An Evaluative Analysis on HB 5043- Reproductive Health and Population Development Act

[Note: This article was included in Social Development Studies Bricolage –an initiative of SDS-271, Second Term/AY2008-2009, of MASDS Graduate Program – University of the Philippines Baguio]

From its conception, House Bill 5043, or the Reproductive Health and Population Development Act of 2008, has been viewed by the Filipino people (and the rest of the world) in numerous angles and perspectives. Perceived with different interpretations, reactions, and opinions, debates related to this proposed legislative agenda show differing opinions and concerns coming from different stakeholders – mostly from individual’s observations based on limited information and biased position and from the public at large. It is undeniable that such occurrences would indirectly; if not subtly give way to a certain degree of influence on the on-going deliberation presently done in the House of Representatives.

This paper would focus in an effort to answer the question: Is there a proper and definitive way to look at the expressed and unexpressed values embedded in House Bill 5043 without the possibility of obscuring the intended purposes and objectives of this bill? This concern led to a close examination on the specifics of RH 5043 in the light of “justice as fairness” theory of John Rawls, along with the possible connection of this bill to the Philippine’s state of development. Moreover, the underlying thought in this paper is concerned with the possible negative effects of preconceived external observations and opinions which may possibly obscure the realities of the embedded concerns and junctures in this proposed legislative feat.

A CLOSER LOOK ON HOUSE BILL NO. 5043

As stated in the “Fact Sheet and Explanatory Notes” (from the Committee on Health, on House Bill No. 5043, House of Representatives, Republic of the Philippines), the population of the Philippines is approximately 88.7 billion as of 2008, which clearly suggests that “four babies are being born in every minute, and that “the fertility rate of Filipino women is 3.05%, which belongs to the upper bracket of around 206 countries”. It is noted however in the above mentioned fact sheet that available data from previous studies states that “Filipinos are responsive to smaller-sized families through free choice of family planning method”. Looking closer into the provisions of HB5043, which is commonly known as the “Reproductive Health (RH) Bill” it is apparent that the authors of the bill aimed for a national unification and participation in its implementation through a nationalistic approach, which coincides with the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Furthermore, the bill aims to pave the way towards sustainable human development, empowerment, and gender equality and equity as it appears that the bill could possibly bridge the gap of inequality especially in gender related societal issues in the Philippines. HB5043 appears to promote “quality life” through application of informed choice, and respect for life among Filipinos (Section 2). Moreover, the authors of the bill stressed in its Guiding Principles that the bill is “about health and rights” (Section 3.b), thus, promoting gender equality and women empowerment (section 3.c), responsible parenthood (section 3.d), freedom of informed choice (section 3.f), among others. There are several provisions in the bill that infused heated debates from different sectors of the Philippine society, primarily from groups and individuals who openly expressed their oppositions, allegedly due to “moral and religious implications”. Other opinions against the bill include – that the bill is unconstitutional, anti-life, and the notion that there are contraceptives that act as “abortifacients”.

Some even believe that promulgation of the bill is more of a means for the national government to qualify for more “AID/welfare” funds from international funding agencies than its expressed objectives. Some specific provisions on the bill that cause strong reactions and oppositions include – Section 10 proposes that contraceptives be considered as an “essential medicine”; Section 12, in its Mandatory Clause wherein the Age-Appropriate Health education was tackled; and Section 14 with regards to “Certificate of Compliance”. On the other hand, proponents of HB 5043 strongly promotes the importance of the following provisions – Section 11 on Mobile Health Care Service; Section 4 i & g, on Reproductive Health Care and Male Involvement Participation; Section 6 on Midwives for Skilled Attendants, and Section 7 on Emergency and Obstetric Care; among others. Proponents of the bill believes that these provisions are essential means, especially for women and the marginalized sector, with regards to the couples’ as well as their children’s overall well-being as well as in promotion to the couples’ equity and equality in terms of responsibility and participation.

THROUGH THE LENS OF DEVELOPMENT

As stated in the “Laws or Principles of Social Development”, Social evolution is subconscious in the collective, and that all achievements in the society are collective, and “not individualistic.” As further stated, laws are essential in social development. However, although laws are of the essence, expressions (and thus interpretations) vary. Thus, differing opinions and perceptions about HB5043 will continue on as the legislative body will progress on its deliberation. Development, on the other hand, as described in the provisions of RH 5043, states that it is “a multi-faceted process that calls for the coordination and integration of policies, plans, programs and projects, that seek to uplift the quality of life of the people, more particularly the poor, the needy, and the marginalized” (Section 3. j).

Based on data and statistics on the official website of the World Bank (WB), the Philippines is presently classified as one the developing countries in the cluster of East Asia and the Pacific Region. It is important to note however, that in the website of the World Trade Organization (WTO) there was no definition for the term “developing countries”. Instead, it was stated that “members announce for themselves whether they are “developed” or “developing” countries.” As a developing country, it is imperative that the Philippines adapt laws and policies geared towards sustainable growth and a holistically empowered state, as such is presumably expected in agendas and objectives of developing countries. One of the possible options for the Philippines is to address the needs of the present without sacrificing the nation’s Constitution (which is especially designed with embedded sense of nationalism) and its people’s core and universal values. In lieu of such analytic developmental opinions, some might say that drastic measures are necessary to speed up growth and development for a developing country; others may opt to adapt a lower phasing and approach towards this goal due to equally essential considerations (cultural, ethical, etc.).

CONCLUSIVE THOUGHTS

HB 5043 has been commonly treated in separate perspectives- either as; a.) The “reproductive health bill” or, b.) as a means of “population control”. Based on the documents that I have examined related to this bill, this matter is always tackled as “either or”, never as “both”- I wasn’t able to find any document that presented it as “both” reproductive health bill and as a means of population control (as one, that is). As I see it, HB 5043 unifies the efforts of the Population Commission (POPCOM), the Department of Health (DepEd), and other government agencies in promoting universal health access towards development. (It is to be understood however, that even after the decentralization of the Philippine Government, the implementation of devolution along with deconcentration wasn’t fully implemented yet – specifically, Rural Health Officers are still operating under the umbrella of the Department of Health and NOT on the Local Government Units.)

The passage of this bill might just be a bridge that would synchronize all departmental projects and programs of different governmental agencies that would possibly result to more caring, more effective, and more efficient health service from the government. Thus, more than the value of individualistic perceptions about the bill’s transparency of purpose and implied hedonistic or even eugenistic agenda, allowing our individual judgment “using the veil of ignorance“, in addition to our deliberate and rational examination of the bill’s underlying presuppositions might enable us to see the essence of the bill in the light of its own reality. In the light of this thought, it is but imperative that HB 5043 be seen through the “veil of ignorance” which was deliberately discussed in the writings of John Rawls about “justice as fairness”, specifically its notion of which was further elaborated in the following excerpts from “A Theory of Justice”;

“..it is clear then, that I want to say that one conception of justice is more reasonable than another, or justifiable
with respect to it, it is rational persons in the initial situations would chose its principles over those of the other
for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice are to be ranked by their acceptability to persons so circumstance...”
– Rawls, 1971

What might be perceived at present as weaknesses or possible violations embedded in the bill with regards to ‘moral and/or religious” issues, etc., could, on the other hand, be possible means that entails different output- either that, or vice versa. Another vague area at present concerns the future implementing rules and regulations, if the bill will indeed become a law. That future phase would essentially be a definitive factor as to the success or failure of this initiative.

Lastly, I as a Filipino citizen have seen some momentous events that transpired in our country – the People Power Revolution for one. That event served as a catalyst, the first of its kind, which I consider to be a sort of “definitive moment” in the Philippines as a nation. These kinds – these definitive moments”, are “turning points” that would illicit positive changes if we, as one nation would be brave enough to try. HB 5043 might just as well be one of these “definitive moments” that could serve as a gateway for more opportunities and chances towards development- that is if we, Filipinos would “take that one shot when the opportunity arises”. The passage of this bill might just be a vital step for the realization of what most of us Filipinos long to happen – to enjoy a better quality of life.

Copyright: Leofina Jane G. Galleta
©2009leofinajanegalleta. All Rights Reserved.