The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10354), informally known as the Reproductive Health Law, is a law in the Philippines which guarantees universal access to methods of contraception, fertility control, sexual education, and maternal care.
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 (BCPs) and IUDs, as the government continues to disseminate information on their use through all health care centers The advantage of Reproductive Health Bill in the Philippines is that hopes to provide midwives for skilled attendance to childbirth and emergency obstetric care, even in geographically isolated and depressed areas.
Thus, the one of the causes of maternal mortality, that arising from unattended births, will be addressed. The disadvantage of the Reproductive Health Bill in the Philippines is the undue focus being given to reproductive health and population and development, when many more urgent and important health problems need to be addressed in the country, those that cause a significant number of deaths across the country such as cardiovascular diseases and infections.
Financial resources allotted by foreign donors to assist the Philippine government programs could actually be better spent towards pursuing health programs targeting communicable diseases than purchasing artificial contraceptives. The Reproductive Health Bill is controversial, as it is being opposed by concerned citizens, especially the pro-life, pro-family and pro-God groups, regardless of creed or religion.
The Roman Catholic Church expresses its opposition against the bill on many counts, most especially the procurement and distribution of family planning supplies for the whole country, when the available evidence from peer reviewed medical journals supports the hypothesis that when ovulation and fertilization occur in women taking oral contraceptives (OCs) or using intrauterine devices (IUD), post-fertilization effects are operative on occasion to prevent clinically recognized pregnancy. Hormonal contraceptives and/or IUDs directly affect the ndometrium. These effects have been presumed to render the endometrium relatively inhospitable to implantation or to the maintenance of the pre-embryo or embryo prior to clinically recognized pregnancy. These make pills and IUDS abortifacient. Pro-life groups, and many professionals in the medical and nursing fields, believe that physicians and policy makers should understand and respect the beliefs of patients who consider human life to be present and valuable from the moment of fertilization.
Patients should be made fully aware of this information so that they can consent to or refuse the use of artificial contraceptives. However, the position of the Catholic Church and the pro-life groups does not mean that they espouse the attitude of “natalism” at all costs, as if the “number” of children, in itself, were the unmistakable sign of authentic Christian matrimonial life. The sexual act, properly exercised within marriage only, is ordained primarily to the propagation of life.
If there are reasonable motives for spacing births, such as serious medical conditions in the mother, or extreme poverty, then the Catholic Church teaches that married couples may take advantage of the natural cycles of the reproductive system and use their marriage precisely those times that are infertile (natural family planning). Other aspects of the bill being contested by concerned citizens include the classification of family planning supplies as essential medicines when their safety/toxicity profile and legal permissibility are questionable.
Very pertinent to the debate about reproduction rights is the right to life. The Philippine Constitution says that the State “shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. If artificial contraceptives are medically proven to induce abortion as one of their mechanisms of action, then procurement and distribution of such family planning supplies are unconstitutional and illegal. As a student, how would you describe RH Bill? How would it affect people’s manner? What are really the advantages and disadvantages of the Reproductive Health Bill?
Much has been written about the Reproductive Health bill and much has been argued for and against it, however, not all has been said The statement that reproductive health means “free sex, use of contraceptives, abortion if contraception fails…” is not found anywhere on that bill. Use of contraceptives, yes, but free sex and abortion if contraception fails?! If you have read the bill, that’s definitely putting words into the authors’ mouth. Contraception as defined “poison in the wound, kill babies inside the womb. In medical lingo, contraception is prevention of pregnancy so basically, you don’t kill any babies because in the 1st place, there aren’t any babies to kill. “Condoms increases sexual activity, increases incidence of AIDS and other STDs. ” First of all, let me say that condoms are not the enemy here. Time brings change and one of those changes is a more liberated view on sexuality and sexual practices. Condoms are not for prevention of sex because sex is, to put it simply, impossible to prevent the argument that people are our greatest asset so why are we preventing birth?
The bill doesn’t force couples to only have 2 children; rather, they provide them w/ an effective choice of being responsible parents by not having too many kids. Isn’t that the same w/ natural family planning? My point is this: natural family planning has been practiced since time began and it has never been effective. We have to admit that sex is probably one of the strongest forces on earth and is in us—and it is almost always impossible to control.
In the advent of poverty, price increases, STDs, AIDs and other crisis, we need to help our people, especially those on the lower end of the financial ladder, take care of their family by not having too many children too soon too fast and we can’t do that with the natural method because that method has failed over and over and over again. The reproductive health bill not only gives us a choice of which contraception is best for us—it prevents couples from having too many children whom they can’t feed, too many children whom they will leave to die in malnutrition, too many children who will not have an education.
God may have told us to procreate but I’m sure he did not mean this way. Contraception is not a sin but having 10 kids and not being able to feed them and take care of them is more than just a sin—its violation of human rights and a child’s right. And it’s hard for me to see many pity children on streets. All we should do is to have the will to do our responsibility as educated people. Cybercrime – crime committed using a computer and the internet to steal a person’s identity or sell contraband or stalk victims or disrupt…
