Misconceptions on RH Law

We got some interesting comments on our column last week on the final declaration of the Supreme Court that the Reproductive Health (RH) Law is not unconstitutional and why its immediate implementation is really needed in our country.

Aleli Cruz says, “The RH Law promotes abortion and an utter disregard to human life.” She adds, ”What the poor needs is food and livelihood, not condoms and contraceptive pills.”

This seems to be  a still prevailing misconception that the law is pro-abortion and anti-life, which definitely it’s not. Abortion, even if with therapeutic indications, such as to save the mother’s life, is still deemed illegal in our country. The SC ruling made it clear that no abortifacients are allowed to be distributed or recommended.

The RH Law in fact is aimed at reducing the rate of unreported abortions in this country. We just can’t turn a blind eye to it and pretend the problem does not exist. One may try going to some places in the city and asking some street vendors there what would be a good herb or medicine “na pangparegla” (to promote menstruation). A good number of them would quickly recommend some herbs and a drug which has been pulled out of the market because it was abused as an abortifacient.

Responsible parenthood

The RH Law promotes responsible parenthood. Some would also call it as “responsible procreation.” Alistair MacDonald, European Union ambassador to the Philippines, put it succinctly when he described the RH Law as a “reproductive health legislation which will really help people make their own (intelligent) choices.”

The RH Law is a propoor legislation which can impact favorably the poverty problem of the country in the long term. Reports would tell us that the fertility rate of the richest population  quintile is 2 per couple, while the total fertility rate of the poorest quintile is 5.9. College-educated women have a fertility rate of 2.3, versus a rate of 4.5 in women who only finished elementary education. Experts would peg the ideal fertility rate at 2.4.

So the poor couples in our country may not realize  that they’re heavily compromised in all aspects because of their increased or prolific reproductivity which they could not provide for.

Because of their poverty, they’re compelled to allow their children to beg for alms and put themselves in peril’s way by selling sampaguitas in busy street corners. It’s not very infrequent when children aged 5 or 6, would raise their little hands to tap on your car window either to ask for loose change or sell you crudely stringed sampaguitas. You painfully debate in your mind whether or not to help these children, especially when you see the adults supervising them staying under a cool shade from a distance. You don’t know if they’re the real parents or just misguided entrepreneurs exploiting these children.

Marvin Macatol posted a comment that we should not “acquiesce to the practice of some teens in engaging in premarital sex (that does not seem to alarm you but which freaks me out).”

He adds: “Therefore the government should come in to help them avoid having children. In other words, the government should condone the immorality and prevent the natural outcome, to the extent of snuffing out the lives of the unseen and the defenseless, a reproductive health legislation which will really help people make their own choices and to provide for their families.

Queries

“Where does reproductive health and responsible parenthood come in? Is the child, no matter how unintended, a disease to be eliminated? Is responsible parenthood about not becoming a parent because one is not ready to become one, even while indulging in sexual acts that only married couples should be doing?”

We’ve already stressed that abortion in any form is not promoted and never condoned, and the RH Law should help reduce that. We also don’t want our teens to make foolish decisions by engaging in premarital sex—a misguided decision brought about by their lack of knowledge of the consequences of their foolish actions, something which they certainly will regret later on.

Many of them would wish they had known better about the “birds and the bees” stuff, so they could have been empowered to make more intelligent decisions and a firmer stand and say “No” because they’re well aware of the complications if they make a foolish decision.

(More next week)