RH bill advocates warn of weakened version

ADVOCATES OF the controversial Reproductive Health (RH) bill yesterday cautioned against the approval of a watered-down version endorsed by Malacañang during the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council meeting.

Bayan Muna Rep. Luzviminda C. Ilagan called on her colleagues “not to surrender provisions crucial to ensuring that a pro-poor, pro-women legislation is passed.”

She said the following provisions should be retained in House Bill (HB) 42444 or the proposed Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act:

• mobile health clinics that will ensure the delivery of health services to far-flung communities and barangays;

• improvement and upgrade of equipment available in public health care facilities, including barangay health centers to ensure that they are able to conduct basic reproductive health care procedures such as pap smears;

• pro-bono reproductive health care services for indigent women by making it mandatory for all health care workers to provide at least 48 hours annually of reproductive health services free of charge to indigent patients, especially pregnant adolescents; and

• paid half-day prenatal leaves for pregnant working employees for each month of the pregnancy period.

For her part, Elizabeth Angsioco, National Chairperson of the Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines said “our group will remain vigilant and work so that the final version that will be enacted does not lose the essence of what we have been fighting for 16 long years now.”

Principal RH bill proponent and House Minority Leader Edcel C. Lagman (1st district, Albay), however, rejected claims that the Palace amendments have weakened the RH bill.

He said the proposal to remove the provision on “ideal family size of two children” has been previously submitted voluntarily by RH authors to the committee on population and family relations as part of committee amendments.

Mr. Lagman said the deletion of the phrase “sexual orientation” in the provision against discrimination found in the “Declaration of Policy” is encompassing.

In addition, the proposal to move mandatory age-appropriate reproductive health and sexuality education to Grade 6 instead of Grade 5 is also acceptable, he said.

DEFENDING THE RH BILL

At the Senate, Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago yesterday delivered the remaining part of her cosponsorship speech on the bill, focusing on the constitutional, international law and socioeconomics.

She noted that the Constitution does not mention the term “reproductive health,” thus it does not directly or indirectly prohibit the RH bill “until the Supreme Court rules otherwise.”

The bill, she added, is in line with the 1979 United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, of which the Philippines is a signatory, that “provided that women have the right to decide freely and responsible on the number and spacing of… children and to have access to the information, education, and means to enable these rights.”

Abortion will remain a crime under the RH bill, Ms. Santiago said as an assurance to pro-life supporters.

“In fact, one important reason to pass the RH bill is that it will reduce abortions by providing full information to any mother on the entire menu of family planning options, making it unnecessary for the mother to resort to abortion,” she said.

Ms. Santiago further said establishing a position on the contentious issue of when life begins is “presumptuous for legislators to settle.”

She also defended the provision of sex education at an early age.

The Filipino youth do not discuss sex with their parents, thus it is “not realistic to argue that sex discussion should be limited to the parents and the home,” Ms. Santiago said. — N. M. Gonzales and R. R. Dinglasan, BUsinessworld