Reproductive Health Bill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Reproductive Health Bill, informally known as the RH Bill, are proposed laws in the Republic of the Philippines aiming to guarantee universal access to methods on contraception, abortion(later amended), fertility control, sexual education, and maternal care.[1] There are two bills with the same intended goals:

House Bill # 4244 ─ An Act Providing for a Comprehensive Policy on Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health, and Population and Development, and For Other Purposes

Senate Bill # 2378 ─ An Act Providing For a National Policy on Reproductive Health and Population and Development

While there is general agreement about its provisions on maternal and child health, there is great debate on its key proposal that the Philippine government and the private sector will fund and undertake widespread distribution of family planning devices such as condoms, birth control pills (BCPs) and IUDs, as the government continues to disseminate information on their use through all health care centers. On October 2012, a revised version of the same bill was re-named the Responsible Parenthood Act and was filed in the House of Representatives as a result of re-introducing the bill under a different impression after overwhelming opposition in the country, especially from the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines.[2][3] The bill is highly divisive and controversial, with experts, academics, religious institutions, and major political figures supporting and opposing it, often criticizing the government and each other in the process. Debates and rallies proposing and opposing the bills, with tens of thousands of opposition particularly those endorsed by the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church and various other conservative groups, have been happening nationwide. Contents

1 Background

o  

1.1 History

2 Key definitions 3 Bill content

o o   

3.1 Sections 3.2 Summary of major provisions

4 Summary of support 5 Summary of criticism 6 Economic and demographic premises

o 

6.1 Criticism of premises

7 Maternal health and deaths

o o o o 

7.1 Magna Carta for Women of 2009 7.2 Unmet need 7.3 Access 7.4 Natural family planning

8 Abortion

o o 

8.1 Abortifacient issue 8.2 Contraception and abortion relationship

9 Contraceptives

o o o        

9.1 Morality and social effects 9.2 Health reasons 9.3 HIV/AIDS

10 Sex education 11 Opinion polls and TV debates 12 Rallies 13 Penalties 14 Separation of church and state 15 Culture war and its implications 16 Financials 17 International reactions

o o 

17.1 European Union 17.2 International scholars

18 Status

o o o o   

18.1 Legislature 18.2 President and Cabinet 18.3 Compromise and alternatives 18.4 Recent events

19 Voting 20 References 21 Readings and external links

o o

21.1 Full text of the bills 21.2 Supporting the RH Bill

o o

21.3 Opposing the RH Bill 21.4 Other readings

[edit]Background [edit]History
According to the Senate Policy Brief titled Promoting Reproductive Health, the history of reproductive health in the Philippines dates back to 1967 when leaders of 12 countries including the Philippines' Ferdinand Marcos signed the Declaration on Population.[4][5] The Philippines agreed that the population problem be considered as the principal element for long-term economic development. Thus, the Population Commission was created to push for a lower family size norm and provide information and services to lower fertility rates.[6]

US National Security Memorandum: paramount importance of world population control through programs of UN and USAID.

Starting 1967, the USAID started shouldering 80% of the total family planning commodities (contraceptives) of the country, which amounted to US$ 3 Million annually. In 1975, the United States adopted as its policy the National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM200). The policy gives "paramount importance" to population control measures and the promotion of contraception among 13 populous countries, including the Philippines to control rapid population growth which they deem to be inimical to the socio-political and economic growth of these countries and to the national interests of the United States, since the "U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad", and these countries can produce destabilizing opposition forces against the United States. It recommends the US leadership to "influence national leaders" and that "improved world-wide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other population education and motivation programs by the UN, USIA, and USAID.[7] Different presidents had different points of emphasis. President Marcos pushed for a systematic distribution of contraceptives all over the country, a policy that was called "coercive," by its leading administrator.[5] The Cory Aquino administration focused on giving couples the right to have the number of children they prefer, while the Ramos presidency shifted from population control to population management. Estrada used mixed methods of reducing fertility rates, while Arroyo focused on mainstreaming natural family planning, while stating that contraceptives are openly sold in the country.[6] In 1989, the Philippine Legislators‘ Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD) was established, "dedicated to the formu lation of viable public policies requiring legislation on population management and socio-economic development."[citation needed] In 2000, the Philippines signed the Millennium Declaration and committed to attain the MDG goals by 2015, including promoting gender equality and health. In 2003, USAID started its phase out of a 33-year-old program by which free contraceptives were given to the country. Aid recipients such as the Philippines faced the challenge to fund its own contraception program. In 2004, the Department of Health

introduced the Philippines Contraceptive Self-Reliance Strategy, arranging for the replacement of these donations with domestically provided contraceptives.[6] In August 2010, the government announced a collaborative work with the USAID in implementing a comprehensive marketing and communications strategy in favor of family planning called "May Plano Ako"



Senate Bill 2378 defines the term "reproductive health care" as follows: Reproductive Health Care – refers to the state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. This implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life, that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so, provided that these are not against the law. This further implies that women and men attain equal relationships in matters related to sexual relations and reproduction. Reproductive Rights is defined by Senate Bill 2378 as follows: the rights of individuals and couples, to decide freely and responsibly whether or not to have children; the number, spacing and timing of their children; to make other decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence; to have the information and means to do so; and to attain the highest standard of sexual and reproductive health. The opposition says that by supporting such definitions, the country will guarantee this same right of having "a satisfying and safe sex life" and the freedom of decision to unmarried children and teenagers, since they are "people." They argue that this will lead to promiscuity among the young, as they will be granted the unstoppable right to "decide if, when and how often to reproduce". [8] They say that the terminology is part of deceptive "verbal engineering"[9] since RH is not in favor of reproduction, and contraceptives are not healthy, but RH is presented as something good.[10]




26. Maternal Death Review SEC. Effectivity [edit]Summary of major provisions The bill mandates the government to ―promote. 3. Role of the Food and Drug Administration SEC. They are also obliged to monitor pregnant working employees among their workforce and ensure they are provided paid half-day prenatal medical leaves for each month of the pregnancy period that they are employed. 5. 4. Maternal and Newborn Health Care in Crisis Situations SEC. 15. Pro Bono Services for Indigent Women SEC. age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education is required from grade five to fourth year high school using ―life skills and other approaches. Mobile Health Care Service SEC. Title SEC. Access to Family Planning SEC.[12] Employers with more than 200 employees shall provide reproductive health services to all employees in their own respective health facilities. non-judgmental and compassionate manner. 19. Emergency Obstetric Care SEC. Capability Building of Barangay Health Workers SEC. 27. Declaration of Policy SEC.[12] Under the bill. Guiding Principles SEC. Penalties SEC. Sexual And Reproductive Health Programs For Persons With Disabilities (PWDs) SEC. 1. 17. 13. without bias. 9. Implementing Mechanisms SEC. 30-32.‖[12] The bill calls for a ―multi-dimensional approach‖ integrates a component of family planning and responsible parenthood into all government anti-poverty programs. Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies SEC. 11.[12] . Implementing Rules and Regulations SEC. [11] SEC. Darker areas mean more population. Employers shall inform employees of the availability of family planning services. Roles of Local Government in Family Planning Programs SEC. 25. Prohibited Acts SEC. 23. Congressional Oversight Committee SEC. 10. 29. 2. 18. 16. Certificate of Compliance SEC. Right to Reproductive Health Care Information SEC. the bill states that ―the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane. 12. Additional Duty of the Local Population Officer SEC. Separability Clause. 8. 21. Appropriations SEC. Reporting Requirements SEC. The basic content of the Consolidated Reproductive Health Bill is divided into the following sections. 14. all effective natural and modern methods of family planning that are medically safe and legal. Integration of Family Planning and Responsible Parenthood Component in Anti-Poverty Programs SEC. 28. Repealing Clause. 20. 22. 6. 24.‖[12] The bill also mandates the Department of Labor and Employment to guarantee the reproductive health rights of its female employees. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education SEC. Those with less than 200 workers shall enter into partnerships with health professionals for the delivery of reproductive health services. Midwives for Skilled Attendance SEC. Benefits for Serious and Life-Threatening Reproductive Health Conditions SEC. Definition of Terms SEC. Companies with less than 200 workers are required to enter into partnership with health care providers in their area for the delivery of reproductive health services. 7.Philippine Population Density Map.‖[12] Although abortion is recognized as illegal and punishable by law.

especially among the poor. premarital sex.[14][16] Smaller families and wider birth intervals could allow families to invest more in each child‘s education. especially the experience in Asia.[12] Any person or public official who prohibits or restricts the delivery of legal and medically safe reproductive health care services will be meted penalty by imprisonment or a fine.[17][18] will lower the rate of abortions as it has done in other parts of the world. 22% of married women of reproductive age express a desire to avoid pregnancies but are still not using any family planning method. stores."[13] (5) use of contraception. which the World Health Organization has listed as essential medicines. which implies that some babies are unwanted.[26] making the bill unconstitutional.The national government and local governments will ensure the availability of reproductive health care services. according to the Guttmacher Institute. and among the poorest women who would like to avoid pregnancy. especially the poor to have the number of children they want and can care for. The country is not a welfare state: taxpayer's money should not be used for personal practices that are . [6][13][14] (3) Ten to eleven maternal deaths daily could be reduced if they had access to basic healthcare and essential minerals like iron and calcium. including family planning and prenatal care. will eventually lead to more abortion.[19] (6) An SWS survey of 2008 showed that 71% of the respondents are in favor of the bill.[30] There is evidence for increased risk of cancer (breast. who as such are human beings equally worthy of respect. health.[14][15] (2) Empirical studies show that poverty incidence is higher among big families. female impoverishment.[10][27] (3) US National Defense Consultant.[23] The latest studies in scientific journals and organizations show that the ordinary birth control pill. cervical. and poverty). teenage pregnancies. they actually engage in riskier sex'.[27] (4) People's freedom to access contraceptives is not restricted by any opposing law.[citation needed] [edit]Summary of criticism Opponents of the bill argue that: (1) "The world's leading scientific experts" have resolved the issues related to the bill and show that the "RH Bill is based on wrong economics" as the 2003 Rand Corporation study shows that "there is little cross-country evidence that population growth impedes or promotes economic growth".[21][22] (2) The bill takes away limited government funds from treating many high priority medical and food needs and transfers them to fund objectively harmful and deadly devices. fatherless children. nutrition and eventually reduce poverty and hunger at the household level. (4) Studies show that 44% of the pregnancies in the poorest quintile are unanticipated. at least 41% do not use any contraceptive method because of lack of information or access. the correlation was shown in a scientific journal and acknowledged by pro-RH leaders.[20] (7) at the heart of the bill is the free choice given to people on the use of reproductive health.[12] [edit]Summary of support Proponents argue: (1) Economic studies.[28][29] Harvard School of Public Health scientist Edward Green observes that 'when people think they're made safe by using condoms at least some of the time. in the phenomenon called "risk compensation".[24] and the IUD[25] are abortifacient to 100-celled human embryos: they kill the embryonic human. has shown empirical evidence that contraceptives have deleterious social effects (abortion. etc. Lionel Tiger. liver)[31][32] as well as significant increase of risk for heart attack and stroke for current users of oral contraceptives. exacerbate poverty and make it harder for the government to address it.[13] show that rapid population growth and high fertility rates.[33][34] The increased usage of contraceptives. [13][14] and "Among the poorest families. according to the DOH. enabling the people. being available in family planning NGOs.

"[36][37] [edit]Economic and demographic premises The Philippines is the 39th most densely populated country. "rapid population growth and high fertility rates.[38] and the population growth rate is 1. Indonesia.[41] Congressman Lagman states that the bill "recognizes the verifiable link between a huge population and poverty. According to these economists. [citation needed] The 2010 total fertility rate (TFR) is 3. He said that his position "is more aptly called responsible parenthood rather than reproductive health. Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill (2008). Jr. it can be used to inform people of the harm of BCPs. The TFR for women with college education is 2. showed that poverty incidence is higher among big families: 57. from a TFR of 7 in 1960. denial of basic services and subsidies to families with more than two children).0.85% (2005–2010 high variant estimate by the UN Population Division.[39] 1. Cayetano Paderanga. and the Philippines. which is about one third the TFR of the poorest quintile (5."[19] The University of the Philippines' School of Economics presented two papers in support of the bill: Population and Poverty: the Real Score (2004). with a density over 335 per squared kilometer. by CIA World Fact Book). wherein the first two grew more rapidly than the Philippines due to lower population growth rates.harmful and immoral. or 1. He also stated that he gives full support to a firm population policy.5 children per woman). Gerardo Sicat. providing contraceptives to those who ask for them.1 in 1960. Poverty. about half that of women with only an elementary education (4.3.. and establishes religious persecution.9 children per woman).[35] President Aquino stated he was not an author of the bill. and Population.[40] In addition. Unbridled population growth stunts socioeconomic development and aggravates poverty.[16] .[14] They stressed that "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.g."[13] In Population and Poverty. which include Solita Monsod. (5) The penal provisions constitute a violation of free choice and conscience. World Population Prospects: The 2008 Revision) coming from 3. Pernia.23 births per woman. but he refuses to promote contraceptive use. Aniceto Orbeta. educating parents to be responsible. do exacerbate poverty and make it harder for the government to address it.957% (2010 est. the total fertility rate for the richest quintile of the population is 2.3% of Filipino families with seven children are in poverty while only 23.9% (2010 Census)." They illustrate the connection between rapid population growth and poverty by comparing the economic growth and population growth rates of Thailand. Ernesto M. and Stella Alabastro-Quimbo.8% of families who have two children live below the poverty threshold. especially among the poor." while at the same time clarifying that it would be "extreme" to view "population growth as the principal cause of poverty that would justify the government resorting to draconian and coercive measures to deal with the problem (e.

He stressed that the more probable cause of poor families is not family size but the limited schooling of the household head: 78% to 90% of the . employment issues. [13] At the national level. between rates of growth of population and of product per capita. they refer to the HSBC 2012 projection for 2050 that the Philippines will be 16th largest economy due to its large growing population. which concluded that "there is little cross-country evidence that population growth impedes or promotes economic growth. Doppelhoffer.[15] [edit]Criticism of premises Opponents refer to a 2003 study of Rand Corporation. health." For example. De Vera says that "similar conclusions have been arrived at by the US National Research Council in 1986 and in the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) Consultative Meeting of Economists in 1992" and the studies of Hanushek and Wommann (2007). as Philippine population increased almost three times. water. nutrition and eventually reduce poverty and hunger at the household level. Economist Roberto de Vera refers to Nobel prize winner Simon Kuznets's study which concludes that ―no clear association appears to exist in the present sample of countries.. an underperforming agricultural sector and an unfinished land reform agenda." Julian Simon compared parallel countries such as North and South Korea.[44] The other Nobel Prize winner who expressed the same view is Gary Becker. transportation.Percentage of population living below poverty line (2003). the 1992 study of Ross Levine and David Renelt.[21] Thus. poverty decreased from 59% to 34%. East and West Germany whose birthrates were practically the same but whose economic growth was entirely different due to different governance factors.[43] In his Primer which critiques the bill. etc. SalaI-Martin (2004). which covered 119 countries over 30 years (vs UP study of 3 countries over a few years). The RAND study also said that a large population can promote growth given the right fundamentals. together with weak macroeconomic management. and those whose populations are decreasing will suffer decline. Proponents argue that smaller families and wider birth intervals resulting from the use of contraceptives allow families to invest more in each child‘s education.. governance issues including corruption. Miller. Ahlburg (1996). fertility reduction cuts the cost of social services with fewer people attending school or seeking medical care and as demand eases for housing.[45][46] De Vera also states that from 1961 to 2000. or is likely to exist in other developed countries. jobs. Darker areas mean more poverty.population neutralism has in fact been the predominant school in thinking among academics about population growth for the last half-century. food and other natural resources.[6][14][42] The Asian Development Bank in 2004 also listed a large population as one of the major causes of poverty in the country.

g.7 per day. Former Finance Secretary Roberto de Ocampo wrote that it is "truly disingenuous for anyone to proceed on the premise that the poor are to blame for the nation‘s poverty.poor households had heads with no high school diploma. is at 5.[47] Opponents also refer to the statement of the Federation of Free Farmers that history teaches about the economic advantages of a large population. Reps." which integrate responsible parenthood and family planning programs into anti-poverty initiatives. thus reducing poverty significantly. a period of rapid economic growth that can happens when the labor force is growing faster than the dependents (children and elderly). according to the WHO. raising tax collection efficiency). as per the proponents who repeated these numbers "to drive home the point. poor governance.[48] The Wall Street Journal in July 2012 said that Aquino's "promotion of a 'reproductive health' bill is jarring" since it could lead to "a demographic trap of too few workers. and the disadvantages of a smaller population. preventing them from getting good paying jobs. it has too few pro-growth policies. HIV/AIDS and STDs (7) Elimination of violence . He refers to studies which show that 90% of the time the poor want the children they have: as helpers in the farm and investment for a secure old age.[50] not 10-11 deaths a day. The two party-list representatives strongly state that poverty is not due to over-population but because of inequality and corruption.[44] Instead of aiming at population decrease."[51][52] The proponents state that RH will mean: (1) Information and access to natural and modern family planning (2) Maternal. De Vera stressed that the country should focus through education on cashing in on a possible ―demographic dividend‖.[22] [edit]Maternal health and deaths Birthing services are key to solving maternal deaths Maternal deaths in the Philippines. and which name the Population Commission as a coordinating body. infant and child health and nutrition (3) Promotion of breast feeding (4) Prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications (5) Adolescent and youth health (6) Prevention and management of reproductive tract infections." He emphasized that the government should apply the principle of first t hings first and focus on the root causes of the poverty (e."[49] Opposing the bill. corruption) and apply many other alternatives to solve the problem (e.[35] They also point to the five factors for high economic growth and reduction of poverty shown by the 2008 Commission on Growth and Development headed by Nobel prize winner Michael Spence. which does not include population control. two authors of the Reproductive Health Bill changed their stand on the provisions of the bill regarding population and development. Emerciana de Jesus and Luzviminda Ilagan wanted to delete three provisions which state that "gender equality and women empowerment are central elements of reproductive health and population and development.[44] In a recent development. The Philippines doesn't have too many people.g. giving up pork barrel.

the Commission on High Education. the government should tie up with all LGUs so that midwives. [citation needed] The Department of Health states that family planning can reduce maternal mortality by about 32 percent. Senator Majority Floor Leader Tito Sotto said that the RH Bill is redundant."[citation needed] Regarding these figures." without any need for a law on the distribution of contraceptives. She reported that "Daily. there are 11 women dying while giving birth in the Philippines. the Commission of Human Rights. Cagayan and Sorsogon. These preventable deaths could have been avoided if more Filipino women have access to reproductive health information and healthcare. STD. is the establishment of birthing centers. birthing facilities should be put in place to take care of the health needs of all to ensure that we minimize maternal and child deaths. and the like  Spouses have the right to decide to space their children The Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Magna Carta directs the Commission on Women under the Office of the President to oversee that the provisions are implemented by the Department of Health. [17] The bill is "meant to prevent maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth. according to the Senate Policy Brief on reproductive health. The Magna Carta for Women contains the following provisions in Section 17 and 19:[54][55]      Prenatal and postnatal care Information regarding all types of family planning methods Access to family planning methods as long as they are ethically and medically safe Sex education Obstetric and gynecological care regarding pregnancy complications and the prevention of AIDS.against women (8) Counseling on sexuality and sexual and reproductive health (9) Treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers (10) Male involvement and participation in RH. Department of Social Welfare. the Department of Education. (11) Prevention and treatment of infertility and (12) RH education for the youth.[10] The key to solving maternal deaths.[56] [edit]Unmet need ." said Clara Padilla of Engender Rights. Because of these provisions. HIV. Department of Labor. experience has shown (as in Gattaran. the Department of Local Governments."[53] [edit]Magna Carta for Women of 2009 There have been comparisons made with the 2009 Law called the Magna Carta for Women and the RH Bill. Sorsogon) that the incidence of maternal death arising from such complications could be fully mitigated and brought down to zero simply by providing adequate basic and emergency obstetrics care and skilled medical personnel and services. The millions of funds intended for the contraceptive devices may just well be applied in improving the skills of our health workers in reducing maternal and child mortality in the Philippines.[6] The Philippine Medical Association or PMA stated in their Position Paper that the goal of reducing the rise of maternal and child deaths "could be attained by improving maternal and child health care without the necessity of distributing contraceptives. In the IRR. doctors. Francisco Tatad of the International Right to Life Federation and former Senator wrote that "If correct. it also states that in order for the law to be successful.

such as farm-to-market roads. The bill intends to provide universal access through government funding. such as those offered by the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) which supports the Family Planning Organizations of the Philippines and the 97 organizations of the Philippine NGO Council.5 children) and actual fertility (3. and taxpayers are not bound to provide for all the wants and desires of its citizenry.[citation needed] The opposition argues that "Access to contraceptives is free and unrestricted" and that the proposed law is pushing an open door.identified by the analyst through the comparison of responses to items in separate blocks of the questionnaire" and is "an inference on the part of the researcher. etc. stated that the most common reasons why women with unmet need in the Philippines do not practice contraception are health concerns about contraceptive methods.. promiscuous actions and needs artificially created by elitist. post-harvest facilities and other support services that the State neglected to provide them."[13][42] Basing itself on demographic surveys. 44% reported these reasons in 2008. the only economic resources they have are their children. not a condition reported by the respondents themselves. parents and individuals to achieve their desired family size within the context of responsible parenthood for sustainable development and encourage them to have two children as the ideal family size." "Our women are having more children than they desire.5 children). The Bill provides that "The State shall assist couples. Bernardo Villegas wrote about the Myth of Unmet Family Planning Needs. disrespectful of their real preferences. The second largest category of reasons is that many believe they are unlikely to become pregnant—41% in 2008." He also challenged that he is willing to bet that if the government will provide cash money to the poor to buy condoms. including a fear of side effects. Likhaan.. imperialist and eugenicist forces. implying a significant unmet need for reproductive health services. Lagman stated that "Twenty-two percent of married Filipino women have an unmet need for family planning services. echoed by a Business Mirror editorial. irrigation systems.Using data from the 2008 National Demographic and Health Survey. experiencing lactational amenorrhea (temporary infertility while nursing) and being less fecund than normal. thus bloating the numbers to favor the pharmaceutical companies and those with a population control agenda. Pritchett said that it is "based on a discrepancy. citing development economist Lant Pritchett who said that the term "unmet need" is an elitist construct. Their specific reasons include having sex infrequently. whose husband is absent. They argue that the Philippines should give priority to providing access to medicines that treat real diseases.[58] [edit]Access One of the main concerns of the proponents is the perceived lack of access to family planning devices such as contraceptives and sterilization. that the poor can afford condoms since they can pay for other items such as cellphone load. are infecund. the poor will use the cash for food and basic needs. thus exploding the myth. an imposition of a need on the poor. Opponents also argue that Philippine government is not a welfare state. including their vanity needs. complementing thus private sector initiatives for family planning services. [10][23] . an increase by more than one-third since the 2003 National Demographic and Housing Survey. nor should taxpayers pay for drugs that are objectively dangerous (carcinogenic) and immoral. Villegas stressed: "Because [the poor] have been deprived of the infrastructures they need. a non-government organization for women's health.[10] They say that these family planning items are available to the citizens and many local government units and NGOs provide these for free.[57] Writing against the bill. as seen in the gap between desired fertility (2." state some Ateneo de Manila University professors." Pritchett argued this term is applied to women who are not sexually active. Congressman Teddyboy Locsin argued..

as well as the Catholic Church are in favor of NFP or natural family planning or fertility awareness as a moral way of regulating child births. Thus the UP economists "strongly and unequivocally support" the thrust of the bill to enable "couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children and to have the information and means to carry out their decisions.Birth control pill The UP School of Economics argues. non- . and non-abortifacient methods of birth control (the methods of modern natural family planning)." (2) "the health risks associated with mistimed and unwanted pregnancies are higher for adolescent mothers. as they are more likely to have complications during labor. because contraceptive use is extremely low among them and "Among the poorest families. which consists in abstinence during period of fertility and having sex during period of infertility. 22% of married women of reproductive age express a desire to avoid pregnancies but are still not using any family planning method. that there is lack of access especially for poor people. totally natural. inexpensive. it is 99% effective.[citation needed] On the other hand.[13][42] [edit]Natural family planning Different groups within the pro-life and anti-abortion movement. since there is no new human life linked to abstention nor to sex during infertile periods."[64] [edit]Abortion [edit]Abortifacient issue According to the RH bill.[citation needed] They say that NFP. it appears that most arguments for using birth-control pills can be said to be advocating convenience for mothers and fathers at the potential expense of innocent and invaluable human life." further complicating limited public resources. (4) families are not able to achieve their desired family size.‖[13] Proponents argue that government-funded access is the key to breaking the inter-generational poverty that many people are trapped in. in contrast." (3) women who have mistimed pregnancies are "constrained to rely more on public education and health services and other publicly provided goods and services." It provides that "the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane. one of its components is "prevention of abortion and management of post-abortion complications. as Dr. By respecting sexuality. it does not "use" the spouse as an object for mere pleasure. Stanford stated: "given that there are highly effective. proponents contend that "natural family planning methods have not proven to be as reliable as artificial means of birth control."[13] They say that lack of access leads to a number of serious problems which demand attention: (1) "too many and too closely-spaced children raises the risk of illness and premature deaths (for mother and child alike).[60][61][62][63] Thus. nor is there a directly willed prevention of human life. does not abuse nor trivialize the natural processes wherein sex is intrinsically linked with procreation of new babies. Larimore and Dr."[59] Pro-life groups counter this by saying that high-level scientific studies show that when fertility awareness is used correctly and consistently with ongoing coaching.

[26] 5-day old human embryo called a blastocyst."[24] They also point to the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (2005). or medication that will interrupt any stage of fertilization and prevents its normal. uninterrupted growth to adulthood"." as the Constitution declares that ―the State shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.'"[68] and not from fertilization."[25] thus is deemed to kill five-day old babies. and poor (68%) (Juarez. reported that "Lagman said in a House hearing that the bill would protect human life 'from implantation. They say that the embryo is an individual. their pregnancy occurred too soon after the last one (57%). "postfertilization effects are operative to prevent clinically recognized pregnancy. and Singh 2005). in which a meta-analysis of 94 studies provides evidence that when a common birth control pill fails to prevent ovulation.589 members). their top three responses were: they could not afford the economic cost of raising another child (72%). founder of the Abay Pamilya Foundation. [edit]Contraception and abortion relationship Proponents argue that research by the Guttmacher Institute. which comprises 70–100 cells. argued thus: "Studies show that the majority of women who go for an abortion are married or in a consensual union (91%).‖[68][69] After referring to many standard textbooks of medicine and humanembryology to affirm this as true.judgmental and compassionate manner. the mother of three or more children (57%).. the Bioethics Society of the Philippines. the Philippine Nurses Association (with at least 368. physiological. and they already have enough children (54%). One in ten women (13%) who had attempted an abortion revealed that this was because her . Cabigon. When women who had attempted an abortion were asked their reasons for doing so. Catholic Physicians‘ Guild of the Philippines stated that ―the antiaborti on stance of the bill is contradicted by the promotion of contraceptive agents (IUD and hormonal contraceptives) which actually act after fertilization and are potentially abortifacient agents.‖[66] Opposition refers to a 2000 study of a scientific journal of the American Medical Association..[53] Jo Imbong. For these women. reveals that the use of contraceptives can reduce abortion rates by 85%.[70] the anti-RH bill citizens argue that the human embryo already has the complete genetic code and is thus a distinct human life beginning its own new life cycle. Proponents such as 14 Ateneo de Manila University professors.[67] The position of the Philippine Medical Association (PMA) "is founded strongly on the principle that 'life or conception begins at fertilization' at that moment where there is fusion or union of the sperm and the egg and thus a human person or human being already does exist at the moment of fertilization. noting at the same time that the Records of the Constitutional Commission state that ―Human life begins at fertilization." It also states that "abortion remains a crime and is punishable. involved in advancing international reproductive health.‖[65] Opposing the bill. self-coordinated and self-organizing subject belonging to the species homo sapiens: a human being by nature and thus a person equally worthy of respect. the Faculty of Medicine of the catholic University of Santo Tomas. which concluded that the IUD brings about the "destruction of the early embryo." The PMA condemns abortifacients that "destroys the fertilized egg or the embryo" and "abhors any procedure . terminating a pregnancy is an anguished choice they make in the face of severe constraints.

" according to the American Medical Association and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1997 to 2007.[80] .52 to 11."[23][72] At the Senate Hearings."[74] Opponents state that leaders of the abortion industry themselves have openly admitted the empirical link between contraception and abortion. It says that contraception is evil because it desecrates sex which is intrinsically linked to new sacred human beings. and is an abuse of the function of reproductive organs.[76][77][78] They also state that RH includes the pill where "postfertilization effects are operative". The anti-RH advocates accuse the RH supporters of hiding from the public the international population control agenda which includes abortion and they refer to US Secretary Hillary Clinton who said that RH includes abortion.)."[71] Opponents of the bill argue that Lagman's data on 85% reduction of abortion through contraception is based on mere projections without any scientific foundation and that this figure comes from the Guttmacher Institute which cannot be trusted because it is the research arm of International Planned Parenthood and that the latter is "the largest promoter of artificial birth control and abortion worldwide.000 women. liturgy) but is of an ethical nature.‖[75] Judith Bury. that in turn will reduce the number of unwanted --and often aborted-. the overall use of contraceptive methods increased from 49.[25] [edit]Contraceptives [edit]Morality and social effects Another central issue is the morality of contraception. This stated that through a 10-year period. for these women. in the abortion rate."[74] The AKP argues that "Since contraceptives will not reduce unplanned pregnancy. such as lying and prostitution. and the Catholic Church teaches that the immorality of contraception is not a matter of religious doctrine (e. there will b e a rise. it makes spouses lie about their total self gift to their spouse.[73] including data published in 2011 in the scientific journal. will "help reduce the number of abortions by providing increased access to information and services on modern contraceptive methods. Contraception. Thus. by not surrendering their personal fertility.49 per 1. Opponents argue that new data thwarts the "myth" that contraception lowers abortions.pregnancies. abortion has become a family planning method.9 percent.pregnancy resulted from forced sex (ibid.[72] Ang Kapatiran Party (AKP) in their Position Paper stated that "The Guttmacher Institute's own study in 2003 showed simultaneous increases both abortion rates and contraceptive use in the United States. Around 81% of Filipinos are Catholics.[25] terminating a 100-cell unborn human. coordinator of Doctors for a Woman‘s Choice on Abortion: ―There is overwhelming evidence that … the provision of contraception leads to an increase in the abortion rate. Cuba.1 percent to 79.[72] Malcolm Potts."[42] The bill. and South Korea. the first medical director of International Planned Parenthood: ―As people turn to contraception. said Clara Padilla of EnGender Rights Inc.g. they will not reduce abortion rates either and may increase them. which common ethical reasoning can understand.[79] and the IUD which brings about the "destruction of the early embryo. Netherlands. The pro-RH people accuse the anti-RH group of misleading the public by calling the bill an abortion bill. Denmark. it was shown that the major pro-RH groups openly promote abortions in the Philippines and are in favor of an abortion law. while the elective abortion rate increased from 5. not a fall. in the absence of information on and access to any reliable means to prevent an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy.‖[citation needed] Both sides of the debate accuse the other side of deception and misleading the public. Singapore. when the bill states that abortion remains a crime and is punishable. subtitled ―an international reproductive health journal‖.

Prolifers refer to economics Nobel prize winnerGeorge Akerlof whom they claim found that wide use of contraceptives led to premarital sex. We are thus deeply disturbed and saddened by calls made by some members of the Catholic Church to reject a proposed legislation that promises to improve the wellbeing of Filipino families. a prominent Catholic University. However." They emphasized that the bill "promotes quality of life. even for the gravest reasons. pro-women.[19] He said that the Papal Commission on Birth Control. illegitimate children. S. Peter Kreeft. which included ranking prelates and theologians. and Joseph W. crimes and abortions. urged that the bill be passed to help them. we share the hope and mission of building a Church of the Poor. expressed in the Encyclical Humanae Vitae issued only forty years ago in 1964.[42] Citing Catholic documents and scientific studies." that the bill disrespects poor people. Koterski. and proinformed choice. Akerlof himself refuted their use of his work. undomesticated men. May."[42] Thus.[citation needed] .[81] However. adolescents. they entitled their paper as "Catholics Can Support the RH Bill in Good Conscience. moreover. the Ateneo administration announced its unity with Catholic teaching and that it had "serious objections to the present bill. The Varsitarian expressed shock about what they see as the Ateneo professors' "erroneous conscience". responded to the faculty of the Ateneo.. to do evil that good may come of it. William E. to bring into the world only the number of children they believe they can care for and nurture to become healthy and productive members of our society. is not infallible. Smith.‖ The editorial of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. saying that ―It is never lawful." They announced that "Catholic social teachings recognize the primacy of the well-formed conscience over wooden compliance to directives from political and religious authorities."[82] The Catholic University of Santo Tomas's student paper.J. 14 professors from Ateneo de Manila University. the research was conducted on Americans. stated that Catholic teaching is "only" a religious teaching and should not be imposed with intolerance on a secular state. considering the empirical evidence of the dire socio-economic conditions of the Filipino poor. especially the lives of women. open and reasonable parenthood in today‘s circumstances. children."[42] In response. including Janet E."[83] Proponents such as Lagman also stressed that official Catholic teaching itself. pro-poor. especially the poor. They argued: "As Catholics and Filipinos. and "focuses primarily on providing services to curb the number of children of the poor. by enabling couples. while doing little to remedy their situation. recommended that the Church change its teaching on contraception as it concluded that ―the regulation of conception appears necessary for many couples who wish to achieve a responsible. and ignorance of economic science and medicine. pro-youth." urging Catholic authorities to withdraw their opposition the bill. they reasoned that "the RH Bill is pro-life. [46] 42 prominent international Catholic scholars. and the poor.

[84] taught by bishops around the world.[28] although Akerlof himself refuted their misuse of his research.  A study of 2010 published by the Cancer Epidemiology. Director of the Harvard AIDS Prevention center. but from those who strip human beings of moral dignity and responsibility."[33]  the conclusion of Edward Green.[30] breakdown of families. nor does misery come from parents who bring up children in faithfulness. and includes high blood pressure. thus part of infallible ordinary magisterium. decline of marriage. trouble in the relationship between the sexes. opponents of the bill said that science and secular moral reasoning show the objective truth that contraception is evil and disastrous for society."[90]  The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism which concluded in 2005 that "a rigorous meta-analysis of the literature suggests that current use of low-dose OCs significantly increases the risk of both cardiac and vascular arterial events.[81] heightened spread of AIDS (Edward C. but of a breakdown in moral sense that gives order to society. discipline.". Harvard Director for AIDS). the list of side effects is long.Responding to the Inquirer. causing widespread moral promiscuity. Thus they cite the 15 non-religious reasons against contraception provided by the Ethics Guide of the secular BBC which includes the loss of potential beneficent human life.[31][32] the same level as cigarettes and asbestos. Raul Nidoy referred to:  a meta-analysis of the Stroke Journal that concluded that the Pill confers "risk of first ischemic stroke." the Philippine Medical Association also stressed that "The health risks of contraception to women are considerable. fatherless children. and single motherhood (Lionel Tiger). poverty. [88] [edit]Health reasons Stating that contraception is a lie and "against the beginning of new life.[22][89] Dr.[85][86] Prestigious secular and anti-Catholic social scientists are also reported to have found empirical evidence linking contraception and a variety of social ills: more premarital sex. being unnatural and anti-life.[29][87] Opponents argue that misery is not the result of the church which they say is the largest charitable organization in the world. female impoverishment. love and respect for life. They say that Catholic Church doctrine on contraception has been the same since its beginning. Biomarkers & Prevention which concluded that "Current use of oral contraceptives carries an excess risk of breast cancer" and that "Previous studies convincingly showed an increase in risk of breast cancer associated with current or recent use of oral contraceptives from the 1960s to 1980s. crimes by unmarried men. Nobel prize winner). social pathology (George Akerlof."[53] In his Science Facts on Contraception. and abortion. Green. by treating them as mere machines. strokes. which they believe contraception does. weakening family life.that is imposing itself on people. and therefore a secular state should stand by this evidence.[84] They stress that it is the errors of conscience pushed by the "dictatorship of relativism"—rather than the objective truth and the good--. . increased incidence of some forms of cancer."[22][34]  findings of The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2007 that "there is sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogecity of combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives. that "the best studies" show that widespread use of contraception and condoms promote the spread of AIDS due to greater risk-taking and sexual adventures.

Expanding modern contraceptive use to all women at risk for unintended pregnancy would prevent 2.[18] While the World Health Organization acknowledges the possible negative side effects of the pill. It is therefore both ironic and tragic that the Philippines‘ trajectory is towards the other direction. Rene Josef Bullecer." says the main proponent. STIs/STDs.935 cases in the Philippines. (5) Tuberculosis – 23.000 women are: (1) Heart diseases – 80. given the limited budget. "shows that all the possible medical risks connected with contraceptives are infinitely lower than the risks of an actual pregnancy and everyday activities. (6) Diabetes – 22.000 cases in Thailand.In its list of essential medicines. They refer to data from the Department of Health as to the leading causes of death in the Philippines. [17][18] "Medical and scientific evidence.. (3) Cancer – 51."[19] In Facts on Barriers to Contraceptive Use in the Philippines.000. and the daily death toll per 100. It would also reap savings on medical care for pregnant women and newborns that would more than offset the additional spending on modern contraception."[23] Proponents such as E. and that there are real diseases among the leading causes of mortality that should take on a higher priority. (2) Vascular diseases – 63.000 and miscarriages would decline by 200. Ansioco of Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines argued that "The World Health Organization (WHO) includes contraceptives in its Model Lists of Essential Drugs" and thus are safe medicines. Opponents also say that being pregnant with a child is not a disease but a blessing. Director of AIDS-Free Philippines.. Lagman explained that "Globally. (4) Pneumonia – 45.[10][91] Dr. it still defines it as anessential medicine." especially since the number of HIV cases among the young nearly tripled from 41 in 2007 to 110 in 2008. whose population is around . while there were only 1." [edit]HIV/AIDS The RH bill provides for "prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS and other.[71]Proponents emphasized that RH will help in stemming the AIDS epidemic that is worsening in the Philippines.6 million fewer pregnancies each year in the Philippines. The proponents applauded government efforts last February 2010 when it distributed condoms in some areas of Manila. Likhaan made the following projection: "If all women who wanted to avoid pregnancy used modern methods. Aguirre of the Makati Medical Society also said that "The health risks of the pill actually outweighs by far the risks of pregnancy and childbirth to a woman's health. WHO stated that these drugs "have been questioned" and "will be reviewed" by its Expert Committee. Our country‘s HIV/AIDS statistics have increased by 30 percent!"[92] Primary among the means is distribution of condoms. there were around 750. where there was an intense campaign for the "100% Condom Use Program".100 maternal deaths each year.000. Thailand had 112 AIDS cases.000. abortions would decline by 500. Dr. The risk of dying from a vasectomy is 1 in 1 million and the risk of dying from using an IUD is 1 in 10 million. (7) Lower chronic respiratory diseases – 16. said that in 1987. more or less the same number as the Philippines (135). .000. there would be 1.[citation needed] On the other side of the debate. Unintended births would drop by 800. the new number of reported cases of HIV infections and deaths has dropped by nearly 20 percent...The risk of dying within a year of using pills is 1 in 200. But the risk of dying from a pregnancy is 1 in 10. By the year 2003.

69% of the Filipinos are in favor of the bill.In Uganda.[93][94] Pro-life groups refer to the Director of Harvard's Aid Prevention Center. a non-government advocacy group. Green. Proponents refer to the latest UNESCO study dated December 2009 which concluded that sexuality education did not encourage early initiation into sex.[10] President of Prolife Philippines." The BMJ said that whereas "in Swaziland.‖[97] They stressed that what is needed is chastity education.. were merely aware of it. .6 percent have HIV. by adequately trained teachers starting from Grade 5 up to Fourth Year High School. Buhay Hayaan Yumabong (Let Life Flourish). increased condom use by teens is associated with increased out-of-wedlock birth rates. 21 percent undecided. where 42. Among those who originally knew of the bill. . because the participants were not fully informed of the bill.. an international expert on sexuality and family. commissioned by the Forum for Family Planning and Development (FFPD). and a mere 8 percent opposed. the score is 84 percent in favor. only 5 percent of the population is Catholic. Lito Atienza. foreign-funded political lobby groups to create a bandwagon effect. and informed that it was about health and "modern methods". which said that ―programs in safer sex education and condom distribution have not reduced the out-of-wedlock birth rates among sexually experienced teens. Among those who learned of the bill for the first time because of the survey. and only . and 6 percent opposed. said that the surveys conducted by SWS and Pulse Asia were misleading.03 percent of the population has HIV!"[96] [edit]Sex education To achieve its goals. the lower the level of HIV."[100] In December 2010." Opposition to the bill is concerned about early sexualization of the youth and say that sexuality education promoters themselves state that it has led to more teenage pregnancies and illegitimacy.. A survey conducted in 2008 by theSocial Weather Stations.[99] SWS President and RH Bill proponent. especially taught by their parents. but actually increased the age at which people first engage in sexual activity. versus 11 percent opposed. They quote the The Consortium of State Physicians Resource Councils. Mahar Mangahas reported that the "survey found 71 percent in favor [of the RH Bill].[98] [edit]Opinion polls and TV debates Proponents refer to many surveys conducted by two prominent locally based organizations (SWS and Pulse Asia) which show majority support for the bill. Instead he referred to the Filipino Family survey of December 2009 conducted by the HB&A International (an affiliate . rather than sex education in school. . the score is 59 percent in favor. the proportion of HIV infected adults is 4 percent. with 43 percent of the population Catholic. showed that 68 percent of Filipinos agree that there should be a law requiring government to distribute legal contraceptives. the bill provides for mandatory reproductive health education and that it be taught in "an age-appropriate manner. ." Evert said that "In the Philippines.[20][99] Pulse Asia reported that in an October 2008 survey "most Filipinos are aware of the reproductive health bill pending at the House of Representatives (68%) and are in favor of the bill (63%). over 80 percent of the population is Catholic. Pulse Asia announced based on the results of an October 2010 survey. Edward C. Senator Tatad remarked that an objective measure of Filipino preference is the consistent top electoral success of the pro-life party-list.30% greater than Thailand's.[30] Jason Evert..[citation needed] Saying that nation-wide surveys are financed by wealthy. because availability of condoms leads to riskier sexual behavior."[95] He cited the British Medical Journal which stated that "The greater the percentage of Catholics in any country. cited the "wisdom of the Filipino approach to halting AIDS" and that they are "living proof that self-control always trumps birth control. The fact is. who said that the "best evidence" agrees with Benedict XVI's statement that condom distribution risked exacerbating the spread of the virus.

the studio audience voted 100% against the bill. including faith-based hospital administrators. majority voted against the bill at the very end of the debate.1000.[121] Bohol .[128] CBCP complex – 1000. stated that these punitive provisions "are tantamount to an affront to civil liberties and smack of religious persecution. versus 41. "85 percent are not aware that once passed the RH bill would allow teenagers to secure 'abortifacient devices and substances' without their parents‘ knowledge and consent..[115] Christians and non-Christians in Mindanao .000.90 percent do not agree that Congress should appropriate P2 billion to the detriment of other essential medicines for free children‘s vaccinations.[107][108] Mindanao – 50.[118] Quiapo (Oct) – 1500.000 to 50.[102] A TV Debate was also hosted by ABS-CBN last May 2011.of Louis Harris & Associates) together with the personnel of Asia Research Organization (the Philippine affiliate of Gallup International).[110] Manila (13 Feb 2011) – 10. According to the ABS-CBN news which reported on the results: "In the SMS poll.[123] Iloilo – 4000."[103] In the separate online poll held on the Harapan microsite that livestreamed the debate..000.[131] [edit]Penalties There is mandatory sexuality education starting grade 5.000[116]Manila (Dec 2011) 10.3% in favor.000 and Pagadian – 8.00).[127] The pro-RH rallies were: Batasan – 1500." according to a report of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. The same may happen to employers who do not provide free services to employees.[105] [edit]Rallies From late 2010 to the present.000. including Rep. Quezon – 2000.000.[129] Mendiola .30.[132]Former Finance Secretary.00) to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50. Roberto de Ocampo.000[106] to 200.[109] Manila 2012 .[113] Cebu – 10.42% support it.[132] Imprisonment ranges from (1) month to six (6) months or a fine ranging from Ten Thousand Pesos (P10.000 to 12."[101] Mangahas acknowledged that the SWS surveys did not include the penalties. and "malicious disinformation" is penalized.[122] Legazpi – 4000.[118][120] Manila Knights of Columbus March (March 2011) – 7000.7% of the viewers voted against the RH Bill via text messaging.[125] Tagaytay – 2000.4000.[118] Dipolog – 10. treatment of dreaded diseases and other more important health and medical concerns. there have been rallies for and against the bill. while 58.' Each participant was supposed to receive P350.[dubious – discuss] On TV5's Debate Hamon sa Pagbabago on 21 August 2011.000.000[111] – 50. Lagman and Rep."[35] . while 44% were in favor.[124] San Pablo.[114] Balanga – 10.000.[119] Maasin.[104] The online poll conducted by the Philippine Star which was published on 18 May 2011 showed that 56% were against the RH Bill.000.[112] Bacolod – 20.000.000. The survey concluded that 92% of people in Metro Manila rejected the bill. organizers "set aside P1.000. may be imprisoned or fined if they refuse to provide family planning services such as tubal ligation and vasectomy.[citation needed] The pro-life rallies against the bill where in: Manila with Catholics.10.000 to organize a rally of 'at least 5.[117] Lucena – 8.000.000 people.[132] All health care service providers which provide reproductive health services..000.[130] In one pro-RH rally. Moslems and Evangelicals (25 March 2011) – 40.750. Leaders of both sides.58% of votes cast reject the RH bill while 30. Golez were present.[126] Batasan – 3000. 69. Leyte – 6000 to 7000.

. The Catholic church also states that their stand is based on secular reasons and natural law that are both acceptable to nonCatholics too. It does not prevent the church. and not favor any particular religion. explained that the concept of separation of church and state is directed towards the state.‖ It means that the state should be guided by the principle that it should support no specific religion. Joaquin Bernas. parents. the absence of the law makes it easier to block the program. Archbishop Luis Antonio Tagle opposes the Reproductive Health Bill. Dr. as it is a political concept.J.[137] They argue that a decreased population growth will lead to improved quality of life and economic development. supervisors. state that the church should not meddle in matters of the state. . not political matters. and should focus on religious matters. Technically it means ―nonestablishment of religion‖. as the Constitution stated that ―No law shall be passed respecting an establishment of religion . Proponents.Defending the bill.. former dean of the School of Economics of UP. S. It will mean reneging on international commitments and will slow down modernization."[citation needed] [edit]Separation of church and state The head of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines.[135][136] Passage or non-passage of the bill have negative implications depending on the views. one of the drafters of the Philippine Constitution and a prominent lawyer and writer. Proponents state that the non-passage of the bill will mean keeping the Philippines in a backward state and unable to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. Proponents also accuse the Catholic Church of holding the Philippines "hostage" and violating the separation of church and state. and thus will have more children than they can care for. This means that government funding should not be allocated for building churches or mosques. rather than the church. Its staunch opposition to the bill has drawn the controversy among non-Catholics and Catholics alike who support the bill whereby many invoke the principle of separation of church and state. Because 81% of Filipinos are Catholics.[134] [edit]Culture war and its implications Millenium Development Goals at the UN The national debate is seen as part of a wider culture war. Also the poor will not have free access to family planning support that many have expressed desires to have. said that "Although the poor‘s access t o family planning services can be improved even without the law. the Catholic Church exerts a strong influence in public and moral life. on the other hand. teachers and other moral educators from expressing their views and educating their wards on the morality of their personal and social actions. and will not have the money to invest in education to break the intergenerational poverty they are trapped in. along with abortion and contraception.[133] Fr. Felipe Medalla. especially the points on poverty alleviation and maternal health.

000 to ―Catholics‖ for Choice to promote RH.6 million to Planned Parenthood arm Family Planning Organization of the Philippines (FPOP) from UNFPA (2009). can help secure the future of young Filipinos. $39. 2009." He also referred to "the lobby against the RH bill that is well-funded by the ―wealthy Catholic hierarchy with the aid of dozens of lay organizations. Lucy Torres-Gomez. That amount can build 4. $1. stating that the population control agenda traces its roots to the wrong assumptions of Thomas Malthus. and that its "2008 lobbying fund of two billion pesos comes from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. and to use Philippines' own national funds to kill the youngest Filipinos. and encourage immorality. $88. from the UN Population Fund or UNFPA (2011).‖[142] .[10][136] They accuse the Philippine Legislator's Committee on Population and Development as "essentially a foreign body" that has drafted the bills.[10][138] Opponents see the bill as allowing the Filipinos to be fooled by the deceptive manipulations of American imperialism and eugenicist control."[136] They say that a population control policy is based on outdated economic theory. and $75. IPPF and UNFPA the latter two both well known for their global agenda to legalize abortion.000 scholars — a chance for underprivileged student achievers to earn their diploma.  $6.Opponents of the bill cite the historical study of Columbia University professor Matthew Connelly. and for the education and development of Filipinos.[139] The Filipinos for Life issued a statement with online copies of documents[140] which according to TV5 News. according to Senator Pia Cayetano. and great reduction of poverty. the forced eugenics of Adolf Hitler and Margaret Sanger.644 new classrooms…or it can subsidize the college education of 300. and will make the country fail to cash in on a possible demographic dividend of rapid economic growth.‖[141] Young Nine Legislators (Y9L)--including Aliah Dimaporo. using United Nations Agencies for its own national interests.[44] [edit]Financials Department of Health is proposing 13. a chance for complete modernization without destruction of human life and promotion of immorality."[141]  $90. and 2010.000 to the Reproductive Health Advocacy Network (RHAN) for promotion. "revealed the following financial grants for RH lobby groups. if put towards education.6 million to FPOP from IPPF for the years 2005.2 million to PSPI from Marie Stopes (2009). and said that the accusation is "an old yarn which is destitute of factual basis. harm its own mothers. from the Wallace Global Fund (2009) Lagman denied this.7 Billion Pesos to be fund the RH Bill if it is passed in 2012.000 to Likhaan from Planned Parenthood (2007).      $1. They see the bill as an act of disrespect and ingratitude to the Catholic Church that works for the poor and the sick. Karlo Alexei Nograles—said that ―The proposed P3 billion appropriation for the RH bill.000 to FPOP in 2009 from Marie Stopes for RH kits.

.. lack of education.. The poor are victims of poverty. citing the slow decline in the maternal mortality ratio in the Philippines. population neutralism has in fact been the predominant school in thinking among academics about population growth for the last half-century."[143] MacDonald noted that the total fertility rate for the richest quintile of the population is 2. They refer to the RAND Corporation study of 2003.9. Thomas Lickona have expressed opposition to the bill in a one-page ad in the major newspapers of the Philippines. which states that "Most economic analysis has examined the statistical correlation between population and economic growth and found little significant connection.. He mentioned that the lack of access to RH services is anti-women. the bill was scheduled to go before the House Appropriations Committee.. there is little cross-country evidence that population growth impedes or promotes economic growth. HB 96 seeks to establish a government-managed program of population management and demographic targets in the Philippines. while the total fertility rate of the poorest quintile is 5.[citation needed] [edit]International [edit]European reactions Union European Union Ambassador to the Philippines Alistair MacDonald said "We have all seen the figures on illegal abortion a year in the Philippines and I very much hope that both Houses of Congress will take these issues into account in producing a reproductive health legislation which will really help people make their own choices and to provide for their families. entitled Population Control Does Not Reduce Poverty.3.. 16 February 2011 the bill was endorsed by the House Appropriations Committee with amendment and referred back to the Population Committee for finalizing the language.[143] [edit]International scholars An international group of conservative catholic scholars.3 children. about half that of women with only elementary education (4. thus population growth is a major issue. This policy is based on incorrect economics assumptions. The neutralist theory has been the dominant view since the mid-1980s.4 children.. and lack of opportunity cause poverty.0. The total fertility rate for women with a college education is 2. not the cause of poverty.[citation needed] [edit]President and Cabinet . He also said surveys suggest that the total wanted fertility rate for the Philippines is 2.5). or below the actual TFR of 3.Lagman on the other hand said that both these priorities are important but with a burgeoning population the budget will become even tighter."[143] MacDonald said that lack of effective access to reproductive health services in the Philippines was 'antithetical' to the cou ntry‘s struggle against poverty and "It seems to me extremely unlikely that the Philippines will be able to meet its commitment under the MDGs under the present policy. six different bills were consolidated into a single RH Bill which was then unanimously approved for plenary debate by the House Committee on Population and Family Relations. On 7 February 2011. including George Weigel. Mary Ann Glendon."[citation needed] [edit]Status [edit]Legislature On 31 January 2011.."[21] The international scholars stressed that "Corruption.

whether natural or artificial. they proposed a study on the meaning of conception in the Constitution.[144] On December 2010. Congressman Roilo Golez and Buhay party-list separately filed bills that seek to restrict abortion and birth control use. [148] Columnist Jose Sison of the Philippine Star criticized this: ―a Catholic School of theology has actually proposed in public."[146] [edit]Compromise and alternatives Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile. by April 2011 the President has given his full support to the entire RH Bill in a speech at the University of the Philippines and promised to push for its passage even at the "risk of excommunication. The individuals can then make use of the cash they receive to purchase birth control devices they may choose. They have established a technical working group for this purpose. much less did he sign the committee report regarding the bill. My position is more aptly called responsible parenthood rather than reproductive health."[36] At the same time. said that "choice and access‖ constituted the keystone of the Aquino government‘s policy. These bills have been seen either as a nullification of the RH Bill. then the . and if they need the government support for contraception. Aquino said he himself was not promoting artificial contraception but believes that the government should be able to provide it to Filipinos who ask for it.[147] The Loyola School of Theology and the John J. the use of tax payers‘ money to train Filipinos to employ methods that are objectively and intrinsically evil‖ and cites "empirical evidence and sc ientific proofs confirming the harmful and evil effects of contraceptives to individuals and to society. the Cabinet and the CBCP agreed to have a joint campaign providing full information on the advantages and risks of contraceptives."[145] However.President Noynoy Aquino during the presidential campaign said that it confounds him why he is always associated with the RH Bill and reiterated that he is neither an author nor a co-author.[37] According to Rina Jimenez David who is pro-RH. Aquino during this visit to the US reiterated his stand that he is in favor of responsible parenthood and respects the decision of each couple as to the number of children they want. As a Catholic. Aquino's Secretary of Social Welfare and Development. during the ―Women Deliver Philippines‖ Conference held September 2010. since the RH Bill proponents have stated their concern in preventing abortion. natural and artificial family planning and responsible parenthood. Among other points. Dinky Soliman. They also proposed "parallel programs for providing information and training. its alternative. and if it means fertilization. I‘m not promoting it."[149] [edit]Recent events In September 2010. Presidential candidate Gilbert Teodoro or Gibo suggested a cash transfer from the government to individuals wanting access to family planning methods. Aquino said that "artificial contraception was a matter of choice and conscience and that health professionals who fool people into using artificial contraceptives should be penalized. He said that "he will fully support the crafting of a firm policy that will address the serious problem on population. thus guaranteeing freedom of choice. one for Natural Family Planning (NFP) and another for artificial methods of family planning". Carroll Institute on State and Church Issues issued 9 "Talking Points" on the RH Bill. They also agreed that government will not be an "instrument to enforce or violate the conscience of the people about these issues." Aquino stressed: "I‘m a Catholic. reiterating the administration‘s support for the pending reproductive health bills. abortifacients "are to be banned even now and regardless of whether the RH Bill is passed". or as a way of achieving unity among the populace.

stepped up the pressure. the House of Representatives voted on second reading in favor of the bill with 113 affirmative votes versus 109 negative votes. which generated 23. creating more controversy that fired up renewed interest in the bill on both sides. The President of the Catholic Bishops Conference said that there can possibly be an excommunication of the President if he continues on with his stance. In the upper house. Francisco Montalvan of the Inquirer said that in the end the Damasos are the scheming. House Speaker Belmonte said that Congress is not likely to rush the legislation of the bill and will tackle it in plenary early next year. ." and "makes one lose morality in the process. Carlos Celdran staged a protest action against the Catholic Church. On 27 July 2012. The President's spokesperson Edwin Lacierda explained that the President "has not changed his stand" and is reaching out to the prelates and said that the President himself has not made any decision in support of the Reproductive Health Bill as he is still studying the document. Leader of the pro-RH group. on 4 August 2012 at the historic Edsa Shrine. Free Carlos Celdran was created in Facebook. etc.[151] [edit]Voting At 3 in the morning on December 13. implying that the "pro-death advocates" are these. the Senate voted on December 18. In response. 5 abstained while 50 congressmen where absent. Belmonte said it is better that highly contentious bills be given more attention. Lacierda said that the Executive Branch "is not involved in the passage of the RH bill. declared that they are against contraceptives since using them "underestimates God. This statement has created a furor as Catholic church leaders say that Aquino has sold out the Filipino soul in exchange for some "measly" aid from the United States. since the bill is about Reproductive Health.[150] Meanwhile. corrupt clergyman Father Dámaso of the novel Noli Me Tangere by Filipino revolutionary writer Jose Rizal – and shouting "stop getting involved in politics!" A fan page. On 30 September 2010. said that the bill is doomed if it is referred to the Committee on Health. the Speaker of the House decided to put to a vote by 7 August 2012 whether the debates have to be terminated. the Senate cut the proposed budget of P 880M for contraceptives down to P 8M for condoms since other contraceptives violated the Constitution's ban on abortifacients." Filipino Freethinkers. On 3 December. Elizabeth Ansioco.. one of the freethinkers. the Committee Chair decided to refer the bill also to the Committee on Health." During the first public hearing on 24 Nov. pro-life groups and the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines have decided to call for a "Prayer Power Rally‖.government will provide it. saying the measure's fate rests solely on the legislative branch. Pro RH Bill Senators encouraged the President to be steadfast to do his duties towards the state. Anti-RH Deputy Speaker Congressman Pablo Garcia said the members of the Committee on Health know of the WHO announcement on the carcinogenicity of combined estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives. corrupt and deceptive people. atheists. Meanwhile. while the Cardinal Rosales who started a nationwide fund for the poor is very far from Damaso. Upon the call of anti-RH congressmen.5 M constitutes 5% of the Philippine population. with the head of the minority group of the house declaring that 8 of their group are withdrawing their previous support for the bill. who have been very active in the fight in favor of the RH bill. 6 co-authors of the bill withdrew support. and Senator Tito Sotto III said that his constituents never asked for contraceptives. the top leaders of the Moslem population which at 4. an association of agnostics. holding a sign which read "DAMASO" – a reference to the villainous.808 fans in 24 hours. the Imam Council of the Philippines. the chair of the Committee on Population handling the bill said that there is no instruction from the Speaker of the House to expedite the bill. progressives. 2012.

Population Research Institute.gmanetwork. Studies in Family Planning. 6. ^ a b c d e f (PDF) Promoting Reproductive Health: A Unified Strategy to Achieve the MDGs. STD".2012 to pass the bill on second reading with 13 affirmative votes versus 8 negative . sexual education among pre-teens and adults. Retrieved 2012-08-20. III and Lito Lapid were absent.alfi.[153] On December 19. both Houses passed the bill on the third and final reading.[152] On the same day. 9. JSTOR 1965194. USAID.[154][155] [edit]References 1. which both ratified the bill. Gregory D.inquirer. PB-09-03. ^ a b c d e f g h i Francisco Tatad (2008-09-14). 8. 2010. 7. 5. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM 200)". The committee quickly passed the bill in just one session. July 2009. 2006 10. 2012. 2011 (2011-02-22). "RH Bills – A Primer – by Rev. ^ February 4. It was transmitted back to the House and the 3. the extensive usage of contraceptive services either through artificial methods and natural family planning. ^ 12 World Leaders (January 1968). Gaston.S.gmanetwork. with the Senate voting 11-5 in favor of ratification. ^http://www. "National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U. Human Life International. "Coercive Population Ploys in the Philippines". Fr. ^ Lexicon. ^ The general overview of the Reproductive Health bill cites fertility control among both men and women. ^ a b Antonio de los Reyes (2002). ^ US Department of National Security (1974). "Procreative Rights and Reproductive Wrongs". as well as supplemental maternal care for expectant mothers. "Declaration on Population". ^ http://newsinfo. 11. ^http://www. Front Royal. the same result as the second reading. The Senate registered 13 affirmative votes versus 8 negative votes. both versions of the bill were passed to the Bicameral Committee to produce a final version to be signed by the President Aquino. Members of the House of Representatives voted 133 affirmative votes versus 79 negative votes while 7 abstained. Senate of the PhilippinesEconomic Planning 2. The bill now must be signed by President Aquino in order for it to become a law. while Senators Sergio Osmeña.

Jr. Danao. Cayetano W. Aleli P. Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill". 22. 18. University of the Philippines School of Economics. Canlas. Joseph J. Ma. Mendoza.. Dennis Claire S. ^ a b c d Edcel Lagman (2008-08-03). ^ a b Aniceto Orbeta. Fidelina Natividad-Carlos. Diokno. World Health Organization. Jr. Balisacan. Canlas. Emmanuel S. Scribd. Ho. Danao. Benjamin E. Kraft. "Poverty in the Philippines". Paderanga. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Teresa J. Dante B. Ruperto P."RH bill OK‘d at House committee level".). 2003. Gerardo P. Implications for the Philippines". Socorro Gochoco-Bautista. Agustin L. Edita A. Mapa. Philippine Journal of Development(Philippine Institute for Development Studies) XXX (56): 198–227. Abrenica. de Dios. Orville C. Clarete. 14. Solita C. Paderanga. Monsod. Fabella. "Science Facts on the RH Bills". and Gwendolyn R. ^ a b c Elizabeth Angsioco (2008-10-08). Felipe M. Toby Melissa C. Capuno. Emmanuel S. Quimbo. Raul V. Mendoza. Tan. Poverty. Pernia. Esguerra. Solon. Stella Alabastro-Quimbo. Edita A. Maria Nimfa F. DP2004-15.12. Rand Corporation. Dante B. ^ a b c "WHO Model List of Essential Medicines". Benjamin E. ^ a b c d e f Ruperto P. Raul V. Medalla. Cayetano W. and Gwendolyn R. Solita C. ^ a b c d e f g h Dalangin-Fernandez. Emmanuel F. Nimfa F. (2003). The Manila Times (The Manila Times Publishing Corp. 19. "Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill". Alonzo. Tecson (December 2004) (PDF). Pernia. Retrieved 1 February 2011. ^ a b Mahar Mangahas (2008-10-18). ^ a b c "The Demographic Dividend: A New Perspective on the Economic Consequences of Population Change". Medalla. Joseph J. Ernesto M. Ramon L. 2008 March. Fabella. Arsenio M. Gerardo P. Rolando A. Orville C. Sicat. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Ernesto M. Ramon L. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Tan. Capuno. Tecson (2008-08-11). 2010 Presidentiables. ^ a b ADB (2004). Rolando A. Diokno. "New polls on reproductive health". Felipe M.inquirer. Emmanuel F. Arcenas. Monsod.politics. Sicat. Maria Joy Philippine Daily Inquirer. Clarete. Esguerra. Solon. 16. Arsenio M. 13. . de Dios. Asian Development Bank. Stella A. "Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill". Maria Socorro Gochoco-Bautista. Links. ^ a b c d Raul Nidoy (2010-11-07). 21. Aleli dela PazKraft. Lira (1 February 2011). "Population. "Population and Poverty: A Review of the Evidence. 15. Population and Poverty: the Real Score. 17. Monsod. 20. Alonzo. Balisacan.

Paulina A. 27. 2007. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (W. ^ a b World Health Organization (2005).A. doi:10.2002. 33. ^ a b Larimore WL. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans (International Agency for Research on Cancer) 91. Mikolajczyk (2005). ^ a b John Jalsevac (2008-07-25). Saunders Comp) 187: 1699– 1708. "Medical Issues in the Reproductive Health Bill". ^ a b c Edward C. The Washington Post(US: The Washington Post Company). Yolanda van der Graaf. ^ a b c d Joseph B. Arch Fam Med 9 (2): 126– 33. "Condoms. 34. 29.The Pope Was Right". ^ a b Jean-Patrice Baillargeon. van den Bosch. 26. "A Position Paper on the Reproductive Health Bills". UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research. HIV-AIDS and Africa . Virginia: Castello Institute.9. First Things.23. The Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines. ^ a b "Combined Estrogen-Progestogen Contraceptives"(PDF). and John E. doi:10. Helmerhorst.20041958. 30.1001/archfami. PMID 10693729.B.126. Phnix.M."Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices: Update and estimation of postfertilization effects". Kemmeren. Bea C.PMID 15814774.E. Retrieved 2010-10-05. Life Site News(Lifeissues. "The Vindication of Humanae Vitae". Frans M. Medical Ethics Policy Monograph. ^ a b c d Angelita Miguel-Aguirre (2008-08-11). ""Heaps of Empirical Evidence" Vindicate Pope Paul VI's Dire Warnings 40 Years Ago About Contraceptive Culture". "Postfertilization effects of oral contraceptives and their relationship to informed consent" (PDF).net). 25. Nestler (2005).1067/mob. "Human Personhood Begins at Conception". ^ a b Ang Kapatiran Party (2010-11-15). 24. 28. Tanis. Edward L.doi:10. ^ a b Jeanet M. Stafford. 32. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (The Endocrine Society) 90 (7): 3863–3870. and Ale Algra . "Association between the Current Use of Low-Dose Oral Contraceptives and Cardiovascular Arterial Disease: A Meta-Analysis".1210/jc. "Carcinogenicity of combined hormonal contraceptives and combined menopausal treatment" (Press release). Maurice A. ^ a b Peter Kreeft. Donna K. Stanford and Rafael T. Rosendaal.J. Bollen. Frits R. ^ a b Mary Eberstadt (August/Sept 2008). 31. Essah.128091. Stanford JB (2000).PMID 12501086. Green (2009-03-29). The Truths and Half Truths about Reproductive Health. Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP).2. McClish.

"The Socio-Economic Sophisms of the RH Bill 5043". Philippine Star. 39. The Truths and Half Truths about Reproductive Health. Photius. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 47. mediocre. "How they stand on population".0000015345. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 2010 Presidentiables. ^ Calonzo. Newsinfo. Census.S. Retrieved 29 January 2011. Filipinosforlife. 36. 43. 46.doi:10. U. ^ Lee Brago. 37. "Dishonest. ^ "Review & Outlook: Keeping the Philippine Dream Alive . Varsitarian. Raymond Aguas. Stroke (American Heart Association. 49. "2 RH authors want population control provisions scrapped".com". GMA News Online.WSJ. ^ a b Various (2010-03-06). Retrieved 1 June 2011. 2012-07-24. ^ "Population density . Impact Magazine. "A Primer on the proposed Reproductive Health. ^ a b Philip Tubeza (2010-03-15).inquirer.PMID Philippine Daily Inquirer.STR. 50. et al (200810-15). 40. "CATHOLICS CAN SUPPORT THE RH BILL IN GOOD CONSCIENCE".1161/01. Andreo. Liane Pena Alampay. and Population Development Consolidated Bill". ^ "Studies show maternal deaths in Philippines in decline | Inquirer News". Retrieved 2009.34 MILLION". ^ [1][dead link] 44. 38. "Risk of Arterial Thrombosis in Relation to Oral Contraceptives (RATIO) Study: Oral Contraceptives and the Risk of Ischemic Stroke".com. "Aquino eases up on reproductive health bill". 42.Persons per sq km 2011 country ranks. Central Intelligence Angency. Retrieved 2012-08-20. National Farmer Leaders Strongly Reject the RH Bill « Filipinos for Life". Responsible Parenthood. Pia (28 December 2010).com. ^ "THE 2010 CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING REVEALS THE PHILIPPINE POPULATION AT 92.Philippine Daily Inquirer.) 33 (5): 1202– 1208. ^ a b Varsitarian (2008-11-20). ^ Tony Roxas (September 2009). anti-poor".com. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 45. ^ "The World Factbook – Philippines". 35. Retrieved 2012-08-20. ^ a b c d Roberto de Vera (2008-08-11). "EU hopes Congress will approve RH bill". 2011-08-28. Inc.61324.3F. 41. . Online. ^ a b c d e f g Marita Castro Guevara. 48. "Kill ‗Bill‘?". By Rank". ^ a b c Roberto de Ocampo (2009-11-27). ^ "Federation of Free Farmers . The Bishops-Legislators Caucus of the Philippines.(2002). Stanford. 2008. Opinion. ^ "Full text of House Bill No.8. "Analysis of natural family planning failures. 61.doi:10. jlp-law. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 43 (6): 495– 502. "Year-ender report: The crusade for a culture of life. "Med experts slam birth control bill". Cbcpforlife. ^ "Facts on Barriers to Contraceptive Use in the Philippines". ^ Howard. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 62. ^ Ecochard. Stanford. 60. 66.FROM THE STANDS By Domini ^ Varsitarian (2008-12-12).The Philippine Star » News » Opinion". May 2010. ^ CBCP for Life (2011-05-23). et al.. ^ "No to RH Bill – By Representative Mitos Habana Magsaysay". Antipinoy. "Pregnancy probabilities during use of the Creighton Model Fertility Care System". ^ a b c Bu Castro and Oscar Tinio (Philippine Medical Association) (2011). Archives of Family Medicine 8 (5): 391– 402. Philstar.inquirer. Reproduction and Contraception (English edition). Pinguet. ^ CBCP for Life. Retrieved 2012-08-20.B. Gmanetwork. 2011-07-28.P. In 7007 cycles of use". (1999). "Creighton Model NaProEducation Technology for avoiding pregnancy.. ^ "RH bill authors agree to make sex education optional | Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development Foundation. Retrieved 2012-08-20. Retrieved 2012-08-20. PMID 9622963. Use effectiveness".. J. ^ Hilgers. F. 54. M. De Gouvello. I. 59. University of Santo Tomas. T. R. 63. 55. 58. Retrieved 2012-08-20. . 2011-08-22.. PMID 10500511. Inc". J. PMID 57. 53. Manila Bulletin. ^ Bernardo Villegas (2010-08-29). 2011-03-23. Huy. ^ "What Guttmacher failed to point out in RH | Inquirer Opinion". "RH Bill concerns already addressed in existing laws".. 56. Retrieved 2012-08-20.5. "The myth of unmet family planning needs". Ecochard. (1998). "POSITION PAPER ON THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL".com.51. 5043". R. M. ^ Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Natural Fertility Regulation Programme in China: Shao-Zhen Qian. Retrieved 2012-08-20. (1998). ^ "Sotto asks Senate to scrap ‗redundant‘ RH bill | News | GMA News Online | The Go-To Site for Filipinos Everywhere". ^ "Pass the RH bill now .com.. Part 2". in press 2000.1001/archfami. Torrevillas .W. Fertilite Contraception Sexualite 26 (4): 291–6. Cbcpforlife. Likhaan. Guy. Plcpd.

"Of Human Life".".. "Statement on Reproductive Health Bill 5043". Retrieved 2012-08-20. "When Does Life Begin? Scientists Speak. Rev. Opposing something wrong. 201106-09. First Things First. Roy Cimagala (29 April 2009). 72. 78. Rappler. "AN INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC RESPONSE TO SOME ATENEO DE MANILA PROFESSORS‘ STATEMENT ON REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH".P. Retrieved 27 November 2011. Retrieved 2012-08-20. ^ "What Guttmacher failed to point out in RH | Inquirer Opinion". Chaput (1998). Philippine Star".net. Richard S. ^ Records of the Constitutional Commission IV: 761. Smith. Retrieved 27 November 2011. Phnix. ^ Malcolm Potts. "Reckless and irresponsible". Meyers. et al (2008). Romanus Cessario. ^ a b Raul Nidoy (2010-03-13). Koterski. ^ Prof Janet E. "A Position Paper on the Reproductive Health Bills".com. ^ Bienvenido Nebres (2008-10-23). Center for Reproductive Rights. "Roy Cimagala. PhD. Joseph W. Retrieved 27 November 2011. RH Includes Abortion. 75. O. Cambridge Evening News. 801. Ateneo de Manila University. S. 68. 80. 69. Thenewstoday.. "Humanae Vitae 25 Years Later". 1986-09-18. 77. The Philippine Star.". February 7. ^ Charles J. 84. Data Shows Otherwise". ^ a b c "Breathtaking infatuation for RH bill | Inquirer Opinion". "(UPDATED) Nobel Prize winner contradicts CBCP". ^ By Fr. ^ Steven Ertelt (2009-10-15). ^ Vicenzo Fagiolo (1989). "Voting with our Gonads". ^ a b by.inquirer. Robert G Kennedy. Retrieved 2010-10-22.Life Site News (Lifeissues. The News Today". Catholic Culture.67. 82.. ^ a b Ang Kapatiran Party (2010-09-04). 28 July ^ Gregory Gaston (2008). 83. 74. March 2010. "Misconceptions and Clarifications on Issues Related to Humanae Vitae and the Reproductive "Health" Bill in Philippine Congress.inquirer. 1973 76. ^ "Transcript of Secretary Clinton's statement to G8 Ministers".net. "Guttmacher Institute Claims Contraception Lowers Abortions. Archdiocese of Denver. 73. Philippine Daily Inquirer.Philippine Daily Inquirer.J. ^ "Jose Sison. 79. Opinion. 85. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Avenues (San Carlos Seminary Graduate School of Theology). ^ Clinicquotes.. ^ a b Jo Imbong (2008-08-16). "Two errors in editorial on contraception". 70. 81. . ^ a b Clara Padilla (2010-04-11). Opinion.

2008. 103. Department of Health. Trade Union Congress of the Philippines. Natural Family Planning Outreach. "Solons laud SWS survey on family planning". Retrieved 2012-08-20. Philippine Daily Inquirer. ^ Analysis. "Business groups work for RH compromise". Catholic Answers. 91. If you loved me. "Poll thumbs down reproductive bill". ^ Amin Abboud. Hamon sa Pagbabago. 100. 102. 2005). 94. ^ Pulse Asia (2008). 98. hosted by Ricardo "Dong" Puno and Luchi Cruz-Valdez. Sexuality Education Guidelines 99. Bradford Wilcox (2005). ^ "LEADING CAUSES OF MORTALITY". ^ Mahar Mangahas (2009-11-20).twotlj. 96. 88. ^ W. Teenagers.One-page Flyer". Retrieved 2012-08-20. The Facts of Life & Marriage: Social Science & the Vindication of Christian Moral Pulse Asia. Scribd. 101. Life Site News(Lifeissues. ^ a b Johanna Camille Sisante (2008-10-15).com. ^ 2011-02-07. "Searching for Papal Scapegoats Is Pointless. ^ Macon Ramos-Araneta (2010-01-09). Retrieved 2012-08-20. 90. Breaking News. Retrieved 25 October 2011. Features". Video. ^ Rene Josef Bullecer.aacrjournals. "Pulse Asia's October 2008 Nationwide Survey on Reproductive Health and the Reproductive Health Bill". ^ Jason Evert. ^ Joseph Ratzinger (2002). ^ "Oral Contraceptive Use and Breast Cancer: A Prospective Study of Young Women". STD. ^ Brian Clowes (2006). 2010-08-27. Human Life International. 93. Edcellagman. 95. ABS-CBN News. Chastity. ^ "Isn't using birth control better than having unwanted teen pregnancies and abortions?". 104. ^ TV5 Debate. ^ "World AIDS Celebration". "Condoms. and International Case Studies Showing Condom Ineffectiveness Against HIV/AIDS". GMANews. "God and the World". Cebp. ^ "Science Facts on Contraception . . 97. 92. 21 August 2011. 1997. Jojo. "Philippines still divided on reproductive health bill | ABS-CBN News | Latest Philippine Headlines. Telling the Truth: AIDS Rates for Thailand and the Philippines. 294. Manila Standard.pdf Retrieved 2012-08-20. ^ UNESCO.TV (GMA)." British Medical Journal 331 (July 30. Pro-Life Advocates at Recent Rally". Retrieved 25 October pass own RH laws – ^ "20. 109. Retrieved 2012-08-20. Cbcpnews. 123. Cbcpforlife. "Thousands turn up for Mindanao anti-RH. Cbcpnews. Leyte march vs RH bill – INQUIRER. Cbcpnews. Retrieved 2012-08-20. Philippine News for Filipinos". 108. 23 February 2011. "Lawmakers rouse thousands with truth about RH bill in Luneta rally". 106. ^ "PDAF to be source of funding for RH contraceptives – solon".000 march against reproductive health bill in Philippines". Retrieved 2012-08-20.aspx?articleId =669859&publicationSubCategoryId=63 107. ^ CBCP for Life (2012-06-20). ^ "CBCP News Servce".philstar. "Santo Papa umapela sa mga Pinoy na ipagtanggol ang buhay | Remate". ^ CBCP for Life (2012-03-25). Rebecca (18 February 2011). 12 February 2011. Newsinfo. Retrieved 25 October 2011. Retrieved 25 October 2011. ^ "CBCP News Servce". pro-peace demo". Retrieved 2012-08-20. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 120. . 111. ^ "Philippines Sees 20. ^ "Official news service of Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines Media Office". Retrieved 25 October 2011. 13 March 2011. Retrieved 25 October 2011.105. ^ "CBCP News Servce".inquirer. Retrieved 25 October 2011. ^ "CBCP News Servce". Sun. Newsinfo. ^ "Thousands join anti-RH Bill rally – The Freeman » The Freeman Sections » Cebu News". Retrieved 2012-08-20. 117. CBCP News. 16 January 2008. ^ CBCP for Life (2011-12-12). ^ http://www. Scribd.inquirer. Retrieved 25 October LifeSiteNews. Retrieved 25 October 2011. 122.000 join rally vs RH bill". Cbcpforlife. 121. 113. ^ CBCP for Life (2011-12-15). reiterate RH bill rejection".com. 118. 2012-08-16. ^ "7 Bataan barangays follow Ayala Retrieved 2012-08-20. "Tens of thousands join K of C‘s Walk for Life. LifeNews. Cbcpnews. 119. The Philippine Star. ^ by (26 March 2011). Philippine News for Filipinos". "Over 50. Retrieved 25 October 2011. 28 March 2011. Cbcpforlife. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 116. ^ "Philstar poll on RH Bill » Nation » News | Philippine News". /http://www. ^ a b c "Thousands in Laguna. ^ "Cbcpmonitor Vol15 n07". Retrieved 2012-08-20.

^ Conrado de Quiros (2010-10-04). "No foreign funding for RH lobby . 134. 142. ^ CBCP for Life (21 September 2011).Lagman". ^ John Carrol. 131. ^ "1. RH bill".000 women march to Mendiola for Reproductive Health bill | Inquirer News". "Solons come out against RH bill". 2011-12-13. Filipino Freethinkers. ^ CBCP for Life (15 November 2011). ^ "RH bill activists hold rally. Retrieved 25 October 2011. 139. Retrieved 27 November 2011. 138. Joaquin G. Bernas. ^ "RH Bill Rally – Memorial March for Mothers". Iloilonewstoday. 31 March 2011. Retrieved 2012-08-20. . (2009-12-08). Retrieved ^ "Matthew Connelly". ^ Kristine L. 127. ^ a b c Linda Valenzona (2008-10-21). (2010-12-06). Features". ^ Newsinfo.J. ^ "CBCP News Servce". 132. "Church and State". 2011-12-02.inquirer. 125. S.inquirer. ^ "We need to debate on RH Bill. ^ a b c "RH Bill – Philippines: full text of reproductive health and related measures".com. 126. Cbcpnews. 133. Breaking News. Philippine Daily Inquirer(Philippine Daily Inquirer). 130. ABS-CBN News. ^ CBCP for Life (2011-09-27). Analysis. ^ a b Dalangin. TJ Burgonio (2012-08-03).com. Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines(CBCP for Life). Philippine Daily May 129. ^ "‗DOH proposed nearly P14 billion to fund RH bill in 2012‘ | Inquirer News". Lira (2011-12-05). says Garin | The News Today". InterAksyon. "Tagaytay anti-RH bill prayer rally unites 136. "A ceasefire in the culture war?".inquirer. Newsinfo. Retrieved 2012-08-20. 135. Retrieved 2012-08-20. Retrieved 25 October 2011. 137. Cbcpforlife.124. Retrieved 2012-08-20. "Official Statement: Documents bare millions of dollars in funding for RH lobbyists « Filipinos for Life". "Concerned citizens re-stage prayer vigil for fight vs. Retrieved 2012-08-20. Alave. House OKs RH budget | ABS-CBN News | Latest Philippine Headlines. ^ "No delay but RH bill won‘t be passed this year—Enrile | Inquirer News". 128. S. ^ Name (required) (2011-12-02). Retrieved 27 November 2011.000". Newsinfo. Cbcpforlife. 2011-10-04. Retrieved 25 October 2011. Filipinosforlife. 140. Philippine Daily Inquirer. "Massive Church rally set against RH bill". "Hostage". Retrieved 2012-08-20. MercatorNet. 141. Matthew Connelly. Likhaan. "The Filipino front in the culture wars". Philippine Daily Inquirer.

December 17. ABS-CBN News. "CBCP. "Congress passes RH Bill". Christian V. 144. Eric O. ^ Fr. filed July 1. Retrieved December 19. "EU hopes Congress will approve RH bill". [edit]Readings [edit]Full and external links text of the bills   House Bill No. Retrieved December 19. Carroll. and Fr.143. no text was provided for refs named cbcpforlife8178. ^ Rina Jimenez-David (2010-08-21). S. "Continuing dialogue on RHB". Manila Bulletin. 4244 Senate Bill No. S. see the help page.. 2012). Manuel. "Aquino risks Church ire on reproductive health bill". John J. ^ by (2010-12-15). no text was provided for refs named philstar1. Ateneo de Manila University. Joaquin Bernas. Lira Dalangin Fernandez (December 19.Philippine Daily Inquirer. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Sun. see thehelp page. 154. "Talking Points for Dialogue on the Reproductive Health Bill (HB 96. 2012. Retrieved 2012-08-20. ^ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag. ^ Jose Sison (2010-11-08). Salaverria (December 18.Star. 149. S. "Nagging questions". 2010)". 2012. TV5. "RH Bill passes bicam". Yamsuan. 2378 [edit]Supporting the RH Bill .. 147. 2012. 2012. Philippine Star. 148. ^ Mogato. Philippine Daily Inquirer.Philippine Star. Senate approve reproductive health bill on final reading". ^ "House. 150. Leila B. (2010-1011). 151. House ratify bicameral panel version of RH Bill". Remate.J. 2012). ^ Bernardo Villegas (2010-04-22). Retrieved December 19. 2012).J. Palace to launch info drive on family planning| Remate". 146. "One big fight". ^ Cathy C. ^ Karl John Reyes. 145. 155. 152. 153. "Senate. Retrieved 2012-08-20.J. Genilo. Retrieved December 19. ^ a b c Pia Lee-Brago (2010-12-28). ^ Maila Ager (December 19. Fr. Esguerra. ^ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag. InterAKSYON.

Aleli P. Edita A. PB-09-03. Population and Poverty: the Real Score. Joseph J. Diokno. The Manila Times (The Manila Times Publishing Corp. Arsenio M. "House Bill No. Health and Welfare Inc.  Ruperto P. Paderanga. Edita A. Nimfa F. Oplan Pepe. Balisacan. Capuno. Mapa. Jr. Ruperto P. and Gwendolyn R. Philippine NGO Council on Population. July 2009.  Edcel Lagman (2008-08-03). Tecson (2008-08-11). Esguerra.). Ramon L. Canlas. Emmanuel F. University of the Philippines School of Economics. Felipe M. Diokno. Solita C. Elizabeth Angsioco (2008-10-08). Pernia. Alonzo. Ma. Clarete. Likhaan. Medalla. Emmanuel S. Paderanga. Toby Melissa C. 2010 Presidentiables.. "Population. . Medalla. Balisacan. and Gwendolyn R. Ramon L. 2008-09-22. Arcenas. Benjamin E. Alonzo.  Ernesto M. Emmanuel S. Ernesto M. Capuno. de Dios. Agustin L. "Arguments for the Reproductive Health Bill". Canlas. Fabella. Maria Nimfa F.  Elizabeth Angsioco (2010-03-04). Edcel Lagman (2010-06-01). de Dios. Esguerra. "KALUSUGAN NG KABABAIHAN: Making Women Matter in the 2010 Elections". Teresa J. Pernia. Tan. Stella A. Monsod.   "Facts on Barriers to Contraceptive Use in the Philippines".  (PDF) Promoting Reproductive Health: A Unified Strategy to Achieve the MDGs. Gerardo P. Jaromay Laurente Pamaos Law Offices. Rolando A. Gerardo P. Danao. Solon. Emmanuel F. Aleli dela Paz-Kraft. Danao. Tan. Stella Alabastro-Quimbo. Poverty. Fabella. Dante B. Solita C. Mendoza. Tecson (December 2004) (PDF). Solon. Benjamin E.  "Full text of House Bill No. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Orville C. Dennis Claire S. Cayetano W. Responsible Parenthood and Population and Development and Other Purposes". Maria Joy V. Kraft. Socorro Gochoco-Bautista. Abrenica. Cayetano W. Raul V. May 2010. 96: An Act Providing For a National Policy on Reproductive Health. Orville C. Felipe M. Clarete. Sicat. Raul V. Maria Socorro Gochoco-Bautista. "Facts and Fallacies on the Reproductive Health Bill". web log. Ho. Quimbo. Arsenio M. Mendoza. Senate of the Philippines Economic Planning Office. Monsod. Rational Hero. DP2004-15. Dante B. Fidelina Natividad-Carlos. Rolando A. Joseph J. 5043 (Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008)". Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill". Monsod. Sicat.

"Coercive Population Ploys in the Philippines". Philippine Journal of Development (Philippine Institute for Development Studies) XXX (56): 198–227. "Reckless and irresponsible". Prolife Philippines. and Population Development Consolidated Bill". Marita Castro Guevara. Liane Pena Alampay. Impact Magazine.  Alliance for the Family (2008-11-06).       Francisco Tatad (2008-09-14). "Why pop-control is not the solution to poverty". Philippine Daily Inquirer. Shame of the Nation Series (Philippine Institute for Development Studies). Scribd. Implications for the Philippines".  Roberto de Vera (2008-08-11). (2003). "Procreative Rights and Reproductive Wrongs". Population Research Institute. "Medical Issues in the Reproductive Health Bill". Alliance for the Family. Responsible Parenthood. "CATHOLICS CAN SUPPORT THE RH BILL IN GOOD CONSCIENCE". "The Socio-Economic Sophisms of the RH Bill 5043".  Angelita Miguel-Aguirre (2008-08-11). 2010 Presidentiables. "A Forum on Population. "Voting with our Gonads". Scibd. Philippine Daily Inquirer. the RH Bill  Antonio de los Reyes (2002). Monograph. Raul Nidoy (2010-11-07).*Elizabeth Aguiling-Pangalangan (2010). Scibd. "Questions about the Reproductive Health Act". Phnix. "Population and Poverty: A Review of the Evidence. "A Position Paper on the Reproductive Health Bills". Jo Imbong (2008-08-16). Tony Roxas (September 2009). Ang Kapatiran Party (2010-11-15). "Science Facts on the RH Bills". "A Primer on the proposed Reproductive Health. Links. Raymond Aguas.  [edit]Opposing Clara Padilla (2010-04-11). . Development and Reproductive Health". Pro life Philippines.  Aniceto Orbeta. Jr. et al (2008-1015).

 Gregory Gaston (2008). "Misconceptions and Clarifications on Issues Related to Humanae Vitae and the Reproductive "Health" Bill in Philippine Congress.  [edit]Other World Youth Alliance: 8 Reasons Why We Should Not Pass the RH Bill readings   Full text of NSSM 200 (US government source) Philippine Family Planning Statistics (National Statistics Office) [hide]    V T E Family planning and reproductive health   Rights Contraceptive security Genital integrity Circumcision controversies    Genital modification and mutilation Sex education  Education    Planning Pre-conception counseling Genetic counseling Birth control Reproductive life plan   Childfree/Childlessness Parenting .". Avenues (San Carlos Seminary Graduate School of Theology).

   Childbirth Adoption Foster care    Health       Pregnancy      Medicine Safe sex Men's Women's (Vulvovaginal) Research (Self-report sexual risk behaviors) Maternal health Obstetrics Prenatal care Pregnant patients' rights Pregnancy from rape Unintended pregnancy Options counseling Abortion Teenage pregnancy Andrology  Gynaecology .

      Disorder Obstetrics and gynaecology Reproductive endocrinology and infertility Sexual medicine Genitourinary medicine Sexual dysfunction Infertility (Assisted reproductive technology)         Reproductive system disease Sexually transmitted disease clinic China India Iran Ireland Pakistan By country      The Philippines Singapore United Kingdom (teen) United States Birth control .

  History History of condoms Timeline of reproductive rights legislation      Policy Social hygiene movement Birth control movement in the United States Two-child policy Financial Tax on childlessness    Birth credit Baby bonus Child benefit View page ratings Rate this page What's this? Trustworthy Objective Complete Well-written I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional) Submit ratings Categories:         Politics of the Philippines Sexual health Proposed laws Demographic economics Health in the Philippines Reproductive rights Political controversies Abortion debate .

a non-profit organization. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. Women's rights in the Philippines Navigation menu              Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Interaction Contact Wikipedia Toolbox Print/export Languages      Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes  Tagalog   This page was last modified on 26 December 2012 at 19:03.  Contact us . Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.. See Terms of Use for details. Inc. additional terms may apply.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful