Against the RH Bill By Denie Rose T. Ortega

Against the RH Bill By Denie Rose T. Ortega Debates and arguments about the hot issue on the Reproductive Health Bill have long been visible and relentless in the Congress plenary hall, in mass demonstrations, in fora in the academe and even in plain conversations among laymen. This issue always has its space in media. It has always been the talk of the town. Both the pros and antis have their respective opinions regarding the issue. But, as members of the UP community, what do we really need to know about the RH Bill? Let us hear what members of the academe have to say on their alternative view on the RH Bill. For the benefit of this article, two resource persons have been interviewed by the author regarding their views on the RH Bill. Both of them are pro-life, hence they are against the bill. One gives us arguments from the medical point of view, while the other one shares her insights based from an economist’s perspective. The Medical Perspective Dra. Ma. Fidelis Manalo, a medical doctor who works at the Palliative Care department in Medical City, has shared her personal account on how she dealt with women who are suffering from cervical and breast cancer. She pointed out that some patients who were diagnosed with cancer always have a history of contraceptives intake. She said artificial contraceptives are declared by the World Health Organization's International Agency on Research on Cancer (IARC) and the well known Mayo Clinic in the US as carcinogenic (in the same class as smoking, asbestos, etc). According to the IARC, more than 10 cohort studies and 60 case–control studies that included over 60, 000 women with breast cancer reported on the relationship between the oral use of combined hormonal contraceptives and the risk for this disease. The totality of the evidence suggested an increase in the relative risk for breast cancer among current and recent users. This effect was noted particularly among women under 35 years of age at diagnosis who had begun using contraceptives when young (< 20 years), whereas the increased risk declined sharply with older age at diagnosis. By 10 years after cessation of use, the risk in women who had used combined hormonal contraceptives appeared to be similar to that in women who had never used them. Important known risk factors did not appear to account for the association. The possibility that the association seen for current and recent users is due to detection bias was not ruled out, but it was considered to be unlikely that this would explain the association observed in young women.

Dra. Manalo said that the pushing through of the RH Bill will only lead to state dictatorship on marital decisions. She personally believes that human life is priceless. She does not believe that the provision of contraceptives in a couple will improve their quality of life. Based on her personal experience, she said that the success of her parents in rearing her and her siblings do not have any relation with the use of contraceptives. She said she has never heard of anyone saying, “We became successful and rich because our parents used contraceptives.” Instead, what she often hears is people succeed in life through proper education and good upbringing by their parents. Dra. Manalo deems that the RH Bill is not “pro-poor, pro-life, nor pro-family.” She said those who advocate for it only want to eliminate the “unfit”. Instead of pushing for the bill, she thinks it would be better if they would instill human dignity to the people. If HIV/AIDS are also the main concern of the pro-RH people, then why don’t they promote a dignified life? Only a monogamous relationship can prevent a person from acquiring these diseases. She mentioned about Africa’s ABC policy against HIV. A stands for Abstinence, B for Be Faithful and C for Condom. She said that we can see from here that contraceptives are only the last resort for the people. Human values are still the top choices for the Africans.

Dra. Manalo also quoted a research done in the United States regarding the ineffectiveness of condoms. One experiment done by Dr. C. Michael Roland of the US Naval Research Laboratory in Washington D.C. found out that an AIDS virus can pass through a latex flaw. He found out that the inherent naturally occurring flaws in natural rubber (latex) are up to 5 microns inches in size. The average sperm is about 50 microns in diameter, and the average AIDS virus is about 0.1 micron in size, thus an AIDS virus can pass through a latex flaw. (Picture at left) Thus, Dra. Manalo emphasized that there is no absolute guarantee that one will not get sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and HIV even when condom is used. She said that sex with condoms isn’t really “safe sex”. It is only “less risky” sex. She further added that most experts believe that the risk of getting HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases can be greatly reduced if a condom is used correctly. She said the best way to avoid getting infected by HIV/AIDS is to abstain from sexual activity or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected partner. Dra. Manalo suggests to educate and provide jobs for the Filipinos so that they will be busy making a livelihood for their family, instead of being busy adding more members to their already-huge family. Although Dra. Manalo is from the field of medicine, and she is one of few doctors who are against the RH Bill, she still stands for what she believes in. She said, “The real answer to poverty is a two-step process: instill self-worth and educate the poor. http://www.dividedviewsonrh.bravehost.com/Against%20RH%20Bill%20page%201.html