Some people I know have been spreading email that is intended for the Philippine Congress. It is about the campaign to oppose the passage of the Philippine Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043). I read through the seven points cited in the document and then went through the sections and paragraphs of the bill that these “concerned citizens” think are detrimental to the Filipino people.

The email spam says:

We strongly oppose the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill (HB5043) for the following reasons:

1. AS EMPLOYERS, we do not want to be compelled to provide free reproductive health care services, supplies, devices and surgical procedures (including vasectomy and ligation) to our employees, and be subjected to both imprisonment and/or fines, for every time that we fail to comply. (Section 17 states that employers shall provide free delivery of reproductive health care services, supplies and devices to all workers more particularly women workers. – Definition of Reproductive Health and Rights Section 4, paragraph g, Section 21, Paragraph c and Section 22 on Penalties).

There is nothing wrong with this. Employers are just afraid to spend more money for their women or men workers! Reproductive health services are essential to the general health and human development of the employees. Having said that, employers must also promote the need for appropriate guidance and training, if necessary, in utilizing these services. Maybe, provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and experiences within the organization. Maybe, form a group to strengthen employees’ education on population, reproductive health and gender issues.

2. AS HEALTH CARE SERVICE PROVIDERS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or a fine, if we fail to provide reproductive health care services such as giving information on family planning methods (outside the natural family planning methods) and providing services like ligation and vasectomy, regardless of the patient’s civil status, gender, religion or age (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, Paragraphs 1 to 5 and Section 22 on Penalties)

If there is a good reason not to provide services, health care providers can do that. The bill states: “Provided, That all conscientious objections of health care service providers based on religious grounds shall be respected: Provided, further, That the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the patient is not in an emergency or serious case as defined in RA 8344 penalizing the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases.”

3. AS SPOUSES, we do not agree that our husband or wife can undergo a ligation or vasectomy without our consent or knowledge (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Letter a, paragraph 2)

If two people love each other, why would a wife or husband undergo a ligation or vasectomy without the consent of the other, in the first place? I also believe reproductive health is a human right — that each one has the right to reproductive health information and services and to impartiality in reproductive decision-making and issues of sexual health.

4. AS PARENTS, we do not agree that children from age 10 to 17 should be taught their sexual rights and the means to have a satisfying and “safe” sex life as part of their school curriculum. (Section 12 on Reproductive Health Educaiton and Section 4 Definition of Family Planning and Productive Health, Paragraphs b, c and d)

Why not? Like parents, schools are the next most capable entity to teach sexual rights to kids. Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child affirms that children have the right to attain the highest standards of health and to health care, including family planning education and services… Parents and teachers must help educate the young minds before these teens discharge their rights and responsibilities of adulthood.

5. AS CITIZENS, we do not want to be subjected to imprisonment and/or pay a fine, for expressing an opinion against any provision of this law, if such expression of opinion is interpreted as constituting “malicious disinformation” (Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f and Section 22 on Penalties)

Is there Section 21 on Prohibited Acts, Paragraph f? Wrong citation and people are even signing up for this campaign without reading the bill! Anyway, I believe that everyone must try to understand the law — information sharing and collaboration are necessary to send the right message across. Authorities must ensure that the right approaches to reproductive health care are developed and implemented.

6. We also oppose other provisions such as losing our paternal authority over a minor/child who was raped and found pregnant (Section 21, a, no. 3)

Why need paternal authority when parents or relatives were usually the ones abusing the child? Part of the bill that was missing in this argument but very important “…abused condition is certified by the proper official or personnel of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD)…” In 2003, the UN committee that monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, affirmed: “States Parties should provide adolescents with access to sexual and reproductive information, including on family planning and contraceptives, the dangers of early pregnancy, the prevention of HIV/AIDS and prevention and treatment of STIs. States Parties should ensure access to appropriate information regardless of marital status, and prior consent from parents or guardians.”

7. We also do not agree to the provision which reclassifies contraceptives as essential medicines (Section 10) and appropriating limited government funds to reproductive services instead of basic services (Section 23)

Why disagree? Did someone ever think that maybe the meaning of ‘medicine’ is different in this bill? What other names will you suggest instead? The names or terms should never be an issue here in the first place, shouldn’t they?

Thus, we urge you to immediately stop deliberations on the bill and stop wasting taxpayers money.

Ridiculous arguments and without substance! These people should think of the increasing population in the country. This is one of the ways to curb massive population growth. Why could we not just help provide the necessary information and services to people deficient of it and help them exercise this right in the most effective manner? Why could we not just help the government in assuring the highest level of quality of health care provided?

I don’t think the Philippine Reproductive Health Bill is an evil that will tear Christians apart. We should see the full spectrum of the information and services it can offer before we cast the stone and throw the bill to the bin.

If you want to sign and join the campaign to oppose the passing of the bill, please read the full text of House Bill No. 5043 first. Maybe after that, you will understand better what you are actually signing for.