Saturday, August 4, 2012

To Use Or Not to Use a Condom--that's essential to Reproductive Health Bill debate

The Filipino people, says a legislator, have waited nearly fourteen years for a "passable" Reproductive Health bill. Now, House Bill no. 96 of Congressman Edcel Lagman lies before members of Congress. Several members of the minority block who once supported the bill, have graciously backed off, an overt political move. Come August 7, the bill will again be discussed by members of the 15th Congress. With the expressed support of President Aquino, the bill is expected to gain decisive momentum and eventual passage. But, not without a fight, says the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines. 


What is so contentious with House Bill no. 96 that several sectors of our society are up and arms against it? Let us review House Bill 96.


House Bill 96 is known now as " Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2010" which was again changed to "An Act Providing for a National Policy on Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood and Population and Development, and for other purposes". This bill is authored by Cong. Edcel Lagman and is being supported largely by civil society and of course, the Aquino administration.


Strongly opposing it is Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Rufus Rodriguez and others, mostly belonging to the minority bloc. 


This House Bill is being supported by another bill, House Bill no. 101 of Congresswoman Garin. 


In Lagman's version, the State guarantees "universal access" to "medically-safe, legal, affordable, effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies and relevant information and education thereon even if it prioritizes the needs of women and children, among other underprivileged sectors."


This means that the State itself will open the floodgates of free, medically safe, legal and effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods and "devices". These "devices" among others, include condoms or contraceptives.


While the bill recognizes both modern "natural and artificial" methods of reproductive health, section 7 of this bill, mandates all health facilities in the country to provide "modern family planning methods".


Fact is, section 9 of the said law,recognizes family planning supplies as "essential medicines". Meaning, the State shall allocate a specific budget for family planning supplies every year. And what are these supplies again?


" Hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectibles and other safe and effective family planning products and supplies"


The question is---does these include abortifacients which other countries have deemed "safe and effective"?


This is one provision which many are opposing. While the objective of the law is laudable, it's solution to the problem of population control is, at best, limited to two things: procurement of contraceptives and educational program.


Why will the people agree on spending huge amounts just to procure billions of pesos worth of condoms or contraceptives or abortifacients disguised as "safe and effective" family planning products and supplies ? 


Is it because of the presumption that poor people do not have the money to buy them, ergo, it should be the State who must provide such things to them? 


Filipinos nowadays are well aware of the effects and non-effects of contraceptives and mind you, many people buy contraceptives without the intervention of the State. However, it is not about the financial capabilities of the poor to buy---it is their use that complicates this issue.


You cannot force a couple to have sex with a condom because it already infringes the individual domain. It is one thing to buy one condom, it is another to use it. 


In many instances, Filipinos do not usually use condoms for personal reasons. Those who do are well aware of the reasons why they ought to use them--mainly to avoid unwanted pregnancies. 


Question---will Lagman guarantee that when the State flood health centers throughout the country with condoms that these will prevent the increase in population? I seriously doubt it.


Again, it is not access to safe and effective family planning products and supplies that is the core problem--it is the use or non-use of these contraceptives that lead to the rise of the population. 


It still all boils down to choice, and not devices, that is central to the success of reproductive health. 


I might agree with the passage of this bill if it eradicates section 9 and 10 altogether. I think that education or information dissemination programs are more effective than allocating or using billions of pesos from the public coffers just to procure contraceptives.


I bet ya that these legislators who push for this bill would eventually back off if those who oppose this bill seeks a compromise saying that they agree on passing this bill only if these legislators eradicate section 8 altogether.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you very much for reading my blog. You inspired me. But if you intend to put your name "anonymous", better not comment at all. Thanks!