Frequently Asked Questions

about the RH Bill

2011-05-24
This FAQ is based on accurately cited scientific data in Facts vs. Myths,
a comprehensive information document on reproductive health published by
the Mulat Pinoy population awareness initiative,
supported by the Probe Media Foundation, Inc.
and the Philippine Center for Population and Development.

http://www.mulatpinoy.ph/
http://www.probefound.com/
http://www.pcpd.ph/
 RH Bill FAQ: On Faith
Q: Is the RH Bill rejected by all major Philippine religious groups?
A: No. In April 2011, the Interfaith Partnership for the Promotion of
Responsible Parenthood (IPPRP) released a statement supporting the value
of responsible parenthood and how the RH Bill espouses it. The signatories
included the following religious institutions:
- National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP)
- United Church of Christ of the Philippines
- Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches (PCEC)
- United Methodist Church (UMC)
- Philippines for Jesus Movement (PJM)
- Iglesia Filipino Independiente (IFI)
- Christian and Missionary Alliance Churches of the Philippines (Inc (CAMACOP)
- Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA)
- Salvation Army
- Iglesia ni Cristo (INC)
- Catholics for Reproductive Health (C4RH)
- Episcopal Church of the Philippines (ECP)

Islam has similarly expressed support for the RH Bill. Only the CBCP and the
Catholic Church hierarchy in the Philippines continue to oppose it. They do,
however, recognize and respect the opinions of other churches.
 RH Bill FAQ: Faith and Governance
Q: Is the Philippines the only Catholic country that is pushing for
reproductive health legislation?
A: No. Ireland, a progressive, developed and predominantly Catholic Country,
has a Constitution similar to the Philippines, acknowledging the right to life of
the unborn with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother. The Irish
government already has a fully implemented family planning policy that funds
and delivers all modern contraceptive methods including IUDs, pills,
injectables, and implants.
Other Catholic countries like Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Colombia, the
Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela and
Paraguay all prohibit abortion as a family planning method even as they
vigorously promote contraceptive use. They have lowered their fertility rates
to sustainable levels, enabling families to plan their desired sizes.
The Philippines is the only predominantly Catholic country that has not
adopted a family planning policy.
 RH Bill FAQ: Faith and Governance
Q: Have other countries benefited from a comprehensive family planning
and reproductive health program?
A: Yes. An excellent example is Chile. It is a model of how a predominantly
Catholic country can pioneer a family planning program with the support of
the Catholic Church, academe, and international community.
Educational institutions in Chile provided the initial knowledge base for
guiding family planning policy. The Chilean medical, scientific, and political
community also advocated reducing the size of families and the judicious use
of family planning. The Catholic Church hierarchy then promoted these
policies because they felt it would reduce the alarmingly high rates of induced
abortions that were prevalent in Chile at the time.
Today, Chile has a sustainable fertility rate, one of the largest GDP-per capita
and Human Development Indices, and is an OECD country that has risen out
of a military dictatorship and feudal system.
 RH Bill FAQ: Population Momentum
Q: Can the RH Bill cause an immediate demographic winter, crippling
Philippine growth?
A: No. Even if we have lower population growth and fertility rates right now,
the country would still grow to reach 160 million in 2060, overtaxing our
available resources, due to population momentum.
Even if the country’s total fertility rate (TFR) continues to decline by 0.2
children every five years, the replacement fertility of 2.1 children per woman
would be reached only by 2040. The effects of population momentum would
still persist for another 60 years after that before population ceases to grow,
by which time the total population would be 240 million. Even a negative TFR
would take decades to slow down population growth.
Thailand’s population, for example, continues to growdue to population
momentum even though its TFR is now below replacement fertility.
A high-quality family planning program (access to education and provision of
multiple family planning methods) can reduce lower TFR to safe levels better
than economic development or poverty reduction alone.
The Philippines’ Average Growth Rate
 RH Bill FAQ: Population and Poverty
Q: Is there a connection between population size and poverty?
A: Yes. There is a proven, strong link across poverty, rapid population growth,
and large, unplanned family sizes.
It is internationally recognized that rapid population growth (of 2% or more
annually) is more likely to impede than promote economic development.
According to the UN State of the World Population Report, “family planning
and reproductive health are essential to reducing poverty,” and “countries
that invest in reproductive health and family planning and in women’s
development register slower population growth and faster economic growth.”
The Asian Development Bank cites a large population as one of the major
causes of poverty in the Philippines: “Population growth in and of itself is not
a problem if resources are available to cope with the additional people
requiring public services, employment, housing, and so on. But in a country
where the budget is already stretched and where poverty is high to begin
with, population growth becomes a major issue.”
 RH Bill FAQ: Population and Poverty
Q: Have local studies been made about population and poverty?
A: Yes. One particularly critical analysis was conducted by the University of the
Philippines, with clear, data-supported results.
In a 2008 study, the UP School of Economics affirmed that rapid population growth
and high fertility rates, especially among the poor, exacerbate poverty and make it
harder for the government to address it: “At the micro level, family size is closely
associated with poverty incidence, as consistently borne out by household survey data
over time. In short, poor families are heavily burdened when they end up with more
children than they themselves desire.”
The country’s foremost economics institution also stated: “The experience from across
Asia indicates that a population policy cum government-funded family planning
program has been a critical complement to sound economic policy and poverty
reduction.”
In addition, “ensuring access to the full range of modern (‘artificial’) FP methods cum
appropriate information raises the success rate of achieving the desired family size.
Limiting FP options to ‘natural family planning (NFP) methods only’ fails to address the
private and social costs of mistimed and unwanted pregnancies.”
Link between family size and poverty
RH Bill FAQ: Contraceptives, Sex Ed and STDs

Q: Will sex education and contraceptive use increase the spread of STDs?
A: No. Sex education in the RH Bill is about warning everyone about the risks
and dangers involved with reproductive health.
According to the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and the Pacific, only 12% of women and 18% of men aged 15-24 knew about
how to avoid and control HIV. Proper sex education encourages the youth to
seek correct guidance rather than rely on media or word of mouth.
Condoms have also been proven to be effective as both artificial
contraceptives, and preventing the transmission of AIDS/HIV and other
sexually-transmitted diseases if used properly.
Scientific studies, such as those conducted by USAID in Africa, provide
evidence that latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, can
greatly reduce the possibility of HIV infection, and can also prevent the
spread of gonorrhea and chlamydia infections in both women and men.
RH Bill FAQ: Sex Ed and Promiscuity
Q: Will sex education promote promiscuity?
A: No. Condoms have been proven effective artificial contraceptives, and are virtually
100% effective in preventing the transmission of AIDS/HIV and other sexually-
transmitted diseases as shown by research conducted in Europe. Scientific studies of
sexually active discordant couples, where one partner is infected with HIV and the
other partner is not, have demonstrated that the correct and consistent use of latex
condoms reduces the likelihood of HIV infection by 80 to 90%.
According to WHO: Over 1,000 reports on sex education programs worldwide show
that sex education courses did not lead to earlier sexual intercourse. In some cases
they delayed it.
According to the United Nations: In 22 studies, sexual health education delayed the
onset of sexual activity, reduced the number of sexual partners, or reduced unplanned
pregnancy and STD rates. In 27 studies: sexual health education neither increased nor
decreased sexual activity and attendant rates of pregnancy and STDs. Only 3 studies
found increases in sexual behavior associated with sexual health education.
 RH Bill FAQ: Abortions
Q: Will the use of contraceptives lower abortion rates?
A: Yes. Contraceptives avert over 112 million abortions a year and will reduce
abortions by 80% of the over 500,000 abortions/year under a modern family
planning policy.
 RH Bill FAQ: Natural Family Planning
Q: Natural family planning is free and effective. Why shouldn’t we use that instead?
A: NFP is not effective. NFP has never played a role in fertility decline in any country.
– According to the Guttmacher Institute, NFP has a 25.3% failure rate and results in 35% of abortions.
– Non-users and NFP users account for 9 of 10 unintended pregnancies.
– NFP programs are only used by 0.5% of married women in the Philippines, despite Catholic Church
programs, and costs just as much money for training, replication, and follow up. In the marginalized
community of Payatas, a Catholic Church program resulted in only 27 successful users (out of 390
documented women), after 4 years of effort.
NFP contradicts and nullifies the central principle of the Catholic Church position on
contraceptives.
– Prof. Luc Bovens, Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method, London School of
Economics and Political Science, says that about 2 to 3 embryos die for every pregnancy that occurs
using the rhythm method. The rhythm method may well be responsible for massive embryonic
death.
– Biology professor S. F. Gilbert, Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, affirms that NFP also
results in heavy embryo losses: 20% of eggs come in contact with sperm. Of this 20%, 16.8 % have
successful fertilization and 13.8% have successful implantation. Only 6.2% of the fetuses come to
term.
 RH Bill FAQ: Sustainability
Q: Can the Philippines support its rapidly increasing population?
A: No. The Philippines is already living beyond its means and cannot sustainably
develop its resources to manage rapid population growth. The growing population,
combined with inconsistent governance, has increased the Philippines’ resource
demand from less than its own biocapacity in 1961 to more than double its
domestically available biocapacity in 2002.
Investing in family planning services will save several billion pesos, which can be used
for critical social services.
– The latest US and Philippine research show that governments annually spend
a minimum of Php 5.5 billion in healthcare costs to address unintended
pregnancies and their complications.
– By contrast, only Php 2.0-3.5 billion annually is needed to fund a
comprehensive range of voluntary family planning services for the entire
country, which also results in a more sustainable population to provide for.
Supporting the Philippine Population