The RH Bill talk with Risa Hontiveros

Friday, 20 November 2009 01:24 AM Rochelle Sy Chua

What is the RH Bill? House Bill No. 5043 or the Reproductive Health & Population Development Act of 2008 is an act providing for a national policy on reproductive health, responsible parenthood & population development.

Why am I blogging about this? Well you see, last week, I had the chance to meet with Liberal Party senatorial candidate & AKBAYAN representative, Risa Hontiveros. On a personal note, I was really impressed with how Risa Hontiveros greeted us. She could have just seated and said her piece, but she went around the room and shook our hands one by one. Now that's what we call courtesy.

So anyway, one of many things that Congresswoman Risa Hontiveros (now senatorial candidate) talked about and is focused on, is a platform on Health & Women. The RH Bill, which she discussed in depth during our meet, fall into that.

Here are the guiding principles of the RH Bill:

freedom of choice with no bias for either modern or natural method of family planning;
it is about health and rights, not demographics;
individuals are provided free, full access to relevant, adequate and correct information on reproductive health and human sexuality by the State and professional private practitioners;
gender equality and women empowerment and their protection, promotion and guarantee are central elements;
aims to ensure birth and care of healthy children;
promotes responsible parenting;
promotes breastfeeding through joint effort between local government and national government.
abortion remains a crime and is punishable by law *but* post abortion complications shall be treated, counseled in a humane, nonjudgmental and compassionate manner.
respect for, protection and fulfillment of reproductive health rights of children to adults are guaranteed
aims to uplift the quality of life of people, especially the poor, the needy and marginalized;
aims to seek active participation of government and non government organization;
the RH Bill does not legalize Abortion.
aims active participation between government, non government and people's organizations and communities

Basically, the RH Bill aims to resolve our population problem. If we don’t act now, we will double our population not in 20 years but in 10 years.

Personally, I believe the main goal won't be resolved with this bill. What is lacking here is not just education but discipline. If we don't impose, people will just continue with their old habits and our current problems will not go away.

I do understand where the legislators are coming from when they passed this bill. We are a catholic country. Even with how conservative this bill was made, there were still some bishops/priests lambasting politicians who support the RH bill.

Risa's point of view is that free will is a gift of God. The church can preach and teach but what doesn't take well with her is the bishops' bullying. Though we all think that most politicians tend to keep mum about the RH bill because they wouldn't want to lose Catholic votes, Risa mentioned surveys actually say most Filipinos are for the RH Bill. She also mentioned that the Catholic vote is a myth.

Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!

Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!

The RH bill is all about freedom of conscience. It is a bill of choice. If a couple want one or many children, it is upto them. Risa thinks if there will be state-sponsored support, it will be an effective family method (things like DOH providing free condoms, pills to the poor).

I think we are one step closer to the right direction. I do think we need to have a law that is more firm. We can provide education and free contraceptive products without passing a bill. We have been doing that already but the problem is still there.

Maybe by passing this bill, we already opened up awareness among Filipinos about family planning. Let's do hope that this works out because population control is a very serious issue we need to address in the Philippines ASAP.

Photo and Videos by author. Some rights reserved.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites

Comments

Add New

Disclaimer: Comments posted here reflect our readers’ views and not the opinion of The Philippine Online Chronicles.

Confused 07 February 10, 09:11 PM

One of the principles stated above says:

"Abortion remains a crime and is punishable by law *but* post abortion complications shall be treated, counseled in a humane, nonjudgmental and compassionate manner"

So after their treatment & counseling, will those criminals be jailed for murdering babies?

Bungangkahoy 07 February 10, 10:00 PM

Proponents of H.B, 5043 "Reproductive Health" bill always cite that that the Philippines is over-populated at 90+ million people to rationalize their support for artificial birth control. But is the country really overpopulated? And the implication is that our country is poor because of that 90+ million figure.

Population figures are meaningless if we don't take into consideration the area where that figure lives. For example, what does it mean that Japan has 128 million people? Or that the U.S.A. has 300 million?

Let's take a look at a sample of Wikipedia's listing of countries according to population DENSITY, or the number of people in every square kilometer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density), Fegruary 7, 2010:

Rank Country People/Sq.Km.
1 Macau 18,534
2 Monaco 16,923
3 Singapore 7,022
4 Hong Kong 6,348
...
43 Philippines 307
...
129 Ethiopia 71

Compared to the thousands of the top 4 most-densely populated countries, the Philippines at 307 is hardly "over-populated".

And what about the overpopulation=poverty myth? The top 4 countries are so RICH! Macau is Asia's playground for billionaires, streets choked with Rolls Royces. Monaco is summer capital to Europe's kings, princes, dukes and other royalty. No need to say anything about Singapore and Hong Kong.

These top 4 countries are so small and have no natural resources to brag about but yet so rich. So is the Philippines poor because there are "too many" Filipinos and that we have no natural resources? Look at Ethiopia in Africa. If less people means more wealth to be shared, Ethiopia should be at the top of the list, instead of being one of the world's poorest.

Some people may argue that the top 4 are rich because they are small and easy to manage in spite their large population. So let's look at huge China with its 1.3 BILLION. It is the fastest growing economy in the world, predicted to overtake the U.S.A. very soon, and even now lends money to the U.S.A.!

Right within our own country, compare the population-to-wealth ratio of Sequijor, Cebu and Manila. Obviously, the more population, the better off the place.

Now guess what is our country's biggest dollar earner? It's our Overseas Foreign Workers - human life.

Clearly, life is God's GIFT and a nation's WEALTH!

So what is causing our poverty?

RIIIGHT! CORRUPTION! And the guilty ones hide their sins by blaming us the people for having too many children! What if by a miracle, our population is cut in half a year from now, will our country start getting richer if corruption is still there?

Hmmm...

Neigyl R. Noval 28 April 10, 10:55 PM

There are good things about this bill. But, there are also bad things in it. However, the
bad things prevails--that is the reason why I will present the bad things. You need to
have a copy of the RH Bill on sight for you to be guided accordingly.
Here are the irregularities of the RH Bill. Please read this carefully so that you may be
aware of this:

Section 2. First paragraph: "...respect for life in conformity with internationally
recognized human rights standards."
--> Why not in conformity with the Philippine standards? Why international? Do we need to follow other countries way of population control and reproductive health? Or are we undermined or enslaved by the first world countries? Philippines is known for its good and kind people like being hospitable, which other countries are seeking to learn. We have our own standards.

Section 2. Third paragraph: "...sustainable human development is better assured with a manageable population of healthy, educated and productive citizens."
--> If you love our country, or if you love other people, you will see that this
statement may promote euthanasia, divorce, etc. If you don't see it, seek more of its
meaning. It lies beneath the underneath. There will be an unequal distribution of wealth. Don't you see it?

Section 3. (a): "In the promotion of reproductive health, there should be no bias for
either modern of natural methods of family planning;"
--> Nothing in this bill that promotes the natural family planning.

Section 3. (e): "The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless."
--> Whoa, more money for the rich! If you look at this bill only on its presented
purpose and overlooking its effects, then we have a problem. You see? This promotes more wealth for the rich.

Section 3. (f): "Freedom of informed choice, which is..."
--> What is meant by informed choice? Does it mean everyone is free to watch x-rated films? How about the kids? How about a demonstration in class? Oh, it's our choice! We are free to be informed of it. Really?

Section 3. (g): "While the number and spacing of children are left to the sound judgement of parents and couples based on their personal conviction and religious beliefs..."
--> This statement is contradicted by Section 10.
Continued: "...such concerned parents and couples, INCLUDING UNMARRIED INDIVIDUALS, should be granted..."
--> This includes minors, and lovers not capable of being a parent. This promotes
pre-marital s**, non-marital s**, abortion, promiscuity, fornication, incest, etc.
Anyway, we are free to do it!
Continued: "...and should be guided by qualified State workers and professional private practitioners;"
--> Why are church leaders not included? Why do priests, bishops, nuns, etc not
involved?

Section 3. (j): "Development...that seek to uplift the quality of life of the people,
more particularly the poor, the needy and the marginalized;"
--> What assurance will the poor benefits? Please reflect on this. Is it really for the
quality of life?

Section 3. (l): "Respect for, PROTECTION and FULFILLMENT of REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH RIGHTS...not only the rights and welfare of adult individuals and couples BUT THOSE OF

ADOLESCENTS' AND CHILDREN'S AS WELL;..."
--> What reproductive health rights for the adolescents and children? Children are
included, whose mind are not yet mature enough! This may promote a dirty knowledge about this to the children. Parents will be responsible for this.

Section 3. (m): "...as abortion remains a crime and is punishable, the government shall ensure the women seeking care for POST-ABORTION COMPLICATIONS shall be treated...and compassionate manner."
--> This is again contradicted in Section 10. The bill doesn't only contradicts the Law
of Nature but violates the bill itself as well. Post-abortion complications in this
statement is only an admission that abortion really has complications.

Section 4. "Definition of Terms"
--> This may not be that heavy but redefining the common understanding of everyone does not need to be defined.

Section 4. (b): "...which enables couples and INDIVIDUALS to decide freely and
responsibly the NUMBER and SPACING OF THEIR CHILDREN..."
--> "Individuals." Does this mean that unmarried couples have the right to have
children? I'm using my common sense here. You should use yours also.

Section 4. (c): "Reproductive Health - refers to the state of physical, mental and social
well-being..."
--> Why spiritual and moral well-being not included here?
Continued: "This implies that PEOPLE are able to have a SATISFYING and SAFE s** 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."
--> Take note of the phrases that are in UPPERCASE. People to have satisfaction includes the youth, unmarried, homos**ual, etc. And, they may decide when and how often to do so? How about teenagers doing it every minute on the grassland? It is not against the law as long as no one saw them.

Section 4. (d): "Reproductive Health Rights - refers to the rights of INDIVIDUALS and
couples to DECIDE FREELY AND RESPONSIBLY the number, spacing and timing of their
children."
--> Again, the 'individual' word. Does this bill really promotes population control in
which I can decide freely and responsibly the number of children? Suppose I receive great pay, I can raise about 15 children. What a population control! This bill is too vague.

Section 4. (g): "10. Male involvement and participation in reproductive health."
--> Number 1 to 8 of this section may be considered okay. But on 10, how will I be
involved and participate with reproductive health? Isn't it obvious that this refers to
s**? Take note that on Section 4 (c) doesn't include the spiritual well-being.

Section 4. (h): "...relevant information on all matters relating to the reproductive
system its functions and processes and human s**uality..."
--> This may promote promiscuity in education.
Continued: "...developing NECESSARY SKILLS to be able to distinguish between facts and myths on s** and s**uality..."
--> How? Doing actual s**ual intercourse in class? What necessary skills? Does it mean the techniques, the positions and the likes? Does it mean the class will have a film showing on pornographic films?

Section 10: "Contraceptives as ESSENTIAL MEDICINES - hormonal contraceptives,
intrauterine devices, injectables and other allied reproductive health products...shall
be considered under the category of ESSENTIAL MEDICINES..."
--> This is the most interesting part. Contraceptives are now considered as ESSENTIAL MEDICINES--not only an ordinary medicine but an ESSENTIAL medicine. We can buy condoms the same way we buy Biogesic. Teenagers can buy those too at an affordable price. Better advertise it so that small children will learn too and if possible imitate it through experiments and practice for better reproductive health learning and to master the NECESSARY SKILLS as depicted in Section 4, h.

Section 12. (g): "Abstinence before marriage"
--> How can this be promoted when the unmarried are allowed to have s** and reproduction (See Section 4)?

Sections 22 - 27:
--> If this become a law, people like me who loves humanity will have no choice to obey it. One reason for peoples immorality may be from this law.

I know you are tired of reading my sharing. That only proves that this Bill has many
irregularities. Erase all those above mentioned parts on the Bill, and the Bill may
become better for the people and will be logical too.