An open letter to the CBCP delivered by more than a thousand women and their supporters had this simple message: “Eleven women die every day from pregnancy and childbirth, a continuing tragedy that can be ended by the RH bill you are blocking.” To stress the point that bishops are partly responsible for these deaths, women carried streamers with this question: “Do bishops care?”
A day or two later, CBCP News published a report with a short reply and disturbing indications that the CBCP representative did not even care to read the bill.
Let us start with the most obvious error. CBCP secretary general Msgr. Juanito Figura called for more health facilities and personnel to show that they are concerned about Filipino women, evidently unaware that the RH bill has very detailed provisions on these matters.
From the past Congress to the current one, versions of the RH bill had called for the hiring of fulltime skilled birth attendants (SBA) to achieve a ratio of 1 SBA to 150 deliveries. SBAs are midwives, doctors or nurses “educated and trained in the skills needed to manage normal (uncomplicated) pregnancies, childbirth and the immediate postnatal period, and in the identification, management and referral of complications in women and newborns.” The ratio of 1 to 150 is based on the experience of successful countries like Malaysia, where the maternal mortality ratio[1] has been reduced to 50 and below since 1985, compared to the Philippines’ 162 in 2006.
Previous and current versions of the RH bill had also called for the setting up or upgrading of hospitals and other health facilities to provide emergency obstetric care (EmOC). Six lifesaving measures must be present for a facility to qualify as capable of basic EmOC; eight in a hospital tagged as comprehensive. Among these lifesaving measures are the administration of parenteral[2] antibiotics, blood transfusion and delivery by cesarean section. The RH bill also targeted a ratio of 1 comprehensive plus 4 basic facilities for every 500,000 people to ensure sufficient and well-distributed services. All of these steps come from lessons in other countries and recommendations by the World Health Organization and other international agencies.
Next, Msgr. Figura cited “social inequities” as among the reasons for the deaths and sufferings of Filipino women, especially the poor, and claimed that the RH bill “can even worsen the already real and present problems.”
Social inequities abound in health care, including reproductive health. Long queues; women due for delivery sent away to prioritize those already in active labor; two or more mothers sharing a bed—all these are common scenes in obstetric wards of public hospitals. The bishops must truly be out of touch with the lives of poor people to claim that RH measures will worsen social inequities.
In the 2008 National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS), comparisons between the poorest and the richest quintile (20%) of women illustrate the serious inequities in reproductive health:
- 26% of the poorest women have been managed in childbirth by a SBA, compared to 94% of the richest;
- 13% of the poorest women have given birth in a health facility, compared to 84% of the richest;[3]
- 1% of the poorest women have delivered via cesarean section, compared to 28% of the richest.[4]
The RH bill seeks to remedy inequities through additional funds, facilities and personnel for the public health sector frequented by poor women. If these are not done, 11 women will continue to die every day from maternal complications. More often than not, these are women who can never set foot inside the air-conditioned single rooms of private hospitals.
Next, Msgr. Figura explained that among the reasons why bishops reject the RH bill is “its overall trajectory towards population control.” Wrong again. Freedom of choice and reproductive rights are among the fundamental principles in the RH bills. Reproductive rights are human rights, and in essence guarantee the rights of couples, individuals and women to “decide freely and responsibly whether or not to have children; to determine the number, spacing and timing of their children; [and] to make decisions concerning reproduction free of discrimination, coercion and violence.” To make these principles enforceable, the RH bill prohibits public officials from forcing people to use or not use family planning services.
Surveys indicate that most women and couples want to have smaller families. Institutions and groups that wish to overturn this social trend through clandestine deals, political pressures, surprise ordinances and other undemocratic means are the ones engaged in population control.
Finally, Msgr. Figura said that bishops reject the RH bill because it intends to “use public funds to subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services.” The 2008 NDHS shows that among married women, 54% do not want to have any more children, and 19% want to delay the next birth by two or more years. If these women can avoid pregnancy, then they would not be in any danger of maternal death. If the government will help them use a method of their choice—whether artificial or natural family planning—then taxes would have been used to prevent maternal complications and deaths.
In a pluralistic and secular society, contraception and sterilization are not self-evidently objectionable. The CBCP’s short reply noticeably dropped any mention of Humanae Vitae or the natural moral law that usually underpin its opposition to contraception and sterilization. This is a good sign. Now if they would just read the bill.
________________
Signed letters sent to the bishops:
Bukas na Liham sa CBCP Hinggil sa RH
An Open Letter to the CBCP Regarding RH
Notes:
[1] Maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, a standard measure that represents the risk of dying once pregnant
[2] Intravenous or intramuscular
[3] The recommended level is not less than 15% should give birth in an EmOC-capable health facility, based on the estimate that at least 15% of all pregnancies lead to serious maternal complications that need emergency obstetric care.
[4] The recommended level is 5-15%. Rates below 5% indicate that women who need cesarean section delivery to survive are not getting it. Rate above 15% suggest an overuse of elective cesarean operations.
Yes Bishops care! read this… http://catholicposition.blogspot.com/2011/03/bish…
@ajo
Maternal care is only part of the solution ajo, and while it is covered, most women would rather not get into an unwanted pregnancy in the first place. It would be like saying that we should only treat the disease itself, rather than create measures to prevent it.
There it is, all laid out in the open by Arm, good work dude. This article helps dispel the common myths and misunderstandings about the RH bill.
The bill does not force mothers to limit their the number of kids they want to have, nor does it force couples to use contraception if they don't feel it necessary, it teaches people how to have kids the safe and responsible way, and most importantly – it aims to reduce the maternal mortality rate.
Now if our bishops still feel that the lives of sperm cells are worth more than the lives of the 11 mothers who die due to birth complications daily, then the CBCP has really gotten its priorities mixed up.
Thanks Wes. Myths from hardcore opposers who do not even bother to read first is irresponsible. The RH bill text is just 80% of Humanae Vitae–I checked 🙂 Otherwise we should ask next: Do bishops read?
[Now if our bishops still feel that the lives of sperm cells are worth more than the lives of the 11 mothers who die due to birth complications daily, then the CBCP has really gotten its priorities mixed up. ]
You gotta understand their viewpoint my friend. For them, every fetus that does not reach full development is a murder. Every fertilized egg that dies before reaching the womb is slaughter, the millions of sperm that expire genocide. It's horrific for them to think about – a veritable holocaust happening in every woman's vagina, and nobody cares!
In the face of such sobering facts, these people believe only one thing can be done to save these unfortunate souls: War
http://www.theonion.com/articles/us-out-of-my-ute…
Eto ang nakalagay sa biblia.. "God blessed them. God said to them, "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." This is true, noong una kakaunti ang tao kaya sabi ng Diyos kay Adan at Eba magpakarami kayo ngunit pagmarami na tao sabi niya ''SUBDUE IT'' (pigilan).. Walang sinabi na natural method lang ang gamitin. Ito ang aral ng DIyos, how dare them dagdagan ang aral na ito? Ang nasa biblia ay huwag babawasan o dadagdagan ang nakalagay sa kasulatan.
Iam was raised from a devoted catholic family i served the church for some time in my life. The time that i got pregnant and got married inisp ko agad kung anu ang mga dapat after lalo na pag anjan na ang anak ko, di kelangang mag tanga tangahan sa mga consequences pag nabuntis ako ulit and so i had to talk to my husband and make a concrete plan sa maging pamilya namin para di kami mahirapan pag dating ng future. After kung manganak i know na what to do so nagpalagay ako ng IUD coz yun ang nakikita kung hiyang sa akin, so ibig sabhin ba nito kinokundena ako ng dyos? well i dont think so, kasi para sa akin bilang isang babae me karapatan akong alagaan ang health ko to the fullest and live an active sex life at the same time. Sa mga taga simbahan, sino ba kayo to judge me and at sa ibang mga babae na pabor sa RH BILL? Dyos ba kayo sa inyo ba kami haharap pag namatay kami? HOW DARE YOU palibhasa di nyo kasi nasubukan magka anak at magka asawa at magkapamilya at kumayod ng kumayod para magtrabaho. Napakadamot nyo at mga hipokrito kayo. Nagkaron pa tayo ng demokrasya kung ipagdadamot samin ang aming kalayaang mamili, para kayong mga kumunista kung magpatupad ng rules. Kung ayaw nyo ipatupad ang RH BILL e di gumawa kayo ng mga eskwelahan na libre hangang kolehiyo para sa mga pamilyang me mga anak na 5 o hangang isang dosena ka tao, tapos pakainin nyo ang mga pamilyang yan na libre at bigyan nyo narin ng libreng livelihood ang mga magulang..magpakitang gilas kayo kung talagang nagmamalasakit kayo sa utos ng dyos.. pero alam ko di nyo kayang gawin yan, sarap kasi ng mga buhay nyo e, naka aircon ang mga kwarto nyo at sarap ng mga kinakain nyo at me sasakyan pa kayo, bindisyon ng bahay 500 pesos ka agad, at ngayong pati yung pagpapamisa ko sa mga namatay kung mga kamag anak pinag iinitan nyo pa, ang mass offering is kahit anung amount kahit piso pa yan, walang katumbas na amount yun, tapos sinisingil ako ng 200 or 350 pero bakit ako magbibigay ng ganyang amount e alam kung donation lang ang ibibigay kaya subrang dismayado ako sa inyo mga nasa simbahan. as of now im thinking to leave dahil sa inyo.
well said po 🙂
dapat magpasalamat pa ang CBCP sa RH bill dahil .. natulungan silang ma evaluate ang simbahan na pinapamunuan nila kun tumagos ba sa puso at isip ng tao ang mga turo nila…
kun naniniwala ang mga tao sa turo nila, kahit anu pang RH bill yan di yan kakagatin ng tao..
pero dahil natatakot sila. isa lang ibig sabihin nito… matagal na silang palpak sa mundong ito…….
Isa lang naman reason jan, thats why they dont want to the bill to be passed is that in the Phils 80% is Roman Catholics, it means every 10 child is born 8 are RC. There are many fees on every steps of life being RC from binyag to marriage to death. Even blessing of the house to business openings. The more Filipino are born the more income of the church. TRUE???
What can you expect from an institution whose power and arrogance knows no bounds..
Hopefully they DO manage to read the bill, but for now it seems that they are just shooting out as much pathetic excuses that they can to hamper the progress of the RH Bill.