Federico Pascual: why blame the innocent for maternal deaths?

From Federico Pascual's column in the Philippine Star for September 11, 2011:

BIRTH CONTROL: My interest in the Reproductive Health debate has been waning, but I was pumped with adrenalin when no less than Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, with Sen. Vicente Sotto not far behind, stood to oppose passage of birth control measures.

Sponsors of RH bills lose points as they lose their cool when replying to searching questions on the abortive effects of birth control pills that the RH bill wants to propagate to unwitting users at great cost to taxpayers.

Maternal deaths and poverty cannot justify killing a helpless fertilized ovum (already a human being as recognized by the Constitution no less) desperately trying to cling for life in the womb’s lining made inhospitable by abortifacient pills.

If a mother could die in childbirth — a possibility even in normal cases — why blame in advance an innocent fetus and execute it?

Why blame the unborn (that did not ask to be produced in the first place) if his family is poor because of government failure to provide opportunities for jobs, education, health care and the decent amenities of normal life?

* * *

MALDISTRIBUTION: Some people drive by a squatter area and see grimy kids in the streets. They conclude that there are just too many of us and that still unborn Filipinos should not be allowed to come into the world.

The problem is actually mainly of population distribution. The population density shows that there is still ample room and resources for more people.

The problem is traceable to the government’s failure to create and spread opportunities and services so people do not flock to urban centers on the mistaken notion that only the cities can provide for life’s necessities.

Taking the line of least resistance, or because it does not know any better, the Aquino administration goes along with the multibillion-peso lobby and pushes the RH bills — in an immoral and criminal bid to kill unborn Filipinos fidgeting in their mothers’ wombs.

* * *

FALSE CLAIMS: Proponents of the RH bill claim that our population growth rate will increase exponentially without a birth control law.

This is simply not true. Data of the government itself show that the projected average annual population growth rate actually has been declining even without an RH law.

Based on the trend as analyzed in 2007 by the National Statistics Office, the growth rate was and is projected to be 1.81 percent from 2010 to 2015, 1.64 percent from 2015 to 2020, and 1.46 percent for 2020 to 2025.

The same NSO study debunks the other claim that the average Filipino household size is 10 or more and will increase without an RH law.

Data show that the average household size has been declining even without an RH law. The household size in 2007 was 4.8 persons, lower than the average household size of 5.0 persons in 2000. The National Capital Region had the lowest average household size of 4.4 persons.

The RH Bill and Poverty

From Federico Pascual's May 22, 2011 column entitled The world didn't end; RH debate continues:

Since birth control is a core RH issue and since the burgeoning population is being blamed for widespread poverty, one is wont to ask if our population growth rate of 1.9 percent is really the cause of poverty and its manifestations. 

But even if contraception and abortion result in every family having only two children, if the government is hardly moving to generate enough jobs, poverty will continue to hound the population. 

Even if children from Grade V to high school are given sex education and taught how to have sex without risk of pregnancy, there will only be heightened experimentation with sex and more teenage pregnancies if the youngsters are not taught values. 

Even if we succumb to the lobby and flood public clinics with condoms and contraceptives, the standard of public health will remain low if frontline clinics and hospitals catering to the poor are not stocked with basic and critical medicines.

Even if Filipinos become world-class experts in safe sex, that will not enhance their chances for employment and liberation from poverty if the government has neglected quality education and training for technical skills. 

Even if we are able to achieve zero population growth, poverty and its attendant ills will continue to stalk the land if the government does not move to disperse opportunities (for jobs, schooling, etc.) and stem migration to urban centers. 

* * * 

ABORTIVE PROCEDURES: The RH bill (HB 4244) speaks grandly in Section 2 (Declaration of Policy) of guaranteed “universal access to medically-safe, legal, affordable, effective and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, and supplies.” 

In Section 3 (Guiding Principles), it also says: “While this Act recognizes that abortion is illegal and punishable by law, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortion complications shall be treated and counseled in a humane, non-judgmental and compassionate manner.” 

But critics counter that the RH bill would pave the way for easier access to abortion.

Under Section 4 (Definition of Terms), the bill speaks of providing “Basic Emergency Obstetric Care” which refers to “lifesaving services for maternal complications being provided by a health facility or professional, which must include the following six signal functions: administration of parenteral antibiotics; administration of parenteral oxytocic drugs; administration of parenteral anticonvulsants for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia; manual removal of placenta; removal of retained products; and assisted vaginal delivery.” 

If a woman starts bleeding because of contraceptives, under the “compassionate” law, her case can be declared a failed abortion or miscarriage and she can then demand a full repertoire of emergency services that are in effect those for an abortion. 

* * * 

SIPAG APPROACH: The fight against poverty need not concentrate on just curbing population growth, but must also help the poor become more productive and fulfilled. 

In Las Piñas, there is the Villar Sipag Center rising in the sprawling grounds of a memorial park a stone’s throw away from Diego Cera Ave. where the world-renowned bamboo organ is. 

This project of the Villar Foundation (established in 1995) seeks to empower the poor and enhance their humanity. Set for completion next year, the center will house a library or resource center for poverty reduction, a reception area, a theater, and an exhibit hall. 

More Sipag Centers for the poor will be put up near churches that the foundation plans to build around the country after the completion of the Santuario de San Ezekiel Moreno church beside the Las Piñas center. 

* * * 

BANISH POVERTY: Sen. Manny Villar, the foundation’s founding chairman, explains, “Social enterprise experts say that poverty should be banished to a museum. I share their vision… And until that happens, we’ll work tirelessly to ease poverty wherever we find it in our country.”

The United Nations reports that close to 900 million of the world’s poor, who survive on less than $1 a day, live in Asia Pacific, and that nearly one in three Asians is poor. 

Over 40 million Filipinos are living on less than $2 a day. Although poverty incidence in the country has been reduced, the actual number of people still in the grip of poverty has increased over the last two decades. 

The country’s economic growth has not been robust enough to speed up poverty reduction, one of eight targets that the Philippines pledged to fulfill under the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals. 

* * * 

A BEEHIVE: Cynthia A. Villar, the foundation’s managing director, says the Villar Sipag Center will be a proactive beehive of activity. 

“We’ll promote industriousness or hard work to beat poverty,” the former Las Piñas congresswoman says. “We’ll guide, train, teach and empower womenfolk, the youth, jobless and even relatives of overseas Filipino workers to persevere in life.” 

Although being pursued quietly, the livelihood-generation and skills training initiatives of the foundation have caught the eye of the world. 

One of its programs, the Las Piñas-Zapote River System Rehabilitation program, recently bested those of 38 other countries for the United Nation’s “Water for Life” Best Practices Award. It won the UN award because it did not only rehabilitate the river, but also improved the living conditions of the poor along the banks.

RH Bill: Legitimizing Crime

Objection to RH bill based on conscience

POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr. (The Philippine Star) 

Updated May 17, 2011 12:00 AM 

IT’S NOT RELIGION: Yes, I am a Catholic, and proud of it. Although a sinner, I am happy that the Mother Church still embraces me as one of its children.

Regular readers of my Postscript must know by now that I am against the Reproductive Health bill (HB 4244) as it is now worded.

But my religion is not the main reason for my opposition. My objections spring largely from conscience — which tells me a grievous wrong is about to be inflicted on an unwary population by a half-baked bill being rushed through the kitchen.

Many of us feel compelled to speak up, because we see the imminence of being ensnared in an ill-conceived hodgepodge of a law that goes against not only the Constitution and the religious beliefs of the majority but also, in my case at least, of conscience.

* * *

REVIEW, REVISE: I am aware that many others are in favor of the enactment of an RH law. The best thing to do, I submit, is to pause and:

• For the House of Representatives to call back HB 4244 (The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011) for further study, debate and possible amendment.

• For the Senate to call a public hearing on SB 2378 (The Reproductive Health Act), with special attention on state-sponsored methods of birth control and artificial contraceptives with abortifacient effects.

• Or better, defer action on the two bills since there is no urgency anyway. Many of the things the bills seek to do are already being done (albeit sometimes illegally).

* * *

LEGITIMIZING CRIME: The passage of HB 4244 as now worded — and for which President Noynoy Aquino has announced support — will legitimize many of the crimes being committed under the aegis of the state using taxpayers’ money.

One such offense is the violation of the constitutional mandate under Section 12 of Article II which says, “It (the state) shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.”

Government personnel commit the crime by, among other means, the wanton distribution and use of artificial contraceptives with abortifacient effects, thereby killing the unborn human being by preventing its implantation in the womb for normal nourishment and growth.

The Congress and the President seek to legitimize that massacre of the unborn — with taxpayers footing the bloody bill.

President Aquino now blames population growth for the poverty around us while neglecting other means to mitigating the problem. Has he forgotten his campaign battlecry “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap!”?

* * *

DISCRIMINATION: It is unfortunate that Catholics who stand up to oppose the RH bills as now worded are derided and their religious beliefs ridiculed.

How come not a whimper is heard when pastors of another religious sect instruct their members to vote for candidates who — in exchange for the members’ votes — had pledged support for the sect’s advocacies and appointees to key government posts?

How come another set of laws, such as in the contracting of multiple marriages, is applied when it involves members of another religion with jihadist tendencies? Why are they entitled to have their own special laws, and in effect their own republic within our republic?

But when we Catholics and our bishops object to what we think would be a grievously faulty law, we are ridiculed and slapped with the principle of separation of the Church and the State (which does not apply)?

* * *

ABORTIFACIENT: My Postscript last Sunday called attention to Section 12, Article II, of the Constitution declaring it an obligation of the state to protect “the life of the unborn from conception.”

That piece laid out, clearly I think, that:

1. Conception refers to the moment of fertilization, or when the sperm and the ovum unite and form a distinct and individual human being.

2. Upon conception, that human being starts enjoying rights even while still in the mother’s body, including the right to life and state protection, guaranteed by no less than the Constitution.

3. Snuffing out that human life by deliberate artificial means would be killing it, or aborting it, a criminal act under existing laws.

4. Many of the artificial birth control methods and contraceptives sought to be purchased with public funds and distributed and used by the government have proven abortifacient affects that induce abortion, which is a crime.

The above train of reasoning is anchored on the premise that human life begins at conception.

* * *

CONCEPTION: On that basic question of when human life actually begins, reader Jomel Fuentes contributed this information:

The US Senate called 57 international experts, some of them from Harvard Medical School and Mayo Clinic, including Dr. Jerome Lejeune, the father of modern genetics, to answer the question of when human life actually begins.

US Senate Report 1981 states that there is “overwhelming agreement” that human life begins at fertilization, when the sperm penetrates the egg, in countless medical, biological and scientific writings. Among those cited were:

Dr. Lejeune: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place, a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion . . . it is plain experimental evidence.”

Hymie Gordon, MD, FRCP, chairman of Medical Genetics, Mayo Clinic: “By all criteria of modern molecular biolog . . . as soon as he has been conceived, a man is a man.”

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th edition, Keith L. Moore, PhD: “Human development begins at fertilization.”

These statements and findings do not come from people with any advocacy, but come from scientific research and experiments.

* * *

FOLLOWUP: Access past POSTSCRIPTs at www.manila mail.com. Like POSTSCRIPT on www.facebook.com/manilamail. Or follow @FDPascual on Twitter. E-mail feedback to mailto:fdp333@yahoo.com

The RH Bill: the easy and lazy path

Key RH issue: When does human life begin?

POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr. (The Philippine Star) 

Updated May 15, 2011 12:00 AM 

WHAT TO DO: Judging from the ferocity of the debate raging over the Reproductive Health bills (plural), it is becoming clearer that the more prudent steps to take are:

1. For President Noynoy Aquino to prevent the deeper division of the country by not openly endorsing the RH measures and to just leave lawmaking to the legislature.

2. For the Congress to call back the bills for closer study, clarify the vague provisions, and amend the more contentious parts. There is no urgency to rush the measures before the arrival of the Three Kings.

3. For the Congress to publish the text of the RH bills. Many of those drawn into the debate have not even read the text of SB 2378 and HB 4244.

* * *

INQUIRY SOUGHT: The Senate should heed a citizens’ petition for it to look deeper into SB 2378 (The Reproductive Health Act) and HB 4244 (The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011).

Citizens Ma. Andrea S. Mandigo, Eric B. Manalang, and Norman V. Cabrera have asked for an inquiry on (1) the abortifacient action of family planning methods and contraceptives, and (2) the side effects on women who use them.

The Petitioners cited discussions of the 1987 Constitutional Commission describing the moment of “conception” as synonymous to fertilization — when the ovum is fertilized by the sperm.

Among the questions in the current debate is whether human life begins at fertilization (conception), or implantation of the fertilized egg in the womb, or some days/weeks after implantation.

* * *

WHEN LIFE BEGINS: The Constitution (Section 12, Article II) says: “The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception.”

The discussion in the 1987 Constitutional Commission indicates a consensus that conception is synonymous to fertilization, and is therefore the moment “when human life begins.”

Still, it will be best for the RH law to define that moment as clearly as possible. There should not be any dark area in or around this pivotal point.

If human life begins upon conception or fertilization, the killing of the unborn human being, such as by preventing its implantation in the womb, is legally and morally wrong.

More so if the unborn child already developing in the womb is destroyed deliberately, as in abortion.

* * *

SIDE EFFECTS: Against this background and other medical facts, the artificial methods of “contraception” sought to be promoted under RH 4244 bill using taxpayers’ money are put in question.

The petitioners presented documented medical findings of serious side effects associated with the use of certain contraceptives, such as breast cancer, cervical cancer, hardening of the arteries, heart disease/stroke, among other problems.

The Department of Health should have data on this. It cannot feign ignorance of the negative side effects. And if it is aware of them, how can it justify its endorsement of artificial contraceptives?

* * *

ABORTIFACIENT: Many readers, some of them doctors, most of them women (some of whom admitted having used some of the contraceptives being promoted), said:

• Most, if not all, oral and injectable contraceptives are abortifacient (inducing abortion) or have abortifacient properties. During the times when they do not prevent ovulation, their abortifacient properties take effect.

• Oral and injectable contraceptives thin out the inner lining of the uterus. This makes the uterus unable to support a fertilized egg — who is already a human being enjoying protection under the Constitution.

The fertilized egg is prevented from implanting on the interior lining of the uterus, and is therefore killed through lack of nutrition. This is abortion, which is a crime.

Even “Depo Provera” or other similar substances, which are injected every three months, have the same abortifacient properties.

• There are also many pills, such as mifepristone (also known as RU 486), which are outright abortifacient. They do not even try to prevent conception. They can kill even a two-month-old child in the womb.

* * *

EASY, LAZY PATH: These pills with abortifacient effects are widely distributed by the government!

The RH bills being supported by President Aquino SEEK TO GIVE LEGAL BASIS for this mass killing of unborn Filipinos.

It seems the President is taking this easy and lazy — not necessarily straight (tuwid) — path, because his administration is unable to do its job of upgrading food production, education, public health and livelihood.

(The rest of the column is about an electoral controversy in Lucena)

Our golden asset: our people

Turn big population from liability to asset

POSTSCRIPT By Federico D. Pascual Jr. (The Philippine Star) 

Updated March 29, 2011 12:00 AM 

CLARK FIELD (PLDT/WeRoam) — It is sad, and somewhat disturbing, that every time our high school class (Pillars ’56, Holy Angel University) gets together, the number that shows up gets smaller. And the women seem to be outliving, and outtalking, us men, but that is all right.

As of press time, only 281 of our 346 classmates are still up and about in varying states of health. Time and the physical ravages of man’s mortality are taking their toll all around.

The age issue prods me to take another look at our national population that seems to have been left to run wild like weeds in the backyard.

* * *

WE’RE ALMOST 101 M: The CIA World Factbook has it that the Philippine population would pass the 101-million mark by July, making us the 12th largest national population — accounting for 1.36 percent of the estimated 6.9 billion warm bodies crammed into this troubled world.

Filipinos who are 0-14 years of age make up 34.6 percent, and those 15-64 years of age are a whopping 61.1 percent! The median age is 22.9 years.

The 15-64-year-old bulge in the profile shows that our population is dominantly young.

Our birth rate is 25.34 per 1,000 population, while the death rate is just a fifth of that, or 5.02 per 1,000 population. Net migration rate is a negative (-)1.29 migrants per 1,000 population.

One report has said that four Filipinos are born every minute. Our population growth rate is 1.903 percent. This is an improvement over the two-plus percent of more than a decade ago, but it remains a concern of demographers and state planners.

* * *

BIRTH CONTROL: Holding aloft the euphemism “reproductive health,” population control advocates led by no less than bachelor President Noynoy Aquino are pushing a controversial bill that would cut the population growth rate by abortifacient means, if necessary.

Malacañang’s obsession with a wide-ranging “reproductive health” law appears to follow the line of least resistance in striking a golden balance between population and resources.

The Aquino administration has failed to carry out an integrated program for good education, food production, job-generation and services-enhancement. So, it is taking the lazy shortcut of simply slowing down population growth to reduce pressure on resources.

The usual donors from the rich West that feel threatened by the poor countries’ growth are offering to help control the population, but they want this done under the umbrella of an RH law.

Malacañang may want to look at a big, dominantly young population not as a problem, but more as an asset — after looking after the youths’ education, livelihood requirements and positive orientation.

* * *

SHORTHANDED: A Filipino traveling in Europe and other places in the developed world notices their aging population. Old folk dominate the human parade in the streets, the parks, in malls, everywhere. A young fresh face is always a delight to see in the dreary setting.

Many countries that have stepped too hard on the brakes to their population growth are now in near-panic as they scout around for younger hands to manage their industries and businesses.

Unlike in the Philippines where an extended family network is alive, they are hard put to find caregivers for the old folk waiting for their passage in hospices and old-age institutions.

Some countries, Canada and Australia for instance, have updated their immigration policies to attract foreign young professionals and skilled workers.

This makes sense since they cannot wait till their own youths, who are not aplenty in the first place, are able to complete their studies and gain experience.

* * *

CHINA BURDEN: Suddenly more countries are feeling the urgency of having educated and technically prepared youths to take over industries and businesses that must grow in step with national requirements.

Some shriveled members of the First World shivering through the winter of an aged and aging population want to advance or prolong the spring of their younger population.

China, in a hurry to leap forward and catch up on the industrialized West, cannot be simply supplying cheap labor (which is increasingly becoming costly too) without also producing the accompanying technical and managerial personnel.

The mainland is starting to feel the drawback of decades of a policy limiting families to one child, its generations-old bias against female babies, and the stunting effects of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) that pulled out the youth from schools and threw them rampaging in the streets.

* * *

GOLDEN ASSET: Breathing down its neck is India, which is bursting with a 1.1-billion population (versus the 1.3 billion of China) despite its state-sponsored abortion clinics where fetuses are vacuumed out of the wombs of women.

Despite the grinding poverty in many places, India is lucky to have a fine educational system turning out a large number of graduates with the technical savvy in demand in the highly competitive information-communication world.

Both China and India, accounting for a third of the world’s inhabitants, could turn their huge population, sometimes regarded as a liability, into a golden asset by looking after their education and health.

Their expanding population could also be the core of a military force needed to add muscle to their economic projection.

There is a lesson here for similarly populous Philippines.

***

RH law not needed, if Noy would do his job

The following is by no means a "Catholic essay" on the RH bill. However, it does contain important points that are of value in the fight against this bill.


RH law not needed, if Noy would do his job
Federico D. Pascual Jr.
(First Published in the Philippine Star issue of October 07, 2010)

NOT NEEDED: For the record, I am for personal and public health in general, for Reproductive Health in particular.

But I am alarmed by the over-reaching scope of the proposed RH bill(s), and by the attempt to use the debate to cover up the mismanagement of our rich human and natural resources.

The RH bill that I have seen aims to pluck the poor and ignorant masses from the muck of overpopulation by imposing a law cutting down the number of their children without due regard for their private sentiments and religious beliefs.

Actually, despite our being dominantly Catholic, we routinely ignore Church teachings on contraception and abortion and slyly resort to the birth control method of our choice.

We are already doing this without an intrusive and coercive RH law hanging over our heads.

* * *

OVERLAPPING LAW: What do proponents of the RH bill(s) really want?

Stripped of their generalized slogans proclaiming family planning, responsible parenthood, informed choice, gender equality, infant and child care, and fighting violence against women, what do they specifically want?

They want planning of family size and spacing of pregnancies? Many couples are already doing that -- even without an intrusive RH law.

They want the Pill, injectible contraceptives, condoms, and other devices preventing or terminating unwanted pregnancy? All these physical and chemical interventions are already available without an RH law. Ask around.

They want gender equality? That is already promoted by existing laws. And you can be sure the women rights crusaders are never asleep.

They want more food, dwellings, better education for their children? They should pressure government officials, from Malacañang down, to do their sworn duties and not foist the lack of an RH law as an excuse.

They want emancipation from poverty? They should tell Malacañang to carry out measures to reduce poverty -- such as improved revenue collection, wise use of resources, job-generation and no-nonsense prosecution of grafters. This can be done without an RH law.

They want to tell parents to limit to two the number of their children? There are better ways -- without having to coerce parents through an RH law -- of convincing and helping couples limit the size of their brood.

They want abortion on demand? Sorry, but they will have to contend with the Constitutional mandate for the protection of the unborn, not to mention the penal laws on the taking of human life. An RH law cannot overturn the basic Charter.

* * *

MISMANAGEMENT: The absence of an RH law (superimposed on laws already covering the subtopics of reproductive health) is being used to explain away the failure of government to address decades-old problems identified with poverty.

Our problem in the Philippines is not so much population growth as it is the mismanagement of our God-given human and natural resources. President Aquino has pinpointed one area -- corruption that saps resources and the will to excel.

Overpopulation is not the cause of corruption. Rather, it is corruption that creates myriad problems that impact on the growing population.

The quality of the population is a decisive factor in building a strong and progressive nation. Properly managed, the population is an asset. Mismanaged, it is a heavy burden.

A number of developed countries whose population’s median age has become alarmingly high are now easing the brakes on population control and encouraging couples to produce more babies.

Some countries that cannot wait for these babies to grow into productive members of the community woo selected foreigners who are professionals or skilled workers. Many qualified Filipinos take advantage of this situation.

* * *

HATE-OBJECTS: It is sad that the strategy stable of President Aquino is again using politics of hate not only to gain acceptance of the RH idea but also to display the President as a hero battling opponents of the bill, especially the Catholic Church.

In the same manner that they put up Gloria Arroyo as a hate-object to win the last elections, they seem to be again drawing the same divisive line of promoting a battle royale with the Church on the issue of birth control.

They probably figured that they could win this big fight also. The President should instruct his boys to discuss the issues purely on the merits instead of again fomenting rifts that may not easily heal.

* * *

ABORTIFACIENT: Reader Noel Manalo called our attention to the fact that all contraceptives are abortifacient (causing abortion). He explained in an email:

“The early contraceptives, such as Enovid back in 1957, did prevent ovulation, and therefore conception -- majority of the time. But such “hormonal” contraceptives -- so called because they used hormones such as estrogen and synthetic hormones like progestin -- had a difficult problem.

“They caused internal bleeding and cancer of the uterus. This is the main reason why manufacturers and doctors turned to outright abortifacients (“pampalaglag”).

“The use of abortifacients looks ‘clean.’ The one they abort is the fertilized egg -- a human being initially one cell in size, too tiny to see, but a human person nonetheless. Abortifacients murder a helpless, unborn person with the same human worth and dignity as all of us.

“There are still hormonal contraceptives being produced, but they retain the same problems of hormonal contraceptives -- intra-uterine bleeding and cancer of the uterus.

“If you take hormonal contraceptives once or a few times, maybe you won’t bleed or get cancer. But for these things to work, you have to take them constantly, day after day, month after month, year after year -- until menopause.

“Otherwise, if you miss a dose, you could get pregnant, and all your plans are ruined. This is how people become slaves to contraceptives and abortifacients.”