict and President Obama meet, the president should not tell the pope how to run his church nor should the pope tell the president how to run his country. In reality, this meeting is more about symbolism and respect for each other and the institutions they represent than anything else. As Pope Benedict is a religious leader and does not take on the responsibilities that President Obama has as a political leader, we cannot and should not expect any substantial outcomes. However, the two men can definitely discuss what they agree on and inspire one another to move forward doing good work."
Post-Meeting Update
The meeting today between Pope Benedict XVI and President Obama was, by all accounts, cordial, despite the fact that the two men discussed many issues, some of which they agree about, others not.
According to the Vatican’s chief spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, their conversation started with “the defense and promotion of life and the right to abide by one’s conscience,” and also encompassed a host of other topics including the Middle East peace process, the economic crisis, food security and immigration.
They are both men of principle who are convinced that the policies they support are the correct ones. While there are many issues on which they agree, it is refreshing to see that it is possible to have discussions about abortion and stem-cell research that do not descend into shrill protests.
The pope and the president’s cordial meeting should be an example to the loud minority that opposed the very idea of Obama’s presence at the University of Notre Dame in the US earlier this year.
It is also very refreshing to hear that the pope acknowledged the importance of conscience in making decisions that have ethical and moral consequences. Catholic teachings place a high value on an individual’s conscience, and we hope that the reference to this teaching reminds the pope, the president and everybody else to respect the conscientious decisions of others.
Source: Press Release by Catholics for Choice 10 July 2009
http://www.cath4cho ice.org/PopeMeet sObama.asp
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
76% want FP Educ in School; 71 Favor Passage RH Bill
taken from the SWS website: http://www.sws.org.ph/
16 October 2008
Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Survey:
76% Want Family Planning Education in Public Schools;
71% Favor Passage of the Reproductive Health Bill
Social Weather Stations
Seventy-six percent of adult Filipinos want family planning education in the public schools, and 71% favor passage of the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill, according to the Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Survey, done on September 24-27, 2008.
Support for the RH Bill is an overwhelming 84% among those previously aware of the bill, and a majority 59% among those who became aware of it on account of the survey.
Support for both family planning education and for passage of the RH Bill is very high among both Catholics and non-Catholics. Regularity of church-going, and trust in the Catholic church, have no effect on support for the RH Bill.
Support for family planning education and for passage of the RH Bill is very high among both men and women, whether single or married, in all areas of the country, and among all socioeconomic classes.
76% want family planning education for youth
To the test statement, “There should be a law that requires government to teach family planning to the youth”, 76% agreed, and only 10% disagreed [Table 1].
Support for family planning is high in all areas: agreement is 78% in Balance Luzon, 77% in the Visayas, 76% in Metro Manila, and 72% in Mindanao.
It is also high across socioeconomic classes: 78% in class ABC, 78% in class D, and 71% among class E.
71% favor the passage of the RH Bill
The September 2008 survey found 46% already aware of the RH Bill prior to the survey. The balance of 54% learned about it on account of the survey [Table 2].
Prior awareness of the RH Bill is 54% in Metro Manila, 47% in Balance Luzon, 44% in Mindanao, and 42% in the Visayas. It is higher in the upper-to-middle class ABC (69%) than in class D (45%) and class E (41%).
Regardless of whether they knew of the bill before, or learned of it during the interview, the survey asked all respondents if they favor it or not, and found 71% in favor, 21% undecided, and only 8% opposed [Table 3].
Those in favor of the RH Bill are 78% in Metro Manila, 72% in Mindanao, 69% in Balance Luzon, and 68% in the Visayas. They are 77% in class ABC, 70% in class D, and also 70% in class E.
Support for the passage of the RH Bill among those previously aware of it is an overwhelming 84%, and is a majority 59% among those who learned of it because of the survey [Table 4].
Family planning education and RH Bill supported by Catholic and non-Catholics
Seventy-six percent of Catholics and 78% of non-Catholics support family planning education for the youth. Such support is high regardless of frequency of church-going, and regardless of trust in the Catholic church [Table 5].
Awareness of the RH Bill, and public support for it, do not vary by religion, regularity of church-going, and trust in the Catholic church [Tables 6 and 7]. Seven out of ten Catholics (71%) and non-Catholics (68%) favor the passage of the RH Bill.
Men and women, single or married, support family planning education and the RH Bill
Three out of four men (75%) and women (77%) support having a law requiring family planning education for the youth. The support is equally high among singles and marrieds [Table 8].
Prior awareness of the RH Bill is slightly higher among women (50%) than men (42%), but support for it is equally high among men (70%) and women (71%), regardless of marital status [Tables 9 and 10].
Support for family planning education is high even among those against the RH Bill
The September 2008 survey found that support for family planning education is four out of five among those who favor the passage of the RH Bill (80% agree), and two out of three among those not in favor (68% agree) and those undecided (65% agree) [Table 11].
Survey Background
The Third Quarter of 2008 Social Weather Survey was conducted over September 24-27, 2008 using face-to-face interviews of 1,500 adults divided into random samples of 300 each in Metro Manila, Visayas, and Mindanao, and 600 in Balance Luzon (sampling error margins of ±2.5% for national percentages and ±6% for Metro Manila, Visayas, and Mindanao, and ±4% for Balance Luzon). The area estimates were weighted by National Statistics Office medium-population projections for 2008 to obtain the national estimates.
The Social Weather Survey on Reproductive Health Bill is a non-commissioned item, and is included on SWS’s own initiative and released as a public service, with first printing rights assigned to BusinessWorld.
16 October 2008
Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Survey:
76% Want Family Planning Education in Public Schools;
71% Favor Passage of the Reproductive Health Bill
Social Weather Stations
Seventy-six percent of adult Filipinos want family planning education in the public schools, and 71% favor passage of the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill, according to the Third Quarter 2008 Social Weather Survey, done on September 24-27, 2008.
Support for the RH Bill is an overwhelming 84% among those previously aware of the bill, and a majority 59% among those who became aware of it on account of the survey.
Support for both family planning education and for passage of the RH Bill is very high among both Catholics and non-Catholics. Regularity of church-going, and trust in the Catholic church, have no effect on support for the RH Bill.
Support for family planning education and for passage of the RH Bill is very high among both men and women, whether single or married, in all areas of the country, and among all socioeconomic classes.
76% want family planning education for youth
To the test statement, “There should be a law that requires government to teach family planning to the youth”, 76% agreed, and only 10% disagreed [Table 1].
Support for family planning is high in all areas: agreement is 78% in Balance Luzon, 77% in the Visayas, 76% in Metro Manila, and 72% in Mindanao.
It is also high across socioeconomic classes: 78% in class ABC, 78% in class D, and 71% among class E.
71% favor the passage of the RH Bill
The September 2008 survey found 46% already aware of the RH Bill prior to the survey. The balance of 54% learned about it on account of the survey [Table 2].
Prior awareness of the RH Bill is 54% in Metro Manila, 47% in Balance Luzon, 44% in Mindanao, and 42% in the Visayas. It is higher in the upper-to-middle class ABC (69%) than in class D (45%) and class E (41%).
Regardless of whether they knew of the bill before, or learned of it during the interview, the survey asked all respondents if they favor it or not, and found 71% in favor, 21% undecided, and only 8% opposed [Table 3].
Those in favor of the RH Bill are 78% in Metro Manila, 72% in Mindanao, 69% in Balance Luzon, and 68% in the Visayas. They are 77% in class ABC, 70% in class D, and also 70% in class E.
Support for the passage of the RH Bill among those previously aware of it is an overwhelming 84%, and is a majority 59% among those who learned of it because of the survey [Table 4].
Family planning education and RH Bill supported by Catholic and non-Catholics
Seventy-six percent of Catholics and 78% of non-Catholics support family planning education for the youth. Such support is high regardless of frequency of church-going, and regardless of trust in the Catholic church [Table 5].
Awareness of the RH Bill, and public support for it, do not vary by religion, regularity of church-going, and trust in the Catholic church [Tables 6 and 7]. Seven out of ten Catholics (71%) and non-Catholics (68%) favor the passage of the RH Bill.
Men and women, single or married, support family planning education and the RH Bill
Three out of four men (75%) and women (77%) support having a law requiring family planning education for the youth. The support is equally high among singles and marrieds [Table 8].
Prior awareness of the RH Bill is slightly higher among women (50%) than men (42%), but support for it is equally high among men (70%) and women (71%), regardless of marital status [Tables 9 and 10].
Support for family planning education is high even among those against the RH Bill
The September 2008 survey found that support for family planning education is four out of five among those who favor the passage of the RH Bill (80% agree), and two out of three among those not in favor (68% agree) and those undecided (65% agree) [Table 11].
Survey Background
The Third Quarter of 2008 Social Weather Survey was conducted over September 24-27, 2008 using face-to-face interviews of 1,500 adults divided into random samples of 300 each in Metro Manila, Visayas, and Mindanao, and 600 in Balance Luzon (sampling error margins of ±2.5% for national percentages and ±6% for Metro Manila, Visayas, and Mindanao, and ±4% for Balance Luzon). The area estimates were weighted by National Statistics Office medium-population projections for 2008 to obtain the national estimates.
The Social Weather Survey on Reproductive Health Bill is a non-commissioned item, and is included on SWS’s own initiative and released as a public service, with first printing rights assigned to BusinessWorld.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Quality Life is a Choice!
I believe Quality Life is Choice! of course not yet for children . . . they are still helpless and are dependent on the parents/adults around them.
Quality of Life will defer from one person to another and different from the rich and to the poor.As one goes up the ladder, his/her "needs", plus the "wants" will also increase. But for the poor, they are already contended with the very basics in life ... food, shelter and clothing but at least education, health/hospitalization, must be met, aside from the physiological needs.)
Quality Life is a CHOICE! and attainable ... if one is determine! knows how to manage their life,if one is RESPONSIBLE and accountable of their decisions and actions!
A young adult, even if she comes from a poor family who could not send her to school, can still be in sch, if she can sacrifice to be a working student,focus on her studies and work after and help her family siblings first and settle down only when READY. More likely this person will have a better quality of life compared to one who did not seek look for better ways to improve their life, worst if she settle down early and be dependent on a poor parent and a jobless + abusive partner who might just leave her.
Even if a couple is just renting small room in a squatters area,if they will only have one or two children educate and guide them and work hard ... eventualy they can be out in that squatters area and will have at least a better quality of life.
To attain a better quality of Life ... is really a Choice! but I think the government should also help the poor in attaining quality of life, by providing them the needed Reproductive Health education, programs and services
Quality of Life will defer from one person to another and different from the rich and to the poor.As one goes up the ladder, his/her "needs", plus the "wants" will also increase. But for the poor, they are already contended with the very basics in life ... food, shelter and clothing but at least education, health/hospitalization, must be met, aside from the physiological needs.)
Quality Life is a CHOICE! and attainable ... if one is determine! knows how to manage their life,if one is RESPONSIBLE and accountable of their decisions and actions!
A young adult, even if she comes from a poor family who could not send her to school, can still be in sch, if she can sacrifice to be a working student,focus on her studies and work after and help her family siblings first and settle down only when READY. More likely this person will have a better quality of life compared to one who did not seek look for better ways to improve their life, worst if she settle down early and be dependent on a poor parent and a jobless + abusive partner who might just leave her.
Even if a couple is just renting small room in a squatters area,if they will only have one or two children educate and guide them and work hard ... eventualy they can be out in that squatters area and will have at least a better quality of life.
To attain a better quality of Life ... is really a Choice! but I think the government should also help the poor in attaining quality of life, by providing them the needed Reproductive Health education, programs and services
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Catholics4 Reproductive Health
For people to know Why there there are Catholics who are OPENLY supporting RH, because many Catholics who are supporters are just "SILENT"!
-----------------------------------------
Pledge of Commitment and Support
to The Catholics for Reproductive Health (C4RH-Cebu)
I believe in the sanctity and dignity of human life. I believe that Reproductive Health will save lives and improve the quality of life of the poor and marginalized women, children, adolescent and youth and people under threat of reproductive health infections and diseases;
I believe in compassion and social justice. I believe that reproductive health will enable us to respond to those who are in most need of counseling, care and support especially among the poor, vulnerable, and weakest members of our society and in the process alleviate further poverty and helplessness;
I believe in truth telling, openness and transparency. I believe that accurate information about reproductive health should be given to the public and not be distorted by religious and laity alike;
I believe in being God’s steward on earth and that Reproductive Health will promote pro-quality of life, responsible decision-making and affirmation of the goodness of the human being;
I believe that reproductive health is consistent with our faith as Catholics and that the time has come to speak up in support of the passage of the reproductive health bill;
By signing this pledge of commitment and support, I declare my involvement to speak up and openly support the passage of a national Reproductive Health Bill and similar local ordinances which will promote the common good and advance Catholic values that binds us together in faith and love.
“I am a Catholic and I support the right to Reproductive Health.”
Please submit the signed portion below to any of the C4RH member or to the Secretariat:
c /o Frohnie D. Cagalitan PRO QUALITY LIFE Training & Dev’t. 1-93 J. Osmeña Ext. Cebu City.
Tel 2590989 TelFax 4166084; Mobile: 09275719399; e-add: proqualitylife@gmail.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name and Signature: _________________________________________________________
Home Address: _____________________________________________________________
Telephone number:__________________________ Mobile number: ________________
Email: ______________________________________ Birthday: _______________________
Occupation: ________________________________ Sex: ________ Civil Status: _______
Organization: _________________________________ Tel: __________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________________________
-----------------------------------------
Pledge of Commitment and Support
to The Catholics for Reproductive Health (C4RH-Cebu)
I believe in the sanctity and dignity of human life. I believe that Reproductive Health will save lives and improve the quality of life of the poor and marginalized women, children, adolescent and youth and people under threat of reproductive health infections and diseases;
I believe in compassion and social justice. I believe that reproductive health will enable us to respond to those who are in most need of counseling, care and support especially among the poor, vulnerable, and weakest members of our society and in the process alleviate further poverty and helplessness;
I believe in truth telling, openness and transparency. I believe that accurate information about reproductive health should be given to the public and not be distorted by religious and laity alike;
I believe in being God’s steward on earth and that Reproductive Health will promote pro-quality of life, responsible decision-making and affirmation of the goodness of the human being;
I believe that reproductive health is consistent with our faith as Catholics and that the time has come to speak up in support of the passage of the reproductive health bill;
By signing this pledge of commitment and support, I declare my involvement to speak up and openly support the passage of a national Reproductive Health Bill and similar local ordinances which will promote the common good and advance Catholic values that binds us together in faith and love.
“I am a Catholic and I support the right to Reproductive Health.”
Please submit the signed portion below to any of the C4RH member or to the Secretariat:
c /o Frohnie D. Cagalitan PRO QUALITY LIFE Training & Dev’t. 1-93 J. Osmeña Ext. Cebu City.
Tel 2590989 TelFax 4166084; Mobile: 09275719399; e-add: proqualitylife@gmail.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name and Signature: _________________________________________________________
Home Address: _____________________________________________________________
Telephone number:__________________________ Mobile number: ________________
Email: ______________________________________ Birthday: _______________________
Occupation: ________________________________ Sex: ________ Civil Status: _______
Organization: _________________________________ Tel: __________________________
Address: ___________________________________________________________________
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Business World Vol. XXII, No. 181
Friday, April 17, 2009 | MANILA, PHILIPPINES
The Nation
PHILIPPINE SENATE STARTS PLENARY DEBATES ON POPULATION MEASURE
THE SENATE started to tackle a controversial population control bill called reproductive health on Wednesday amid continuing objections by the Catholic Church.
With provisions similar to that of the House counterpart bill that is a few votes shy of being endorsed by a majority of congressmen, the Senate version is targeted to be approved before Congress adjourns its second regular session on June 5, Majority Leader Juan Miguel F. Zubiri said Wednesday evening.
The committee on health and demography recommended the approval of Senate Bill 3122, a measure that consolidated five proposals, to improve the quality of life of Filipinos.
"A genuine reproductive health policy will ensure that no woman will have to face a horrific situation in which she will have to choose between her life and her child’s. Promoting family planning practice along with making sure that all Filipino families will have access to all acceptable family planning methods will reduce unintended pregnancies," said Senator Rodolfo G. Biazon, principal sponsor of the "Reproductive Health Care Act of 2009."
He said modern family planning methods such as hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices and injectables will be made available in government hospitals and classified as so-called essential medicine.
The bill would require local government units to deploy a minimum of one full-time skilled birth attendant for every 150 deliveries per year, while each province and city will have a hospital equipped with emergency obstetric care supplies and services.
An annual maternal death review would monitor death rates. Sexuality education would be taught by teachers to fifth grade and high school students. Barangay health workers will also undergo training to promote reproductive health.
"This bill does not encourage nor promote abortion. It does not impose a national policy on the freedom of couples to make choices," Mr. Biazon said. "This bill is about providing informed choice through an education and information program. It is about making available reproductive health care services and supplies to our people, especially to those who need it most."
He said adopting a reproductive health policy would minimize rapid population growth which "impedes economic growth."
Although the June 5 target approval for the bill has been set, Mr. Zubiri said he was noncommittal if majority of his colleagues would favor the "controversial" proposal.
"It’s a very important measure that needs to be discussed lengthily and with clarity. It’s a very controversial measure. We will take it up everyday," said Mr. Zubiri in an interview.
"I want to strengthen the portion that abortion should not be allowed. It’s an illegal act," he added.
The counterpart measure, House Bill 5043 authored by Albay Rep. Edcel C. Lagman (1st district), is up for approval on second reading. It was identified as one of the chamber’s priority bills. — Bernard U. Allauigan
Friday, April 17, 2009 | MANILA, PHILIPPINES
The Nation
PHILIPPINE SENATE STARTS PLENARY DEBATES ON POPULATION MEASURE
THE SENATE started to tackle a controversial population control bill called reproductive health on Wednesday amid continuing objections by the Catholic Church.
With provisions similar to that of the House counterpart bill that is a few votes shy of being endorsed by a majority of congressmen, the Senate version is targeted to be approved before Congress adjourns its second regular session on June 5, Majority Leader Juan Miguel F. Zubiri said Wednesday evening.
The committee on health and demography recommended the approval of Senate Bill 3122, a measure that consolidated five proposals, to improve the quality of life of Filipinos.
"A genuine reproductive health policy will ensure that no woman will have to face a horrific situation in which she will have to choose between her life and her child’s. Promoting family planning practice along with making sure that all Filipino families will have access to all acceptable family planning methods will reduce unintended pregnancies," said Senator Rodolfo G. Biazon, principal sponsor of the "Reproductive Health Care Act of 2009."
He said modern family planning methods such as hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices and injectables will be made available in government hospitals and classified as so-called essential medicine.
The bill would require local government units to deploy a minimum of one full-time skilled birth attendant for every 150 deliveries per year, while each province and city will have a hospital equipped with emergency obstetric care supplies and services.
An annual maternal death review would monitor death rates. Sexuality education would be taught by teachers to fifth grade and high school students. Barangay health workers will also undergo training to promote reproductive health.
"This bill does not encourage nor promote abortion. It does not impose a national policy on the freedom of couples to make choices," Mr. Biazon said. "This bill is about providing informed choice through an education and information program. It is about making available reproductive health care services and supplies to our people, especially to those who need it most."
He said adopting a reproductive health policy would minimize rapid population growth which "impedes economic growth."
Although the June 5 target approval for the bill has been set, Mr. Zubiri said he was noncommittal if majority of his colleagues would favor the "controversial" proposal.
"It’s a very important measure that needs to be discussed lengthily and with clarity. It’s a very controversial measure. We will take it up everyday," said Mr. Zubiri in an interview.
"I want to strengthen the portion that abortion should not be allowed. It’s an illegal act," he added.
The counterpart measure, House Bill 5043 authored by Albay Rep. Edcel C. Lagman (1st district), is up for approval on second reading. It was identified as one of the chamber’s priority bills. — Bernard U. Allauigan
RH advocates ask Palace: What and who is moral?
Thursday, April 16, 2009
RH advocates ask Palace: What and who is moral?
This is a reaction to The Times “Special Report: The Church and Human Life” article “Mala-cañang’s pro-Life stand mainly a matter of morals” published April 12, 2009, reported by Angelo S. Samonte.
As reproductive health advocates, we cannot help but react to Press Secretary Cerge Remonde’s statement on President Gloria Arroyo’s stance on reproductive health. In that report, Sec. Remonde said that the first and main reason for Pres. Gloria Arroyo’s pro-Life stand on the reproductive health is morals and ethics.
This made us wonder, how could one’s decision be morally and ethically upright if the basis of that decision ignores certain realities and scientific studies and merely to please a small but highly influential group of the Catholic hierarchy?
While we agree that natural family planning method is also effective if used faithfully, we strongly disagree with the promotion of the natural family planning method only. The 2006 Family Planning Survey revealed that 35.6 percent of women aged 15 to 49 are using modern artificial family planning methods while only 15.1 percent is using modern natural and traditional family planning methods. Arroyo government’s natural-family-planning-only program disempowers women and couples to exercise freedom to choose and to make informed decision.
Meanwhile, results of international and local studies have established that natural methods are not for everyone. For example, the standard days-method is effective only for women whose menstrual cycles fall between 26 to 32 days and require the unfailing cooperation by the husband as the couple must abstain from sex for 12 consecutive days during the woman’s fertile period.
RH bill promotes informed choice by making both artificial and traditional methods accessible to all. The couples can freely decide what method they prefer.
Time and again, survey after survey, results are the same—Filipinos wants modern family planning methods education and services.
Pulse Asia Survey conducted in October 2008 revealed that a big majority of Filipinos (82 percent) thinks government should not only educate couples regarding modern methods of family planning but also provide them with services and materials on these methods. Same survey further revealed that 82 percent of Filipinos think government should teach couples about modern methods of family planning.
In addition, exactly the same percentage says that it is the government’s duty to provide the people with knowledge, services and materials on modern methods of family planning.
Earlier, in September 2008, a nationwide survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed an overwhelming support for both family planning education and for passage of the reproductive health bill is very high among both Catholics and non-Catholics, 76 percent even wants to have family planning education for youth.
The results of SWS survey in the cities of Manila and Pa-rañaque conducted in December 2008 and February 2009 respectively showed almost the same result. Sixty four percent of Manileños agree that there should be a law that requires government to distribute condoms, intra-uterine devices and pills to people who want to avail of them. Meanwhile, 86 percent of the respondents said that the city should have a policy on reproductive health and family planning.
These surveys justify the need for government to provide the family planning and reproductive services they need.
We are fully aware that the reproductive health bill can be held hostage during election times that is why we, reproductive health advocates, laud Speaker Prospero Nograles for standing firm in saying that the House Bill 5043 or the Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2009 remains one of the priority measures in the House of Representatives. He even assured the public, through media interviews, that the Congress will vote on the measure before the session ends in June.
We are also happy with the statement of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile that he will support “artificial methods” of family planning for as long as it will not destroy life.
It is worth mentioning that government offices such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development, Commission on Population, Department of Health, Department of Labor and Employment, Department of Education and Department of Science and Technology have openly declared their support on the reproductive health bill.
Groups from various sectors, like national and local NGOs, civic organizations, business, LGUs, faith-based organizations, the academe, youth, opinion leaders, and even international organizations, are continually coming out in the open and bravely expressing their support.
What then is moral and ethical? Who should the government believe? The voice of the majority of the Filipino people who are exposed to the stark realities of life, or the privileged few who refuse to see and acknowledge the conditions in which the many more live?
Despite confusing statements from various Malacañang officials, reproductive health advocates still laud the official position of the President that she will not meddle in the deliberations of the controversial reproductive health bill. We are happy to hear that the President will let her allies make their own decisions. After all, the essence of reproductive health is making informed choice.
Ms. Vigie Benosa-Llorin
Media Advocacy officer, PLCPD
Cell Number 0918-2936786]
Reference: Mr. Ramon San Pascual
Executive Director,
Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development Foundation Inc. (PLCPD)
RH advocates ask Palace: What and who is moral?
This is a reaction to The Times “Special Report: The Church and Human Life” article “Mala-cañang’s pro-Life stand mainly a matter of morals” published April 12, 2009, reported by Angelo S. Samonte.
As reproductive health advocates, we cannot help but react to Press Secretary Cerge Remonde’s statement on President Gloria Arroyo’s stance on reproductive health. In that report, Sec. Remonde said that the first and main reason for Pres. Gloria Arroyo’s pro-Life stand on the reproductive health is morals and ethics.
This made us wonder, how could one’s decision be morally and ethically upright if the basis of that decision ignores certain realities and scientific studies and merely to please a small but highly influential group of the Catholic hierarchy?
While we agree that natural family planning method is also effective if used faithfully, we strongly disagree with the promotion of the natural family planning method only. The 2006 Family Planning Survey revealed that 35.6 percent of women aged 15 to 49 are using modern artificial family planning methods while only 15.1 percent is using modern natural and traditional family planning methods. Arroyo government’s natural-family-planning-only program disempowers women and couples to exercise freedom to choose and to make informed decision.
Meanwhile, results of international and local studies have established that natural methods are not for everyone. For example, the standard days-method is effective only for women whose menstrual cycles fall between 26 to 32 days and require the unfailing cooperation by the husband as the couple must abstain from sex for 12 consecutive days during the woman’s fertile period.
RH bill promotes informed choice by making both artificial and traditional methods accessible to all. The couples can freely decide what method they prefer.
Time and again, survey after survey, results are the same—Filipinos wants modern family planning methods education and services.
Pulse Asia Survey conducted in October 2008 revealed that a big majority of Filipinos (82 percent) thinks government should not only educate couples regarding modern methods of family planning but also provide them with services and materials on these methods. Same survey further revealed that 82 percent of Filipinos think government should teach couples about modern methods of family planning.
In addition, exactly the same percentage says that it is the government’s duty to provide the people with knowledge, services and materials on modern methods of family planning.
Earlier, in September 2008, a nationwide survey conducted by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) revealed an overwhelming support for both family planning education and for passage of the reproductive health bill is very high among both Catholics and non-Catholics, 76 percent even wants to have family planning education for youth.
The results of SWS survey in the cities of Manila and Pa-rañaque conducted in December 2008 and February 2009 respectively showed almost the same result. Sixty four percent of Manileños agree that there should be a law that requires government to distribute condoms, intra-uterine devices and pills to people who want to avail of them. Meanwhile, 86 percent of the respondents said that the city should have a policy on reproductive health and family planning.
These surveys justify the need for government to provide the family planning and reproductive services they need.
We are fully aware that the reproductive health bill can be held hostage during election times that is why we, reproductive health advocates, laud Speaker Prospero Nograles for standing firm in saying that the House Bill 5043 or the Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2009 remains one of the priority measures in the House of Representatives. He even assured the public, through media interviews, that the Congress will vote on the measure before the session ends in June.
We are also happy with the statement of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile that he will support “artificial methods” of family planning for as long as it will not destroy life.
It is worth mentioning that government offices such as the Department of Social Welfare and Development, Commission on Population, Department of Health, Department of Labor and Employment, Department of Education and Department of Science and Technology have openly declared their support on the reproductive health bill.
Groups from various sectors, like national and local NGOs, civic organizations, business, LGUs, faith-based organizations, the academe, youth, opinion leaders, and even international organizations, are continually coming out in the open and bravely expressing their support.
What then is moral and ethical? Who should the government believe? The voice of the majority of the Filipino people who are exposed to the stark realities of life, or the privileged few who refuse to see and acknowledge the conditions in which the many more live?
Despite confusing statements from various Malacañang officials, reproductive health advocates still laud the official position of the President that she will not meddle in the deliberations of the controversial reproductive health bill. We are happy to hear that the President will let her allies make their own decisions. After all, the essence of reproductive health is making informed choice.
Ms. Vigie Benosa-Llorin
Media Advocacy officer, PLCPD
Cell Number 0918-2936786]
Reference: Mr. Ramon San Pascual
Executive Director,
Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development Foundation Inc. (PLCPD)
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Abortion is NOT a Contraception!
Re: RH Bill
(my comments are based on my readings at http://www.filipinovoices.com/ps-to-hb-5043-%e2%80%93-reproductive-health-bill)
"Shotgun approach has been the design of HB 5043 – it will kill all birds that took flight – adults, adolescents, children – without distinction."
(nielsky_2003@yahoo.com or text to: 09164985265)
I dis-agree! i am against abortion but abortion is not a contraception! i believe parents also has to be RESPONSIBLE, to have only the number of children they can afford to attend to and provide for their needs, so they will have a descent and QUALITY LIFE. Parents should have the option to choose whatever FP methods that is safe and EFFECTIVE for them,because failed FP Method could mean unwanted pregnancy and usually the reason why women would resort to abortion.
Upper Class couples could easilly access to RH/FP Services. Low, to no-definite income families should also have access and be made available to them RH/FP Education & other programs & services by the gov't. so to prevent unwanted pregnancies that will result to abortion.
"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." (nielsky_2003@yahoo.com or text to: 09164985265)
Prevention of Abortion & Management of Post-Abortion Complication (PMAC)is often mis-understood!
I was able to attend a 5day seminar on PMAC together with other catholic participants. it has a lot of education/counseling component from the moment the woman-patient comes in, bleeding,to the ER,to other dept.till she goes out of the hospital.
The objective really is for the woman to have adequate information on how to PREVENT another unwanted pregnancy by using safe and effective FP Methods natural or artificial, because many of those who had abortions ARE NOT USING any FP method or contraception or FAILED method or
VICTIMS/Survivors of abusive/violent husbands or partners! we really don't know the circumstances, therefore it is not good to pre-judged them...
Reality is! (even if Abortion is not an easy thing to do) there are many women who are into Abortion, not just first-time abortion but REPEATED Abortion! studies will show that majority are married women!
Thus, i believe (as a Catholic and a Medical Social Worker ) the objective of PMAC is to avoid not only first time abortion but also REPEATED ABORTION! (for more personal discussion on the matter you may contact the undersigned)
Frohnie D. Cagalitan
Catholic 4 Reproductive Health - Cebu (C4RH-Cebu)
-------------------------------------------
(my comments are based on my readings at http://www.filipinovoices.com/ps-to-hb-5043-%e2%80%93-reproductive-health-bill)
"Shotgun approach has been the design of HB 5043 – it will kill all birds that took flight – adults, adolescents, children – without distinction."
(nielsky_2003@yahoo.com or text to: 09164985265)
I dis-agree! i am against abortion but abortion is not a contraception! i believe parents also has to be RESPONSIBLE, to have only the number of children they can afford to attend to and provide for their needs, so they will have a descent and QUALITY LIFE. Parents should have the option to choose whatever FP methods that is safe and EFFECTIVE for them,because failed FP Method could mean unwanted pregnancy and usually the reason why women would resort to abortion.
Upper Class couples could easilly access to RH/FP Services. Low, to no-definite income families should also have access and be made available to them RH/FP Education & other programs & services by the gov't. so to prevent unwanted pregnancies that will result to abortion.
"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." (nielsky_2003@yahoo.com or text to: 09164985265)
Prevention of Abortion & Management of Post-Abortion Complication (PMAC)is often mis-understood!
I was able to attend a 5day seminar on PMAC together with other catholic participants. it has a lot of education/counseling component from the moment the woman-patient comes in, bleeding,to the ER,to other dept.till she goes out of the hospital.
The objective really is for the woman to have adequate information on how to PREVENT another unwanted pregnancy by using safe and effective FP Methods natural or artificial, because many of those who had abortions ARE NOT USING any FP method or contraception or FAILED method or
VICTIMS/Survivors of abusive/violent husbands or partners! we really don't know the circumstances, therefore it is not good to pre-judged them...
Reality is! (even if Abortion is not an easy thing to do) there are many women who are into Abortion, not just first-time abortion but REPEATED Abortion! studies will show that majority are married women!
Thus, i believe (as a Catholic and a Medical Social Worker ) the objective of PMAC is to avoid not only first time abortion but also REPEATED ABORTION! (for more personal discussion on the matter you may contact the undersigned)
Frohnie D. Cagalitan
Catholic 4 Reproductive Health - Cebu (C4RH-Cebu)
-------------------------------------------
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
63% Pinoy favors RH Bill
63% of Pinoys favor RH bill, Pulse Asia survey says
01/19/2009 | 09:43 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Despite the Church's all-out campaign against it, six of 10 Filipinos favor a proposed bill on reproductive health pending at the House of Representatives, according to a survey by Pulse Asia.
Pulse Asia said the survey also showed eight of 10 Filipinos believe government should not only educate couples on family planning but also provide them with services and materials.
"A considerable majority of Filipinos (63 percent), whether aware or unaware of the reproductive health bill, expresses support for the proposed legislation while only 8 percent are not in favor and 29 percent are ambivalent on the matter," it said.
Pulse Asia said majorities ranging from 56 percent in the Visayas to 79 percent in Class ABC are in favor of the bill.
In contrast, it said only 8 percent are not in favor of the bill while 29 percent are unable to say whether or not they support the bill.
"Public ambivalence on the matter is more notable in the Visayas, Mindanao, and Class E (32 percent to 35 percent) than in Class ABC and Metro Manila (13 percent to 21 percent)," it said.
The survey showed most Filipinos are aware of the reproductive health bill pending at the House of Representatives (68 percent) and are in favor of the bill (63 percent).
Awareness of the reproductive health bill being discussed at the House is reported by 68 percent of Filipinos while 32 percent do not know about the bill, Pulse Asia said.
"Across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings, majorities (60 percent to 89 percent) know about the proposed legislation with the highest level of public awareness being recorded in the best-off socio-economic Class ABC. In contrast, lack of awareness is most
pronounced in Mindanao and Class E (38 percent and 40 percent, respectively)," it said.
The survey also said that while 49 percent of Filipinos say couples should follow what their religion tells them about family planning, 44 percent are ambivalent on the possibility of their church or religion influencing their vote for a candidate advocating modern family planning methods.
"Big pluralities to sizeable majorities (41 percent to 68 percent) across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings are of the view that couples should follow the dictates of their religion when it comes to the issue of family planning," it said.
This sentiment is most manifest in the Visayas and least pronounced in the rest of Luzon, it said.
On the other hand, around the same percentages of Filipinos are either ambivalent on the matter or do not agree that couples are obliged to abide by the teachings of their religion on family planning (27 percent versus 23 percent).
As for the impact of their church or religion on their decision as to whether or not to vote for a candidate supporting modern family planning methods, indecision is the predominant public sentiment at the national level (44 percent) and particularly in the rest of Luzon, the Visayas, and Classes D and E (42 percent to 52 percent), Pulse Asia said.
"In contrast, 34 percent of Filipinos say there is a big possibility their vote would be influenced by their church or religion while 21 percent express a contrary opinion," it said.
In Metro Manila, a big plurality (41 percent) says there is a big possibility of their church or religion influencing their vote while in Mindanao and Class ABC, nearly the same percentages either share the same sentiment or are undecided on the matter (36 percent to 39 percent versus 38 percent to 41 percent).
The survey also showed a big majority of Filipinos, or eight of 10 Filipinos (82 percent), thinks government should not only educate couples regarding modern methods of family planning but also provide them with services and materials on these methods.
"Most Filipinos (82 percent) think government should teach couples about modern methods of family planning (i.e., both natural and artificial methods) – a view articulated by big to overwhelming majorities (76 percent to 91 percent) in all geographic areas and socio economic classes," it said.
Also, it said exactly the same percentage says that it is the government's duty to provide the people with knowledge, services, and materials on modern methods of family planning.
This sentiment is expressed by 78 percent to 87 percent across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings, Pulse Asia said.
On the other hand, less than one in ten Filipinos (6 percent to 8 percent) disagrees with either view while indecision on these matters is expressed by 10 percent to 13 percent of Filipinos.
The survey also said about four in ten Filipinos (44 percent) say the government should pass a law specifying the number of children couples may have.
On the matter of whether or not government should pass a law dictating the number of children a couple may have, 44 percent of Filipinos support such government action while 36 percent are not inclined to do the same.
Almost one in five Filipinos (19 percent) are undecided on the matter.
Across geographic areas and socio-economic classes, big pluralities to small majorities (45 percent to 58 percent) in Metro Manila, the Visayas, Mindanao, and Classes D and E favor the idea of government passing a law on the number of children couples may have.
In contrast, a near majority (47 percent) of those in the rest of Luzon do not think government should pass such a law while in the poorest Class E, almost the same percentages express either agreement or disagreement (42 percent versus 40 percent) with this proposal.
The survey said almost all Filipinos consider it important for one to have the ability to plan the family for the welfare of both the family (93 percent) and the country (90 percent).
"Overwhelming majorities across all geographic areas and socio-economic classes (84 percent to 99 percent) say it is important for couples to have the ability to plan their families for the sake of the family and the country as a whole," it said.
Less than one in 10 Filipinos (6 percent to 9 percent) are ambivalent on the matter and practically none consider this to be unimportant.
The survey was based on a multistage probability sample of 1,200 representative adults 18 years old and above, and has a +/- 3 percent error margin at the 95 percent confidence level.
Subnational estimates for each of the geographic areas covered in the survey (Metro Manila, the rest of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao) have a +/- 6 percent error margin, also at 95 percent confidence level.
Face-to-face field interviews for this project were conducted from October 14 to 27, 2008.
While the field interviews for this survey were being done, major developments during this period included the financial crisis in the United States that soon spilled over into other parts of the world including the Philippines, the American presidential elections, the filing of a new impeachment complaint against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the Supreme Court decision on the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD), and the controversial trip to Russia of several police officials that involved a "contingency fund" of P6.9M.
Other issues included the deportation from the US of former Agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn Bolante who is widely believed to be the brains behind the fertilizer fund scam, the decline in the price of oil at the world market, the impending increase in the electricity charges of the Manila Electric Company (Meralco), and the food scare in China and other parts of the world over the discovery of melamine, an industrial chemical, in milk and other food products. - GMANews.TV
01/19/2009 | 09:43 AM
MANILA, Philippines - Despite the Church's all-out campaign against it, six of 10 Filipinos favor a proposed bill on reproductive health pending at the House of Representatives, according to a survey by Pulse Asia.
Pulse Asia said the survey also showed eight of 10 Filipinos believe government should not only educate couples on family planning but also provide them with services and materials.
"A considerable majority of Filipinos (63 percent), whether aware or unaware of the reproductive health bill, expresses support for the proposed legislation while only 8 percent are not in favor and 29 percent are ambivalent on the matter," it said.
Pulse Asia said majorities ranging from 56 percent in the Visayas to 79 percent in Class ABC are in favor of the bill.
In contrast, it said only 8 percent are not in favor of the bill while 29 percent are unable to say whether or not they support the bill.
"Public ambivalence on the matter is more notable in the Visayas, Mindanao, and Class E (32 percent to 35 percent) than in Class ABC and Metro Manila (13 percent to 21 percent)," it said.
The survey showed most Filipinos are aware of the reproductive health bill pending at the House of Representatives (68 percent) and are in favor of the bill (63 percent).
Awareness of the reproductive health bill being discussed at the House is reported by 68 percent of Filipinos while 32 percent do not know about the bill, Pulse Asia said.
"Across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings, majorities (60 percent to 89 percent) know about the proposed legislation with the highest level of public awareness being recorded in the best-off socio-economic Class ABC. In contrast, lack of awareness is most
pronounced in Mindanao and Class E (38 percent and 40 percent, respectively)," it said.
The survey also said that while 49 percent of Filipinos say couples should follow what their religion tells them about family planning, 44 percent are ambivalent on the possibility of their church or religion influencing their vote for a candidate advocating modern family planning methods.
"Big pluralities to sizeable majorities (41 percent to 68 percent) across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings are of the view that couples should follow the dictates of their religion when it comes to the issue of family planning," it said.
This sentiment is most manifest in the Visayas and least pronounced in the rest of Luzon, it said.
On the other hand, around the same percentages of Filipinos are either ambivalent on the matter or do not agree that couples are obliged to abide by the teachings of their religion on family planning (27 percent versus 23 percent).
As for the impact of their church or religion on their decision as to whether or not to vote for a candidate supporting modern family planning methods, indecision is the predominant public sentiment at the national level (44 percent) and particularly in the rest of Luzon, the Visayas, and Classes D and E (42 percent to 52 percent), Pulse Asia said.
"In contrast, 34 percent of Filipinos say there is a big possibility their vote would be influenced by their church or religion while 21 percent express a contrary opinion," it said.
In Metro Manila, a big plurality (41 percent) says there is a big possibility of their church or religion influencing their vote while in Mindanao and Class ABC, nearly the same percentages either share the same sentiment or are undecided on the matter (36 percent to 39 percent versus 38 percent to 41 percent).
The survey also showed a big majority of Filipinos, or eight of 10 Filipinos (82 percent), thinks government should not only educate couples regarding modern methods of family planning but also provide them with services and materials on these methods.
"Most Filipinos (82 percent) think government should teach couples about modern methods of family planning (i.e., both natural and artificial methods) – a view articulated by big to overwhelming majorities (76 percent to 91 percent) in all geographic areas and socio economic classes," it said.
Also, it said exactly the same percentage says that it is the government's duty to provide the people with knowledge, services, and materials on modern methods of family planning.
This sentiment is expressed by 78 percent to 87 percent across all geographic areas and socio-economic groupings, Pulse Asia said.
On the other hand, less than one in ten Filipinos (6 percent to 8 percent) disagrees with either view while indecision on these matters is expressed by 10 percent to 13 percent of Filipinos.
The survey also said about four in ten Filipinos (44 percent) say the government should pass a law specifying the number of children couples may have.
On the matter of whether or not government should pass a law dictating the number of children a couple may have, 44 percent of Filipinos support such government action while 36 percent are not inclined to do the same.
Almost one in five Filipinos (19 percent) are undecided on the matter.
Across geographic areas and socio-economic classes, big pluralities to small majorities (45 percent to 58 percent) in Metro Manila, the Visayas, Mindanao, and Classes D and E favor the idea of government passing a law on the number of children couples may have.
In contrast, a near majority (47 percent) of those in the rest of Luzon do not think government should pass such a law while in the poorest Class E, almost the same percentages express either agreement or disagreement (42 percent versus 40 percent) with this proposal.
The survey said almost all Filipinos consider it important for one to have the ability to plan the family for the welfare of both the family (93 percent) and the country (90 percent).
"Overwhelming majorities across all geographic areas and socio-economic classes (84 percent to 99 percent) say it is important for couples to have the ability to plan their families for the sake of the family and the country as a whole," it said.
Less than one in 10 Filipinos (6 percent to 9 percent) are ambivalent on the matter and practically none consider this to be unimportant.
The survey was based on a multistage probability sample of 1,200 representative adults 18 years old and above, and has a +/- 3 percent error margin at the 95 percent confidence level.
Subnational estimates for each of the geographic areas covered in the survey (Metro Manila, the rest of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao) have a +/- 6 percent error margin, also at 95 percent confidence level.
Face-to-face field interviews for this project were conducted from October 14 to 27, 2008.
While the field interviews for this survey were being done, major developments during this period included the financial crisis in the United States that soon spilled over into other parts of the world including the Philippines, the American presidential elections, the filing of a new impeachment complaint against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the Supreme Court decision on the Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain (MOA-AD), and the controversial trip to Russia of several police officials that involved a "contingency fund" of P6.9M.
Other issues included the deportation from the US of former Agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn Bolante who is widely believed to be the brains behind the fertilizer fund scam, the decline in the price of oil at the world market, the impending increase in the electricity charges of the Manila Electric Company (Meralco), and the food scare in China and other parts of the world over the discovery of melamine, an industrial chemical, in milk and other food products. - GMANews.TV
Free No Needle No Scalpel Vasectomy
For the first time in the Philippines, NSV International, Inc. USA, has conducted a "No Needle No Scalpel " Vasectomy in Negros in coordination with the Bisaya Medical Association in America. Based on request, will conduct also in Cebu City at SWU - Sacred Heart Hospital on Jan. 29, 2009 and in Hilongos Leyte at the Rural Health Center on Jan 30. before going back to the U.S.
The "No Needle No Scalpel Vasectomy" will be performed by Dr. Ramon U. Suarez ,MD.,F.A.C.S. Diplomate, American Board of Urology.He is an expert on NSV and has performed NSV's here and abroad, to workers, laborers and professionals. He himself and the Founders of NSV International have had vasectomy, so with their family members and relatives here and abroad.
No Scalpel Vasectomy is a permanent method and is intended for men who don't intend to have additional children anymore. It is a modern technique which is safe, simple, quick (15 min.ave.) and doesn't entail incision, no suture, just BAND-AID! and lately NO NEEDLE !
With our economic condition and many families are living in extreme poverty, parents has to be RESPONSIBLE also in planning their family. If Natural Family Planning Method is not effective for them or difficult to count/monitor menstrual cycle or forgets to take the pills or it's costly to always buy condoms, pills,etc till the wife reach age 50... NSV is a good option! it's a one time procedure but lifetime effect.
NSV orientation & counseling will be conducted before the NSV procedure. For reservation more information, please contact: Mrs.Myrna Danuco of the RH Clinic Tel. 4188980 or Mrs.Frohnie D. Cagalitan of Pro Quality Life Training & Dev't. Inc. (Q-Life) Tel.-032- 2590989 or 0927-5719399
The "No Needle No Scalpel Vasectomy" will be performed by Dr. Ramon U. Suarez ,MD.,F.A.C.S. Diplomate, American Board of Urology.He is an expert on NSV and has performed NSV's here and abroad, to workers, laborers and professionals. He himself and the Founders of NSV International have had vasectomy, so with their family members and relatives here and abroad.
No Scalpel Vasectomy is a permanent method and is intended for men who don't intend to have additional children anymore. It is a modern technique which is safe, simple, quick (15 min.ave.) and doesn't entail incision, no suture, just BAND-AID! and lately NO NEEDLE !
With our economic condition and many families are living in extreme poverty, parents has to be RESPONSIBLE also in planning their family. If Natural Family Planning Method is not effective for them or difficult to count/monitor menstrual cycle or forgets to take the pills or it's costly to always buy condoms, pills,etc till the wife reach age 50... NSV is a good option! it's a one time procedure but lifetime effect.
NSV orientation & counseling will be conducted before the NSV procedure. For reservation more information, please contact: Mrs.Myrna Danuco of the RH Clinic Tel. 4188980 or Mrs.Frohnie D. Cagalitan of Pro Quality Life Training & Dev't. Inc. (Q-Life) Tel.-032- 2590989 or 0927-5719399
Monday, January 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)