A critique of the pro stand on the Reproductive Health Bill

Written on Tuesday, October 7th, 2008 at 7:30 pm | by blackshama

After skewering the antis as the Devil’s Advocate, now I’ll be Darwin’s Angel to the pro RH people by skewering the statement of support for this bill.

To:  Philippine Congress

We are seriously disturbed that more than 10 Filipino women die every day due to pregnancy and childbirth-related complications. The big majority of those who die are poor women at the prime of their lives

Good argument. There is data to support this. The problem is in the context of the argument.

We are alarmed that 29 out of 1,000 infants die due to various sickness and illnesses that are preventable and curable.

I believe this is a case of appeal to emotion. Nothing can tweak at your heartstrings as babies can. But there is nothing wrong with that if there is an appeal to reason to go with it.

Will a low population growth rate reduce these incidents? The Catholic Church and the NSO are right to say that the population growth rate has decreased. But why hasn’t infant mortality decreased? Shouldn’t the inequitable nature of our health delivery system more have to do with it?

We are troubled that 4.9 million Filipino youth, aged 15-27 are sexually active but programs that would ensure their safety and help them become more responsible in dealing with their sexuality and relationships are severely lacking. Especially worrisome is the fact that 1 out of 5 female teenagers get pregnant before they reach their 20th birthday. 

This is a good argument. There is data to support this but what causes this sexually active behaviour? Is it 1) poverty, 2) poor church catechesis, 3) overpopulation? 4) lack of information or the wrong kind of information? 5) Or just plain Darwinian biology?!?

The evolutionary biologist in me thinks number 5 is most parsimonious! But take note this isn’t the appeal to nature fallacy. There is a heap of scientific evidence to support number 5. I won’t comment on the catechesis bit. Let the Catholic Church comment on that.

BTW is there truly safe sex? Since all behaviours entail risk, what then is safe? Perhaps monogamy?!?

These are just a few of the problems in the midst of the ongoing economic crisis, escalating poverty, and the ever-increasing prices of basic commodities and services. Moreover, the Philippine population grows unabated with almost 2 million individuals added every year. Researches [sic] consistently show that poverty is more prevalent among big families compared to smaller ones.

Is poverty the cause of increasing population growth, increasing prices of basic commodities and services? The data may show some correlation but that could be just a weak analogy. I also think the reverse is true, increasing prices of basic commodities is more determinant of poverty. There is stronger reason to believe that poverty is correlated to life expectancy. Also this argument of the pro RH people goes ppffffft when there is data to say that in a globalised economy the reason why we have these problems is that the world economy has outstripped the world’s resources to support it. Thus we have more poverty. The impending financial doom of the First World is testament to this.

Now research may consistently show that poverty is more prevalent among big families as compared to smaller ones. The strongest support for this argument is that there is less resources to go around within the family unit. However there are some sectors of society that use more at the expense of the rest and the reason has nothing to do with population. So why not consider Marxian redistribution( which as DJB implies has been implemented on Wall Street!) instead of this RH Neo-Mathusianism?

The acute lack of services and information regarding reproductive health:

* results in the untimely death of women and children;
* is the reason why our youth are largely unprepared to deal with matters pertaining to their sexuality and relationships; and
* exacerbates the effects of economic crisis and poverty on millions of ordinary Filipinos, especially those with big families.

Again there is some evidence to support these arguments. But it pays to choose the most simple argument.  Isn’t it more parsimonious to say that the breakdown of the family unit (which should be the best medium for transmitting these good memes as Rich Dawkins would lead us to believe ) is the reason why this is happening? After all there is much evidence to show that the family unit has contributed to evolutionary fitness in humans. Also monogamous marriage seems to be directly selected (even with the occassional “straying” by me and you! ) and reinforces the family unit. This direct selection has its evolutionary biology roots as well as cultural evolutionary roots and these do confer fitness. We have to throw this piece of information (first recognized by Darwin) to the proponents of the RH bill.

Why not promote monogamy education, monogamous health and a strong family unit instead? :)

Also women can die in childbirth even if their pregnancy was planned. Children die within the first 5 years of life due to inadequacy of health services.  Now will less children die or at least a lower proportion die if the RH bill is passed? If this is linked with a low population growth rate then the Catholic Church will be justified in its stand that the RH bill goes against its teachings. No one on both sides of the debate can seriously consider that the Church is against reducing child mortality. To say so is poisoning the well.

We believe that Filipinos, particularly the poor, urgently need access to information and services that will address their reproductive health needs.

Well everyone has the right to a belief. But can the signatories to the petition sign in behalf of the poor?

We believe that a rights-based, comprehensive, and responsive reproductive health law will help empower Filipinos to achieve a better quality of life.

What rights are they referring to? –unstated premise

We firmly believe that the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill into law will help actualize people’s, especially women’s rights to make informed decisions- Begging the question

How different is women’s rights from human rights?

Therefore, we call on our legislators to pass the Reproductive Health Bill into law now –wishful thinking?

BTW  the petitioners failed to mention the best argument. To me one of the best arguments for the RH bill is the claimed paternity of some show biz personalities turned politicians! :-)

Tags:
Add to del.icio.us | Digg this! | Yahoo MyWeb | Google Bookmark It! | Stumble It!
About The Author: blackshama is an ex-academic OFW, now an academic at home involved in mentoring hardheaded postgraduate students and terrorizing undergrads who think they can have it easy! He blogs at "Blackshama's Blog".

Filed Under Politics, Society

Related Entries:

Comments

8 Responses to “A critique of the pro stand on the Reproductive Health Bill”

  1. DJB on October 7th, 2008 10:04 pm

    In reverse order, as it were…

    We firmly believe that the passage of the Reproductive Health Bill into law will help actualize people’s, especially women’s rights to make informed decisions- Begging the question

    How different is women’s rights from human rights?

    Some women’s rights to information are very different from men’s rights, arising mainly from the role they play in reproduction and child-bearing, even if both are human rights. It is begging the question to ask what the difference is between women’s rights and human rights. Of course women’s rights are human rights, but women have a right to know the facts of biology that apply uniquely to their gender. All the Bill is saying is that if passed it would certainly aid in attaining that worthy goal of educating women about their own bodies.

    Now will less children die or at least a lower proportion die if the RH bill is passed?

    The common sense expectation is that preventing unwanted or unplanned pregnancies will also help to prevent unwanted and unplanned abortions. So less children will die from abortions anyway. In many countries like the United States where contraception is readily available, abortion is at an all time low.

    But there is another way of looking at it. If most pregnancies that go to term are wanted and/or planned, the likelihood is that mothers and fathers will exercise great pre- and post-natal care, ipso facto.

    Monogamy can certainly help prevent the spread of STDs, but don’t you think it inhumane of the Catholic Church to insist that rather than “go against nature” couples should not use condoms even if it means infecting a spouse with an STD like HIV/Aids? Strangely enough, in these cases, the Church also does not recommend abstinence doctrinally. Why? Because it would frustrate nature and the charism of marriage!

    Many things cause poverty, like corruption and lack of education and opportunity, etc. It is in trying to solve poverty that overpopulation plays a role as a major impediment to progress, not necessarily that is “causes” poverty. But overpopulation makes every attempt to solve the problems of poverty much, much harder. Overpopulation saps government and individual resources, and puts heavy strains on natural resources like food, water, space, and all socio economic goods which are always in short supply like…food, water, education and opportunity!

    So even if overpopulation is not the metaphysical cause of poverty, it is like obesity preventing a human individual from performing at optimum levels. A fat rich person probably doesn’t have any urgent need to lose weight since he has the resources to take care of the dire consequences on his health. But a fat poor person needs to get fit if he is going to uplift himself and his family from poverty’s grip.

    Overpopulation might not cause poverty, but it will KEEP you poor for sure because of the large denominator effect on any solution you come up with to poverty.

  2. The Jester-in-Exile on October 9th, 2008 10:06 am

    on your last three paragraphs, djb, there are folks among the anti-RH lobby who say that overpopulation is a myth.

    we should someday consider putting up a post saying that overpopulation is a real threat — the philippines has X land area, but only a fraction of that X is actually livable, especially if we have to allocate parts of X to agri, forestry, water supply, and what not.

    even then, a large fraction of this X is not conducive as living space — unless the bishops do walk the talk, and they make apo reef or the summit of mount halcon as the location of the CBCP headquarters, with minimal environmental pressure on these areas.

  3. blackshama on October 9th, 2008 10:18 am

    Those folks who say overpopulation is a myth didn’t take their high school biology seriously.

  4. Jeg on October 9th, 2008 11:04 am

    Honestly, blackshama, I think one human is one too many. It baffles me that our Lord God saw it fit to create us. We’re such an ornery, destructive species.

  5. cvj on October 9th, 2008 11:23 am

    Those who say that overpopulation is a myth need to be aware of the concept of the environment’s carrying capacity and how it is computed.

    I read somewhere that the carrying capacity of the earth is 8 billion. However, there’s a possiblity that climate change can reduce it to 2 billion. If that happens, then the extra 6 billion will have to somehow get off the planet.

  6. joe on November 23rd, 2008 1:16 am

    ladies and gents, hold your horses. i will honestly say that before i conducted some research on the subject matter i was totally pro stand on this bill. however since i myself have taken things in consideration and has decided not to base my opinion on speculations i have put things in perspective and is able to see things clearer. Before i go any further i would like to say that I am not catholic, and is much less of a christian. I am very open minded, (liberal) pro gay, womens rights etc. For goodness sakes i am born both a citizen of the philippines and the US. I grew up in the US where abortion & contraception is allowed.
    However i disagree with this bill not because it gives us information, but because it is the wrong approach to our problems. Over population is not the question we should be asking(how many people are on
    earth). The question we should be asking is how many enlightened people are on earth. (educated) It is PROVEN that women and men who are EDUCATED ARE NOT LIKELY to have many children, or have kids UNPREPARED. yes i know the bill says it will give people information hey, jeeze get on the internet read books. (no i’m not a nerd in fact i have modeled in the US and here.) my point is if this bill is not passed ur not getting deprived of information. Now secondly you have the phillippine constitution. and this bill violates a S**T load of laws namely

    Article XVI, Section 9
    Section 9. The State shall protect consumers from trade malpractices and from substandard or hazardous products. (yes drug companies will profit by making you panic. it’s everywhere panic=sales and business. a funny example is a few months ago in dallas, texas they announced that it may be hit by a freakin hurricane. the idotic people decided to buy food and supplies to protect themselves and reinforce their homes of course it did not happen. Idiots a hurricanes only gain strength in water. texas is a fuckin desert the air is dry. of course the hurricane died before it reached the main land. point is, marketing scam like the phone operators lol)

    Article XIII, Section 14
    Section 14. The State shall protect working women by providing safe and healthful working conditions, taking into account their maternal functions, and such facilities and opportunities that will enhance their welfare and enable them to realize their full potential in the service of the nation.

    When the egg of the mother unites with the sperm of the father, a zygote forms and a new life begins. However, some of these artificial contraceptives, aside from the barrier method, doesn’t only inhibit the union of sperm and egg, but kills the life of that one-day or perhaps five-day old zygote. How? This zygote burrows in the inner layer of the uterus in order to gain nutrition from the mother, and some of these contraceptives enables the inner layer to shed off so that this zygote cannot gain nutrition, thus causing the zygote to die. That, is how some of these contraceptives deny the inherent right of the zygote to live, which is a violation of Section 5,11, and 12 of Article II of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines which states that “ the state recognizes the sanctity of family and shall protect and strengthen the family.. it shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn”.

    Article II
    Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the PROTECTION OF LIFE, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general WELFARE are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.

    Section 11. The State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for HUMAN RIGHTS.
    Section 12. 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 natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.
    Section 13. The State recognizes the VITAL ROLE of the YOUTH in nation-building and shall PROMOTE and PROTECT their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.

    Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to HEALTH of the people and instill health consciousness among them.
    Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
    Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development. ( EDUCATION OR DECEPTION? yea are they gonna tell you how the pill works, how other than killing the child it makes marriages and relationships end because it affects the girls brain nad emotions? how it increases the risk of cancer in women by 480% and so on and so forth,. nah, all they will tell you is that it’s all good this is nice since they are all sales men, and you know what if i had a company that supplies this shit i’d tell you the same buy it lol.

    now my friends you claim to be open minded then open your minds and analyze less you get called idiots!. the catholic church ain’t that bad again i am not catholic. the problem with us kids is we hate god coz he’s a form of authority like our parents s**t. grow up and think before you act! now if you think contracetives is a new thing then you are mislead. it has been done for over 1000 years, go do some research on the egyptians and europeans you’ll find out.

    Last but not the least the malthusian fear (meaning the earth is getting overpopulated) check this out look it up on wikipedia under malthusianism again this is not science but rather speculation)

    Deming has identified himself with the Cornucopian school of environmental thought, and has consistently criticized Malthusian theory. In 1998, he wrote “although world population has increased by more than a factor of six over the last 200 years, we are all aware that the average standard of living has risen dramatically - in direct contradiction to Malthusian theory.”[6] Deming considers the “fundamental flaw” in Malthusian theory to be that “it fails to take into account the exponential growth in resources that occurs through technological advances.”[7] He has questioned if Malthus’ hypothesis is scientific, because its adherents resist empirical falsification.[8]
    In a letter published in the American Association of Petroleum Geologists magazine, the Explorer, in 2002, Deming wrote that “prior to World War II, the central principle upon which our civilization was ordered was progress - the idea that the application of scientific knowledge results in improved standards of living,” but “in the latter half of the 20th century, the idea of progress was replaced by an anti-scientific environmentalism based on a mythological primitive harmony that has never existed.”[9]
    Deming has criticized “sustainability,” as a misleading concept, a chimera,”[10] at least as far as it pertains to technology, pointing out that “present day technologies and practices are never sustainable, nor should we expect them to be…projections of current technology into the future are always invalid because technology does not stand still…technological progress is our birthright and destiny.”[11] In 2003, speaking at a meeting of the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association, Deming said “I think it would be foolish to try to predict what our technological capabilities will be (100 years from now), just as it would have been foolish for someone from the 19th century to try to predict what we could do today.”[12

    So in conclusion i would like to say yes, i am liberal i believe in family planning and S**T in fact if i was not ready i’d get my pregnant girlfriend aborted, however i would say don’t get mislead focus your tax money on education and maybe killing corrupt officials lol (since treason is punishable by death and corruption has betrayed our country) just kiddin i mean putting them behind bars. and F**k the bill, get a life and focus on or come up with better solutions. also if you really want this bill approved then redo your constitution thanx.

    yeah ya’ll have my email. freshwaterent@gmail.com your narrow minds are free to act childish and cuss at me for stepping on your sensitive egos.

    the answer to the question how many enlightened people do we have on the planet is: surprise, not enough!!

  7. joe on November 23rd, 2008 1:31 am

    and ooh implying “that the people claiming that overpopulation is a myth are wrong”, does not follow. again malthusianism. what i really wanna say is your a ******* *****! another thing is the whole environment thing is crashing, well i bet you did not know that cows and livestock produce more green house gases than vehicles. so maybe to save the environment we should all just kill anything that eats greens like cows, a bunch of animals and ooh you and me. however cfc’s serious deal, hybrid cars not really (marketing trick).

  8. joe on November 23rd, 2008 1:39 am

    and one last thing that dude who said will people die less if we give out contraceptives. nah not really, first off your already killing them before they come out, which in a case where someone is undecided and does not have contraceptives well they still get a kid and 2 contraceptives does not ensure a woman infertility so if a condom breaks or if a pill fails here comes an extra kid who’ll probably die from startvation or something weird like cannibalism lol. plus hey more contraceptives more sex yey. anyway figure it out.

Leave a Reply