Category Archives: women’s rights

RA 10354 – Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012

[ REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10354 ]

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A NATIONAL POLICY ON RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Title. – This Act shall be known as “The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012″.

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – The State recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all persons including their right to equality and nondiscrimination of these rights, the right to sustainable human development, the right to health which includes reproductive health, the right to education and information, and the right to choose and make decisions for themselves in accordance with their religious convictions, ethics, cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible parenthood.

Pursuant to the declaration of State policies under Section 12, Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, it is the duty of the State to protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution and equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of women especially mothers in particular and of the people in general and instill health consciousness among them. The family is the natural and fundamental unit of society. The State shall likewise protect and advance the right of families in particular and the people in general to a balanced and healthful environment in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. The State also recognizes and guarantees the promotion and equal protection of the welfare and rights of children, the youth, and the unborn.

Moreover, the State recognizes and guarantees the promotion of gender equality, gender equity, women empowerment and dignity as a health and human rights concern and as a social responsibility. The advancement and protection of women’s human rights shall be central to the efforts of the State to address reproductive health care.

The State recognizes marriage as an inviolable social institution and the foundation of the family which in turn is the foundation of the nation. Pursuant thereto, the State shall defend:

(a) The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood;

(b) The right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development;

(c) The right of the family to a family living wage and income; and

(d) The right of families or family associations to participate in the planning and implementation of policies and programs

The State likewise guarantees universal access to medically-safe, non-abortifacient, effective, legal, affordable, and quality reproductive health care services, methods, devices, supplies which do not prevent the implantation of a fertilized ovum as determined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and relevant information and education thereon according to the priority needs of women, children and other underprivileged sectors, giving preferential access to those identified through the National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR) and other government measures of identifying marginalization, who shall be voluntary beneficiaries of reproductive health care, services and supplies for free. ■ •

The State shall eradicate discriminatory practices, laws and policies that infringe on a person’s exercise of reproductive health rights.

The State shall also promote openness to life; Provided, That parents bring forth to the world only those children whom they can raise in a truly humane way.

SEC. 3. Guiding Principles for Implementation. – This Act declares the following as guiding principles:

(a) The right to make free and informed decisions, which is central to the exercise of any right, shall not be subjected to any form of coercion and must be fully guaranteed by the State, like the right itself;

(b) Respect for protection and fulfillment of reproductive health and rights which seek to promote the rights and welfare of every person particularly couples, adult individuals, women and adolescents;

(c) Since human resource is among the principal assets of the country, effective and quality reproductive health care services must be given primacy to ensure maternal and child health, the health of the unborn, safe delivery and birth of healthy children, and sound replacement rate, in line with the State’s duty to promote the right to health, responsible parenthood, social justice and full human development;

(d) The provision of ethical and medically safe, legal, accessible, affordable, non-abortifacient, effective and quality reproductive health care services and supplies is essential in the promotion of people’s right to health, especially those of women, the poor, and the marginalized, and shall be incorporated as a component of basic health care;

(e) The State shall promote and provide information and access, without bias, to all methods of family planning, including effective natural and modern methods which have been proven medically safe, legal, non-abortifacient, and effective in accordance with scientific and evidence-based medical research standards such as those registered and approved by the FDA for the poor and marginalized as identified through the NHTS-PR and other government measures of identifying marginalization: Provided, That the State shall also provide funding support to promote modern natural methods of family planning, especially the Billings Ovulation Method, consistent with the needs of acceptors and their religious convictions;

(f) The State shall promote programs that: (1) enable individuals and couples to have the number of children they desire with due consideration to the health, particularly of women, and the resources available and affordable to them and in accordance with existing laws, public morals and their religious convictions: Provided, That no one shall be deprived, for economic reasons, of the rights to have children; (2) achieve equitable allocation and utilization of resources; (3) ensure effective partnership among national government, local government units (LGUs) and the private sector in the design, implementation, coordination, integration, monitoring and evaluation of people-centered programs to enhance the quality of life and environmental protection; (4) conduct studies to analyze demographic trends including demographic dividends from sound population policies towards sustainable human development in keeping with the principles of gender equality, protection of mothers and children, born and unborn and the promotion and protection of women’s reproductive rights and health; and (5) conduct scientific studies to determine the safety and efficacy of alternative medicines and methods for reproductive health care development;

(g) The provision of reproductive health care, information and supplies giving priority to poor beneficiaries as identified through the NHTS-PR and other government measures of identifying marginalization must be the primary responsibility of the national government consistent with its obligation to respect, protect and promote the right to health and the right to life;

(h) The State shall respect individuals’ preferences and choice of family planning methods that are in accordance with their religious convictions and cultural beliefs, taking into consideration the State’s obligations under various human rights instruments;

(i) Active participation by nongovernment organizations (NGOs), women’s and people’s organizations, civil society, faith-based organizations, the religious sector and communities is crucial to ensure that reproductive health and population and development policies, plans, and programs will address the priority needs of women, the poor, and the marginalized;

(j) While this Act recognizes that abortion is illegal and punishable by law, the government shall ensure that all women needing care for post-abortive complications and all other complications arising from pregnancy, labor and delivery and related issues shall be treated and counseled in a humane, nonjudgmental and compassionate manner in accordance with law and medical ethics;

(k) Each family shall have the right to determine its ideal family size: Provided, however, That the State shall equip each parent with the necessary information on all aspects of family life, including reproductive health and responsible parenthood, in order to make that determination;

(l) There shall be no demographic or population targets and the mitigation, promotion and/or stabilization of the population growth rate is incidental to the advancement of reproductive health;

(m) Gender equality and women empowerment are central elements of reproductive health and population and development;

(n) The resources of the country must be made to serve the entire population, especially the poor, and allocations thereof must be adequate and effective: Provided, That the life of the unborn is protected;

(o) Development is a multi-faceted process that calls for the harmonization 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; and

(p) That a comprehensive reproductive health program addresses the needs of people throughout their life cycle.

SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. – For the purpose of this Act, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

(a) Abortifacient refers to any drug or device that induces abortion or the destruction of a fetus inside the mother’s womb or the prevention of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in the mother’s womb upon determination of the FDA.

(b) Adolescent refers to young people between the ages of ten (10) to nineteen (19) years who are in transition from childhood to adulthood.

(c) Basic Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (BEMONC) refers to lifesaving services for emergency maternal and newborn conditions/complications being provided by a health facility or professional to include the following services: administration of parenteral oxytocic drugs, administration of dose of parenteral anticonvulsants, administration of parenteral antibiotics, administration of maternal steroids for preterm labor, performance of assisted vaginal deliveries, removal of retained placental products, and manual removal of retained placenta. It also includes neonatal interventions which include at the minimum: newborn resuscitation, provision of warmth, and referral, blood transfusion where possible.

(d) Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care (CEMONC) refers to lifesaving services for emergency maternal and newborn conditions/complications as in Basic Emergency Obstetric and Newborn Care plus the provision of surgical delivery (caesarian section) and blood bank services, and other highly specialized obstetric interventions. It also includes emergency neonatal care which includes at the minimum: newborn resuscitation, treatment of neonatal sepsis infection, oxygen support, and antenatal administration of (maternal) steroids for threatened premature delivery.

(e) Family planning refers to a program which enables couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number and spacing of their children and to have the information and means to do so, and to have access to a full range of safe, affordable, effective, non-abortifacient modem natural and artificial methods of planning pregnancy.

(f) Fetal and infant death review refers to a qualitative and in-depth study of the causes of fetal and infant death with the primary purpose of preventing future deaths through changes or additions to programs, plans and policies.

(g) Gender equality refers to the principle of equality between women and men and equal rights to enjoy conditions in realizing their full human potentials to contribute to, and benefit from, the results of development, with the State recognizing that all human beings are free and equal in dignity and rights. It entails equality in opportunities, in the allocation of resources or benefits, or in access to services in furtherance of the rights to health and sustainable human development among others, without discrimination.

(h) Gender equity refers to the policies, instruments, programs and actions that address the disadvantaged position of women in society by providing preferential treatment and affirmative action. It entails fairness and justice in the distribution of benefits and responsibilities between women and men, and often requires women-specific projects and programs to end existing inequalities. This concept recognizes that while reproductive health involves women and men, it is more critical for women’s health.

(i) Male responsibility refers to the involvement, commitment, accountability and responsibility of males in all areas of sexual health and reproductive health, as well as the care of reproductive health concerns specific to men.

(j) Maternal death review refers to a qualitative and in-depth study of the causes of maternal death with the primary purpose of preventing future deaths through changes or additions to programs, plans and policies.

(k) Maternal health refers to the health of a woman of reproductive age including, but not limited to, during pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period.

(l) Modern methods of family planning refers to safe, effective, non-abortifacient and legal methods, whether natural or artificial, that are registered with the FDA, to plan pregnancy.

(m) Natural family planning refers to a variety of methods used to plan or prevent pregnancy based on identifying the woman’s fertile days.

(n) Public health care service provider refers to: (1) public health care institution, which is duly licensed and accredited and devoted primarily to the maintenance and operation of facilities for health promotion, disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care of individuals suffering from illness, disease, injury, disability or deformity, or in need of obstetrical or other medical and nursing care; (2) public health care professional, who is a doctor of medicine, a nurse or a midwife; (3) public health worker engaged in the delivery of health care services; or (4) barangay health worker who has undergone training programs under any accredited government and NGO and who voluntarily renders primarily health care services in the community after having been accredited to function as such by the local health board in accordance with the guideline’s promulgated by the Department of Health (DOH).

(o) Poor refers to members of households identified as poor through the NHTS-PR by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) or any subsequent system used by the national government in identifying the poor.

(p) Reproductive Health (RH) refers to the state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. This implies that people are able to have a responsible, safe, consensual and satisfying sex life, that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when, and how often to do so. This further implies that women and men attain equal relationships in matters related to sexual relations and reproduction.

(q) Reproductive health care refers to the access to a full range of methods, facilities, services and supplies that contribute to reproductive health and well-being by addressing reproductive health-related problems. It also includes sexual health, the purpose of which is the enhancement of life and personal relations. The elements of reproductive health care include the following:

(1) Family planning information and services which shall include as a first priority making women of reproductive age fully aware of their respective cycles to make them aware of when fertilization is highly probable, as well as highly improbable;

(2) Maternal, infant and child health and nutrition, including breastfeeding;

(3) Proscription of abortion and management of abortion complications;

(4) Adolescent and youth reproductive health guidance and counseling;

(5) Prevention, treatment and management of reproductive tract infections (RTIs), HIV and AIDS and other sexually transmittable infections (STIs);

(6) Elimination of violence against women and children and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence;

(7) Education and counseling on sexuality and reproductive health;

(8) Treatment of breast and reproductive tract cancers and other gynecological conditions and disorders;

(9) Male responsibility and involvement and men’s reproductive health;

(10) Prevention, treatment and management of infertility and sexual dysfunction;

(11) Reproductive health education for the adolescents; and

(12) Mental health aspect of reproductive health care.

(r) Reproductive health care program refers to the systematic and integrated provision of reproductive health care to all citizens prioritizing women, the poor, marginalized and those invulnerable or crisis situations.

(s) Reproductive health rights refers to the rights of individuals and couples, to decide freely and responsibly whether or not to have children; the number, spacing and timing of their children; to make other decisions concerning reproduction, free of discrimination, coercion and violence; to have the information and means to do so; and to attain the highest standard of sexual health and reproductive health: Provided, however, That reproductive health rights do not include abortion, and access to abortifacients.

(t) Reproductive health and sexuality education refers to a lifelong learning process of providing and acquiring complete, accurate and relevant age- and development-appropriate information and education on reproductive health and sexuality through life skills education and other approaches.

(u) Reproductive Tract Infection (RTI) refers to sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and other types of infections affecting the reproductive system.

(v) Responsible parenthood refers to the will and ability of a parent to respond to the needs and aspirations of the family and children. It is likewise a shared responsibility between parents to determine and achieve the desired number of children, spacing and timing of their children according to their own family life aspirations, taking into account psychological preparedness, health status, sociocultural and economic concerns consistent with their religious convictions.

(w) Sexual health refers to a state of physical, mental and social well-being in relation to sexuality. It requires a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships, as well as the possibility of having pleasurable and safe sexual experiences, free from coercion, discrimination and violence.

(x) Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) refers to any infection that may be acquired or passed on through sexual contact, use of IV, intravenous drug needles, childbirth and breastfeeding.

(y) Skilled birth attendance refers to childbirth managed by a skilled health professional including the enabling conditions of necessary equipment and support of a functioning health system, including transport and referral faculties for emergency obstetric care.

(z) Skilled health professional refers to a midwife, doctor or nurse, who has been educated and trained in the skills needed to manage normal and complicated pregnancies, childbirth and the immediate postnatal period, and in the identification, management and referral of complications in women and newborns.

(aa) Sustainable human development refers to bringing people, particularly the poor and vulnerable, to the center of development process, the central purpose of which is the creation of an enabling environment in which all can enjoy long, healthy and productive lives, done in the manner that promotes their rights and protects the life opportunities of future generations and the natural ecosystem on which all life depends.

SEC. 5. Hiring of Skilled Health Professionals for Maternal Health Care and Skilled Birth Attendance. – The LGUs shall endeavor to hire an adequate number of nurses, midwives and other skilled health professionals for maternal health care and skilled birth attendance to achieve an ideal skilled health professional-to-patient ratio taking into consideration DOH targets: Provided, That people in geographically isolated or highly populated and depressed areas shall be provided the same level of access to health care: Provided, further, That the national government shall provide additional and necessary funding and other necessary assistance for the effective implementation of this provision.

For the purposes of this Act, midwives and nurses shall be allowed to administer lifesaving drugs such as, but not limited to, oxytocin and magnesium sulfate, in accordance with the guidelines set by the DOH, under emergency conditions and when there are no physicians available: Provided, That they are properly trained and certified to administer these lifesaving drugs.

SEC. 6. Health Care Facilities. – Each LGU, upon its determination of the necessity based on well-supported data provided by its local health office shall endeavor to establish or upgrade hospitals and facilities with adequate and qualified personnel, equipment and supplies to be able to provide emergency obstetric and newborn care:Provided, That people in geographically isolated or highly populated and depressed areas shall have the same level of access and shall not be neglected by providing other means such as home visits or mobile health care clinics as needed: Provided, further, That the national government shall provide additional and necessary funding and other necessary assistance for the effective implementation of this provision.

SEC. 7. Access to Family Planning. – All accredited public health facilities shall provide a full range of modern family planning methods, which shall also include medical consultations, supplies and necessary and reasonable procedures for poor and marginalized couples having infertility issues who desire to have children: Provided, That family planning services shall likewise be extended by private health facilities to paying patients with the option to grant free care and services to indigents, except in the case of non-maternity specialty hospitals and hospitals owned and operated by a religious group, but they have the option to provide such full range of modern family planning methods: Provided, further, That these hospitals shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health facility which is conveniently accessible: Provided, finally, That the person is not in an emergency condition or serious case as defined in Republic Act No. 8344.

No person shall be denied information and access to family planning services, whether natural or artificial: Provided, That minors will not be allowed access to modern methods of family planning without written consent from their parents or guardian/s except when the minor is already a parent or has had a miscarriage.

SEC. 8. Maternal Death Review and Fetal and Infant Death Review. – All LGUs, national and local government hospitals, and other public health units shall conduct an annual Maternal Death Review and Fetal and Infant Death Review in accordance with the guidelines set by the DOH. Such review should result in an evidence-based programming and budgeting process that would contribute to the development of more responsive reproductive health services to promote women’s health and safe motherhood.

SEC. 9. The Philippine National Drug Formulary System and Family Planning Supplies. – The National Drug Formulary shall include hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectables and other safe, legal, non-abortifacient and effective family planning products and supplies. The Philippine National Drug Formulary System (PNDFS) shall be observed in selecting drugs including family planning supplies that will be included or removed from the Essential Drugs List (EDL) in accordance with existing practice and in consultation with reputable medical associations in the Philippines. For the purpose of this Act, any product or supply included or to be included in the EDL must have a certification from the FDA that said product and supply is made available on the condition that it is not to be used as an abortifacient.

These products and supplies shall also be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national hospitals: Provided, further, That the foregoing offices shall not purchase or acquire by any means emergency contraceptive pills, postcoital pills, abortifacients that will be used for such purpose and their other forms or equivalent.

SEC. 10. Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies. – The DOH shall procure, distribute to LGUs and monitor the usage of family planning supplies for the whole country. The DOH shall coordinate with all appropriate local government bodies to plan and implement this procurement and distribution program. The supply and budget allotments shall be based on, among others, the current levels and projections of the following:

(a) Number of women of reproductive age and couples who want to space or limit their children;

(b) Contraceptive prevalence rate, by type of method used; and

(c) Cost of family planning supplies.

Provided, That LGUs may implement its own procurement, distribution and monitoring program consistent with the overall provisions of this Act and the guidelines of the DOH.

SEC. 11. Integration of Responsible Parenthood and Family Planning Component in Anti-Poverty Programs. – A multidimensional approach shall be adopted in the implementation of policies and programs to fight poverty. Towards this end, the DOH shall implement programs prioritizing full access of poor and marginalized women as identified through the NHTS-PR and other government measures of identifying marginalization to reproductive health care, services, products and programs. The DOH shall provide such programs, technical support, including capacity building and monitoring.

SEC. 12. PhilHealth Benefits for Serious .and Life-Threatening Reproductive Health Conditions. – All serious and life-threatening reproductive health conditions such as HIV and AIDS, breast and reproductive tract cancers, and obstetric complications, and menopausal and post-menopausal-related conditions shall be given the maximum benefits, including the provision of Anti-Retroviral Medicines (ARVs), as provided in the guidelines set by the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PHIC).

SEC. 13. Mobile Health Care Service. – The national or the local government may provide each provincial, city, municipal and district hospital with a Mobile Health Care Service (MHCS) in the form of a van or other means of transportation appropriate to its terrain, taking into consideration the health care needs of each LGU. The MHCS shall deliver health care goods and services to its constituents, more particularly to the poor and needy, as well as disseminate knowledge and information on reproductive health. The MHCS shall be operated by skilled health providers and adequately equipped with a wide range of health care materials and information dissemination devices and equipment, the latter including, but not limited to, a television set for audio-visual presentations. All MHCS shall be operated by LGUs of provinces and highly urbanized cities.

SEC. 14. Age- and Development-Appropriate Reproductive Health Education. – The State shall provide age- and development-appropriate reproductive health education to adolescents which shall be taught by adequately trained teachers informal and nonformal educational system and integrated in relevant subjects such as, but not limited to, values formation; knowledge and skills in self-protection against discrimination; sexual abuse and violence against women and children and other forms of gender based violence and teen pregnancy; physical, social and emotional changes in adolescents; women’s rights and children’s rights; responsible teenage behavior; gender and development; and responsible parenthood: Provided, That flexibility in the formulation and adoption of appropriate course content, scope and methodology in each educational level or group shall be allowed only after consultations with parents-teachers-community associations, school officials and other interest groups. The Department of Education (DepED) shall formulate a curriculum which shall be used by public schools and may be adopted by private schools.

SEC. 15. Certificate of Compliance. – No marriage license shall be issued by the Local Civil Registrar unless the applicants present a Certificate of Compliance issued for free by the local Family Planning Office certifying that they had duly received adequate instructions and information on responsible parenthood, family planning, breastfeeding and infant nutrition.

SEC. 16. Capacity Building of Barangay Health Workers (BHWs). – The DOH shall be responsible for disseminating information and providing training programs to the LGUs. The LGUs, with the technical assistance of the DOH, shall be responsible for the training of BHWs and other barangay volunteers on the promotion of reproductive health. The DOH shall provide the LGUs with medical supplies and equipment needed by BHWs to carry out their functions effectively: Provided, further, That the national government shall provide additional and necessary funding and other necessary assistance for the effective implementation of this provision including the possible provision of additional honoraria for BHWs.

SEC. 17. Pro Bono Services for Indigent Women. – Private and nongovernment reproductive healthcare service providers including, but not limited to, gynecologists and obstetricians, are encouraged to provide at least forty-eight (48) hours annually of reproductive health services, ranging from providing information and education to rendering medical services, free of charge to indigent and low-income patients as identified through the NHTS-PR and other government measures of identifying marginalization, especially to pregnant adolescents. The forty-eight (48) hours annual pro bono services shall be included as a prerequisite in the accreditation under the PhilHealth.

SEC. 18. Sexual and Reproductive Health Programs for Persons with Disabilities (PWDs). – The cities and municipalities shall endeavor that barriers to reproductive health services for PWDs are obliterated by the following:

(a) Providing physical access, and resolving transportation and proximity issues to clinics, hospitals and places where public health education is provided, contraceptives are sold or distributed or other places where reproductive health services are provided;

(b) Adapting examination tables and other laboratory procedures to the needs and conditions of PWDs;

(c) Increasing access to information and communication materials on sexual and reproductive health in braille, large print, simple language, sign language and pictures;

(d) Providing continuing education and inclusion of rights of PWDs among health care providers; and

(e) Undertaking activities to raise awareness and address misconceptions among the general public on the stigma and their lack of knowledge on the sexual and reproductive health needs and rights of PWDs.

SEC. 19. Duties and Responsibilities. – (a) Pursuant to the herein declared policy, the DOH shall serve as the lead agency for the implementation of this Act and shall integrate in their regular operations the following functions:

(1) Fully and efficiently implement the reproductive health care program;

(2) Ensure people’s access to medically safe, non-abortifacient, legal, quality and affordable reproductive health goods and services; and

(3) Perform such other functions necessary to attain the purposes of this Act.

(b) The DOH, in coordination with the PHIC, as may be applicable, shall:

(1) Strengthen the capacities of health regulatory agencies to ensure safe, high quality, accessible and affordable reproductive health services and commodities with the concurrent strengthening and enforcement of regulatory mandates and mechanisms;

(2) Facilitate the involvement and participation of NGOs and the private sector in reproductive health care service delivery and in the production, distribution and delivery of quality reproductive health and family planning supplies and commodities to make them accessible and affordable to ordinary citizens;

(3) Engage the services, skills and proficiencies of experts in natural family planning who shall provide the necessary training for all BHWs;

(4) Supervise and provide assistance to LGUs in the delivery of reproductive health care services and in the purchase of family planning goods and supplies; and

(5) Furnish LGUs, through their respective local health offices, appropriate information and resources to keep the latter updated on current studies and researches relating to family planning, responsible parenthood, breastfeeding and infant nutrition.

(c) The FDA shall issue strict guidelines with respect to the use of contraceptives, taking into consideration the side effects or other harmful effects of their use.

(d) Corporate citizens shall exercise prudence in advertising its products or services through all forms of media, especially on matters relating to sexuality, further taking into consideration its influence on children and the youth.

SEC. 20. Public Awareness. – The DOH and the LGUs shall initiate and sustain a heightened nationwide multimedia-campaign to raise the level of public awareness on the protection and promotion of reproductive health and rights including, but not limited to, maternal health and nutrition, family planning and responsible parenthood information and services, adolescent and youth reproductive health, guidance and counseling and other elements of reproductive health care under Section 4(q).

Education and information materials to be developed and disseminated for this purpose shall be reviewed regularly to ensure their effectiveness and relevance.

SEC. 21. Reporting Requirements. – Before the end of April each year, the DOH shall submit to the President of the Philippines and Congress an annual consolidated report, which shall provide a definitive and comprehensive assessment of the implementation of its programs and those of other government agencies and instrumentalities and recommend priorities for executive and legislative actions. The report shall be printed and distributed to all national agencies, the LGUs, NGOs and private sector organizations involved in said programs.

The annual report shall evaluate the content, implementation, and impact of all policies related to reproductive health and family planning to ensure that such policies promote, protect and fulfill women’s reproductive health and rights.

SEC. 22. Congressional Oversight Committee on Reproductive Health Act. – There is hereby created a Congressional Oversight Committee (COC) composed of five (5) members each from the Senate and the House of Representatives. The members from the Senate and the House of Representatives shall be appointed by the Senate President and the Speaker, respectively, with at least one (1) member representing the Minority.

The COC shall be headed by the respective Chairs of the Committee on Health and Demography of the Senate and the Committee on Population and Family Relations of the House of Representatives. The Secretariat of the COC shall come from the existing Secretariat personnel of the Senate and the House of Representatives committees concerned.

The COC shall monitor and ensure the effective implementation of this Act, recommend the necessary remedial legislation or administrative measures, and shall conduct a review of this Act every five (5) years from its effectivity. The COC shall perform such other duties and functions as may be necessary to attain the objectives of tins Act.

SEC. 23. Prohibited Acts. – The following acts are prohibited:

(a) Any health care service provider, whether public or private, who shall:

(1) Knowingly withhold information or restrict the dissemination thereof, and/or intentionally provide incorrect information regarding programs and services on reproductive health including the right to informed choice and access to a full range of legal, medically-safe, non-abortifacient and effective family planning methods;

(2) Refuse to perform legal and medically-safe reproductive health procedures on any person of legal age on the ground of lack of consent or authorization of the following persons in the following instances:

(i) Spousal consent in case of married persons: Provided, That in case of disagreement, the decision of the one undergoing the procedure shall prevail; and

(ii) Parental consent or that of the person exercising parental authority in the case of abused minors, where the parent or the person exercising parental authority is the respondent, accused or convicted perpetrator as certified by the proper prosecutorial office of the court. In the case of minors, the written consent of parents or legal guardian or, in their absence, persons exercising parental authority or next-of-kin shall be required only in elective surgical procedures and in no case shall consent be required in emergency or serious cases as defined in Republic Act No. 8344; and

(3) Refuse to extend quality health care services and information on account of the person’s marital status, gender, age, religious convictions, personal circumstances, or nature of work: Provided, That the conscientious objection of a health care service provider based on his/her ethical or religious beliefs shall be respected; however, the conscientious objector shall immediately refer the person seeking such care and services to another health care service provider within the same facility or one which is conveniently accessible: Provided, further, That the person is not in an emergency condition or serious case as defined in Republic Act No. 8344, which penalizes the refusal of hospitals and medical clinics to administer appropriate initial medical treatment and support in emergency and serious cases;

(b) Any public officer, elected or appointed, specifically charged with the duty to implement the provisions hereof, who, personally or through a subordinate, prohibits or restricts the delivery of legal and medically-safe reproductive health care services, including family planning; or forces, coerces or induces any person to use such services; or refuses to allocate, approve or release any budget for reproductive health care services, or to support reproductive health programs; or shall do any act that hinders the full implementation of a reproductive health program as mandated by this Act;

(c) Any employer who shall suggest, require, unduly influence or cause any applicant for employment or an employee to submit himself/herself to sterilization, use any modern methods of family planning, or not use such methods as a condition for employment, continued employment, promotion or the provision of employment benefits. Further, pregnancy or the number of children shall not be a ground for non-hiring or termination from employment;

(d) Any person who shall falsify a Certificate of Compliance as required in Section 15 of this Act; and

(e) Any pharmaceutical company, whether domestic or multinational, or its agents or distributors, which directly or indirectly colludes with government officials, whether appointed or elected, in the distribution, procurement and/or sale by the national government and LGUs of modern family planning supplies, products and devices.

SEC. 24. Penalties. – Any violation of this Act or commission of the foregoing prohibited acts shall be penalized by imprisonment ranging from one (1) month to six (6) months or a fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) to One hundred thousand pesos (P100,000.00), or both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the competent court: Provided, That, if the offender is a public officer, elected or appointed, he/she shall also suffer the penalty of suspension not exceeding one (1) year or removal and forfeiture of retirement benefits depending on the gravity of the offense after due notice and hearing by the appropriate body or agency.

If the offender is a juridical person, the penalty shall be imposed upon the president or any responsible officer. An offender who is an alien shall, after service of sentence, be deported immediately without further proceedings by the Bureau of Immigration. If the offender is a pharmaceutical company, its agent and/or distributor, their license or permit to operate or conduct business in the Philippines shall be perpetually revoked, and a fine triple the amount involved in the violation shall be imposed.

SEC. 25. Appropriations. – The amounts appropriated in the current annual General Appropriations Act (GAA) for reproductive health and natural and artificial family planning and responsible parenthood under the DOH and other concerned agencies shall be allocated and utilized for the implementation of this Act. Such additional sums necessary to provide for the upgrading of faculties necessary to meet BEMONC and CEMONC standards; the training and deployment of skilled health providers; natural and artificial family planning commodity requirements as outlined in Section 10, and for other reproductive health and responsible parenthood services, shall be included in the subsequent years’ general appropriations. The Gender and Development (GAD) funds of LGUs and national agencies may be a source of funding for the implementation of this Act.

SEC. 26. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). – Within sixty (60) days from the effectivity of this Act, the DOH Secretary or his/her designated representative as Chairperson, the authorized representative/s of DepED, DSWD, Philippine Commission on Women, PHIC, Department of the Interior and Local Government, National Economic and Development Authority, League of Provinces, League of Cities, and League of Municipalities, together with NGOs, faith-based organizations, people’s, women’s and young people’s organizations, shall jointly promulgate the rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this Act. At least four (4) members of the IRR drafting committee, to be selected by the DOH Secretary, shall come from NGOs.

SEC. 27. Interpretation Clause. – This Act shall be liberally construed to ensure the provision, delivery and access to reproductive health care services, and to promote, protect and fulfill women’s reproductive health and rights.

SEC. 28. Separability Clause. – If any part or provision of this Act is held invalid or unconstitutional, the other provisions not affected thereby shall remain in force and effect.

SEC. 29. Repealing Clause. – Except for prevailing laws against abortion, any law, presidential decree or issuance, executive order, letter of instruction, administrative order, rule or regulation contrary to or is inconsistent with the provisions of this Act including Republic Act No. 7392, otherwise known as the Midwifery Act, is hereby repealed, modified or amended accordingly.

SEC 30. Effectivity. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

About these ads

Republic Act 10354 – Reproductive Health Act of 2012

Fulfilling his pledge that the controversial reproductive health bill will be enacted before 2012 ends, President Benigno Aquino III has signed Republic Act 10354 or the “Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012″ in Malacanang last December 21. Click this link to download the full text of RA 10354 (credits to Rappler.com for originally uploading the file).

republic act 10354 - reproductive health law

President Benigno Aquino III has signed into law Republic Act 10354 or the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012

Online news outlet Rappler.com noted that Aquino’s low-key signing of the law stands in contrast with the great deal of attention that the measure received from supporters and opponents alike throughout the many years it has languished in Congress.

RA 10354 is the consolidated version of House Bill 4244, which was primarily authored by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman and Iloilo Rep. Janette Garin) and Senate Bill 2865, which has Senators Pia Cayetano and Miriam Defensor-Santiago as its main author.

The law will come into effect fifteen days after the publication of all its contents in at least two national newspapers. Malacanang has already published a text version of RA 10354 in its official website. This blog will also be posting its entire content.

PERSONAL:

I have always been open about my support for the RH bill (still not used to referring it as a “law”!). It is a pleasure to get to know advocates and fellow supporters in the past few years that I’ve written about the measure, including Ms Chi Laigo-Vallido (Forum for Family Planning and Development), Ms Elizabeth Angsioco (Democratic Socialist Women of the Philippines), Mr. Ramon San Pascual* and Ms Maida Ojeda of the Philippine Legislators Committee on Population and Development and Juan Carlo Tejano and Gibby Gorres of the Student Council Alliance of the Philippines. (Note: Mr. San Pascual is now with the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians for Population and Development in Bangkok, Thailand).

mark madrona rh bill

Supporting the reproductive health bill (now a law) with full conviction!

Honestly, I had hoped that Malacanang would organize a formal signing ceremonies for this landmark law in the presence of RH advocates (see for example this 2010 video of United States President Barack Obama signing the law which repealed the long-standing policy prohibiting gays in the military). Those who campaigned for the passage of the RH bill for over a decade now deserved that moment.

Aquino can also use that moment to give a full-throttled defense of his support for the initiative (again, like what Obama did). But on another thought,  he probably did not want to offend the Catholic Church by being perceived as “spiking the ball” after scoring a win. Oh well, RA 10354 will never come into being without his decisive support.

I’m sad to note that two of my professors in University of the Philippines-Diliman, Dr. Josefina Cabigon (UP Population Institute) and Dr. Ma. Lina Nepomuceno-Van Heugten (UP Psychology Department), did not live to see this day. Wherever they are, I know this news will make them happy.

PLEASE LIKE THE FILIPINO SCRIBE ON FACEBOOK!

House, Senate OKs RH bill on final reading

Bucking intense pressure from the powerful Roman Catholic Church, both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed on third and final reading their respective versions of the controversial reproductive health bill Monday evening. A bicameral conference committee will soon be formed to reconcile the two versions of the bill before it can be sent to President Benigno Aquino III for final approval. Check this page on the Senate website for an explanatory note on how the legislative process works.

This is the farthest the bill has gone since it was first introduced in Congress in the 1990s. This time, it did not take the Lower House five hours to render a verdict on the RH bill. For the third reading, House solons were required to cast a vote first regarding the measure before being allowed to explain their stand.

The lengthy perorations of certain lawmakers last Wednesday night dragged the proceedings until Thursday midnight. Shortly after the presence of a quorum has been confirmed early Monday night, the House leadership immediately put the RH bill to a vote. In contrast to the close vote during the second reading, the pro-RH bill camp won decisively this time – 133 votes in favor, 79 votes against, and 7 abstentions.

The Senate also gave a decisive victory for the advocates of the RH bill. Today’s RH bill proceedings in the Upper House began with Senator Vicente Sotto III introducing 33 amendments to the proposed legislation. This led to a repeated back-and-forth between Sotto and Senators Pia Cayetano and Miriam Defensor-Santiago. Once Sotto was done with his individual amendments, Cayetano moved to have the bill voted on the second reading. Santiago backed her motion. The vote on the second and third reading yielded the same 13-8 result in favor of the RH bill.

purple ribbon for rh bill

The Reproductive Health bill moved closer to being a law today, December 17

YES:

Angara

Arroyo*

Cayetano, A.

Cayetano, P.

Defensor-Santiago

Drilon

Escudero

Guingona

Lacson

Legarda

Marcos

Pangilinan

Recto*

NO:

Enrile

Estrada

Honasan

Pimentel

Revilla

Sotto

Trillanes

Villar

Senators Arroyo and Recto voted “yes” on the condition that the amendments made on the Senate version will make it through the bicameral conference committee. Curiously, Senators Lito Lapid and Sergio Osmena III did not take part in today’s proceedings. Their votes may be crucial in case Arroyo and Recto decide to switch sides in the end.

Different reactions

In a pastoral letter released just as the nation marks the beginning of the annual Simbang Gabi, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) once again slammed the RH bill. Penned by Lingayen Dagupan Archbishop Socrates Villegas, the statement describes the RH bill as being “gift wrapped to look like a gift for maternal health care (even if) it will lead to greater crimes against women.” The CBCP also hailed opponents of the bill as “heroes” of the nation.

For its part, international advocacy group Human Rights Watch (HRW) said the RH bill is “a massive step forward to promote women’s health” and that its passage “marks the start of an era in which public policies can save lives, promote healthy family planning, and respect human rights.” HRW Asia researcher Carlos Conde added: “The Aquino administration should be credited for having the political will to muster support for the bill in Congress despite the threat of a political backlash.”

PS: Read this article from Rappler.com for a detailed account of what happened in today’s Senate proceedings.

Jose Rizal and the Reproductive Health bill

It has been 116 years since our national hero Jose Rizal was executed in Bagumbayan, but his ideas are now being dragged into the raging debate regarding the long-pending reproductive health (RH) bill. Last year, Rep. Arlene “Kaka” of Akbayan explained that the controversial bill mirror’s “Rizal’s legacy of advancing the importance of education, knowledge, and progress.”

The lady lawmaker further expounded: “By providing the people with the widest array of options, the RH bill essentially enlightens and broadens the people’s perspectives on how they combat sexually transmitted diseases as well as the planning and management of healthy Filipino families.” Not to be outdone, the local Catholic Church argued that since RH bill will lead to more abortions in the country (a claim that has been debunked as early as 2008 by Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman), Rizal’s vision for the youth to be the “oag-asa ng bayan” (“hope of the future”) may be in danger.

Jose Rizal - reproductive health bill

Jose Rizal’s past writings indicate that he would have supported and not opposed the reproductive health bill (personal photo)

In his Philippine Daily Inquirer column, historian Ambeth Ocampo warned that forcing the national hero into the RH bill debate “is to put words in Rizal’s mouth.” He nevertheless speculated that if Rizal supported the bill, his mother Teodora Alonso “would probably have pulled rank, twisted his ear, and scolded him.” Dona Teodora after all is the mother of 11 children apart from being a devout Catholic.

In voicing out his support for the RH bill, Deputy Erin Tañada noted that the measure “promotes not only access to information, but (also) the freedom of informed choice among individuals and families.” He went on to recall that the Catholic Church during the 1950s vigorously opposed Section Two of Republic Act 1425 or the Rizal Law. This section says that Noli Me Tangere and El Filibusterismo should be a required reading material for all schools – even those ran by religious orders.

In a pastoral statement, the local Catholic hierarchy defended their stance by saying that Rizal’s two novels contains passages that are “against Catholic dogma and morals” as well as portions which “repeatedly attacks” the Catholicism in general.

The prelates quoted Rizal as having said that although he only intended to attack the friars, the latter “used the ritual and superstitions of a religion as a shield.” Rizal further continued: “I had to get rid of that shield in order to wound the enemy that was hiding behind it.” Rizal must be turning in his grave knowing how the so-called pro-life camp mangled his words deliberately to fit in their agenda.

Rizal’s famous letter to the women of Malolos also gives us a glimpse on his views on the role of education as an individual seeks self-determination and women empowerment as a whole.  “You have discovered that it is not goodness to be too obedient to every desire and request of those who pose as little gods, but to obey what is reasonable and just, because blind obedience is the origin of crooked orders and in this case both parties sin,” Rizal wrote in his letter.

Toward the end, Rizal emphasized that “ignorance is bondage.” Rizal is pro-education and pro-women empowerment. He is also anti-Catholic dogmatism. Had Rizal been alive today, he will most likely be one of the stalwarts of the pro RH camp, no doubt.

MUST READ:

Senate RH bill saga reaches climax from Rappler.com

Rizal’s thoughts on education from the National Historical Commission of the Philippines

PS: Mandaluyong Rep. Neptali Gonzales Jr., the House Majority Leader, has warned that Liberal Party solons who will not vote in favor of the RH bill may face “disciplinary actions.” While this blog supports the bill without any reservations, that kind of public arm-twisting is uncalled for. Lawmakers should be left to decide on the matter on their own.

Gonzales’ pronouncement gives the anti-RH bloc a strong narrative in case they lose e.g. the solons backed the RH merely out of fear of the President. Doing so will of course be hypocritical on their part since the Catholic Church has long announced that they will campaign against those who will support the measure during the 2013 elections.

House approves RH bill on second reading

The Philippine House of Representatives narrowly passed the controversial reproductive health bill (House Bill 4244) on second reading, 113 to 104 in favor of those supporting the measure. The approval comes at the end of a marathon legislative session that started Wednesday afternoon and lasted until early morning of Thursday.

Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman, the chief proponent of the bill in the Lower House, deflected most of the amendments that critics of the bill like Cebu Rep. Pablo Garcia, Batangas Rep. Hermilando Mandanas, and Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez have put forward. The House leadership closed the period of amendments around 8PM and initially tried to hasten the bill’s passage by pushing for a viva voce vote (or via voice vote of ayes and nays).

House Deputy Majority Leader Erin Tanada soon pronounced the affirmative side as the winner in the voice voting. Cebu Rep. Pablo Garcia and Navotas Rep. Tobias Tiangco challenged its results and pushed for a nominal voting instead. In this process, all House solons will be given up to three minutes to explain their vote. According to initial reports, 217 members of the lower house are present in today’s deliberations – enough to constitute a quorum.

The number needed to make the bill advance to the third and final reading remained uncertain until the end because of latecomers led by Saranggani Rep. Manny Pacquiao. In the end, 111 became the magic number since only 220 out of 286 House members voted during the proceedings. As a presiding officer, Tanada can only vote only in case of a tie. To advance to the Senate, the bill has to be supported by a simple majority (or 144 votes, assuming everyone is present during Monday’s session).

In response to a query from The Filipino Scribe, the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development explained that since the RH bill is already passed in the second reading, the House Secretariat will have to distribute a copy of the amended bill to all members of Congress within the next three days. The measure will undergo a third and final reading on Monday.

How did your district representative vote? Check this list:

YES            

1. Abad, Dina (Batanes)

2. Aglipay (DIWA)

3. Alcala (Quezon)

4. Alvarez, M. (Negros Occidental)

5. Amante-Matba (Agusan del Norte)

6. Angara (Aurora)

7. Antonio, Patricio (Agbiag PL)

8. Arnaiz (Negros Oriental)

9. Arquiza (Senior Citizens PL)

10. Bag-ao (Akbayan PL)

11. Baguilat (Ifugao)

12. Balindong (Lanao del Sur)

13. Banal (QC)

14. Barzaga (Cavite)

15. Batocabe (Ako Bicol)

16. Bautista (Davao del Sur)

17. Bello (Akbayan)

18. Belmonte (Quezon City)

19. Belmonte (Lanao del Norte)

20. Benaldo (Cagayan de Oro)

21. Benitez (Negros Occidental)

22. Bernos (Abra)

23. Biazon (Muntinlupa)

24. Binay (Makati)

25. Biron (Iloilo)

26. Bondoc (Pampanga)

27, Bulut-Begtang (Apayao)

28. Cajayon (Caloocan)

29. Calixto-Rubiano (Pasay)

30. Casino (Bayan Muna)

31. Castelo (Quezon City)

32. Catamco (North Cotabato)

33. Celeste (Pangasinan)

34. Cerafica (Taguig-Pateros)

35. Chipeco (Laguna)

36. Cojuangco (Pangasinan)

37. Colmenares (Bayan Muna)

38. Cosalan (Benguet)

39. Cruz-Gonzales (CIBAC)

40. Datumanong (Maguindanao)

41. De Jesus, Emmi (Gabriela PL)

42. Defensor (Iloilo)

43. Del Rosario (Davao del Norte)

44. Del Rosario (Capiz)

45. Dimaporo (Lanao del Norte)

46. Duavit (Rizal)

47. Ebdane (Zambales)

48. Eriguel (La Union)

49. Espina (Biliran)

50. Estrella (ABONO)

51. Flores (Bukidnon)

52. Fuentes (South Cotabato)

53. Garcia-Albano (Davao City)

54. Garin (Iloilo)

55. Garin (AAMBIS-OWA)

56. Gatchalian, R. (Valenzuela)

57. Gatchalian, W. (Alay Buhay PL)

58. Go, A. (Isabela)

59. Go, Arnulfo (Sultan Kudarat)

60. Gonzales, N. (Mandaluyong)

61. Guanlao (Butil)

62. Haresco (Ang Kasangga)

63. Hataman (Basilan)

64. Herrera-Dy (Bagong Henerasyon)

65. Ilagan (Gabriela)

66. Jalosjos, C. (Zamboanga del Norte)

67. Jalosjos, S. (Zamboanga del Norte)

68. Joson (Nueva Ecija)

69. Kho (Senior Citizens PL)

70. Lacson-Noel (Malabon)

71. Lagdameo, A. (Davao del Norte)

72. Lagdameo, M. (Makati City)

73. Lagman (Albay)

74. Ledesma (Negros Occidental)

75. Limkaichong (Negros Oriental)

76. Loong (Sulu)

77. Lopez, C. (Manila)

78. Lopez, C.J. (YACAP)

79. Loyola, R. (Cavite)

80. Maranan (1-UTAK)

81. Mariano (Anakpawis)

82. Mendoza (TUCP )

83. Miraflores (Aklan)

84. Mirasol (Negros Occidental)

85. Nava (Guimaras)

86. Ortega (La Union)

87. Padilla (Nueva Vizcaya)

88. Paez (COOP-NATCO)

89. Palatino (Kabataan PL)

90. Palmones (AGHAM)

91. Ponce-Enrile (Cagayan)

92. Primicias-Agabas (Pangasinan)

93. Quimbo (Marikina)

94. Sacdalan (North Cotabato)

95. Sahidulla (Sulu)

96. Sakaluran (Sultan Kudarat)

97. Sarmiento (Western Samar)

98. Sema (Lanao del Norte)

99. Singson (Ilocos Sur)

100. Sy-Alvarado (Bulacan)

101. Teodoro (Tarlac)

102. Tinga (Taguig City)

103. Tinio (ACT)

104. Tomawis (ALIF)

105. Trenas (Iloilo City)

106. Tugna (CIBAC)

107. Tupas (Iloilo)

108. Ungab (Davao City)

109. Villar (Las Pinas)

110. Villarica (Bulacan)

111. Yap (Tarlac)

112. Yu (Zamboanga del Sur)

113. Zubiri (Bukidnon)

NO

1. Abayon (Aangat Tayo)

2. Acharon (General Santos)

3. Acop (Antipolo)

4. Alcover (ANAD)

5. Almario, Thelma (Davao Oriental)

6. Alvarez, Antonio (Palawan)

7. Angping (Manila)

8. Antonino, Rodolfo (N.E)

9. Apacible (Batangas)

10. Aquino (Agusan)

11. Arago (Laguna)

12. Asilo (Manila)

13. Bagasina (ALE PL)

14. Bagatsing (Manila)

15. Bataoil (Pangasinan)

16. Bichara (Albay)

17. Bonoan-David (Manila)

18. Cabaluna (1-CARE)

19. Cabilao Yambao (Zamboanga Sibugay)

20. Calimbas-Villarosa (Mindoro Occidental)

21. Cari (Leyte)

22. Castro (Capiz)

23. Cerilles (Zamboanga del Sur)

24. Climaco (Zamboanga City)

25. Co, Christopher (Ako Bicol)

26. Crisologo (QC)

27. Cua (Quirino)

28. Dalog (Mt.Province)

29. De Venecia (Pangasinan)

30. Del Mar (Cebu)

31. Dimaporo, F. (Lanao del Norte)

32. Ejercito, Juan Victor (San Juan)

33. Fabian (Zamboanga)

34. Ferrer (Cavite)

35. Fortuno (Camarines Sur)

36. Fua (Siquijor)

37. Fuentebella (Camarines Sur)

38. Garay (Surigao del Sur)

39. Garbin (Ako Bicol)

40. Garcia, Albert Raymond (Bataan)

41. Garcia, P. (Cebu)

42. Garcia, P.J. (Cebu)

43. Golez (Bacolod)

44, Golez (Paranaque)

45. Torres-Gomez (Ormoc)

46. Gonzales, A. (Pampanga)

47. Gonzales F. (Albay)

48. Gullas (Cebu)

49. Javier (Antique)

50. Lanete (Masbate)

51. Lico (Ating Koop)

52. Macapagal-Arroyo, J.M (Ang Galing Pinoy)

53. Madrona (Romblon)

54. Magsaysay (Zambales)

55. Malapitan (Caloocan)

56. Maliksi (Cavite)

57. Mandanas (Batangas)

58. Maranon (Negros Occidental)

59. Marcos (Ilocos Norte)

60. Matugas (Surigao del Norte)

61. Mellana (Agusan del Sur)

62. Mendoza (Batangas)

63. Mercado-Revilla (Cavite)

64. Montejo (An Waray)

65. Noel, B. (An Waray)

66. Nograles (Davao)

67. Obillo (Una ang Pamilya)

68. Ong (Northern Samar)

69. Pacquiao (Saranggani)

70. Panotes (Camarines Norte)

71. Paras (Bukidnon)

72. Payuyo (APEC)

73. Piamonte (A-Teacher)

74. Plaza (Agusan del Sur)

75. Puno (Antipolo)

76. Ramos (Sorsogon)

77. Rivera (1-CARE)

78. Robes (San Jose del Monte City)

79. Rodriguez, I. (Abante Mindanao)

80. Rodriguez, R. (Cagayan de Oro)

81. Rodriguez, R. (Rizal)

82. Romarate (Surigao del Norte)

83. Romualdez (Leyte)

84. Romualdo (Camiguin)

85. Romulo (Pasig)

86. Salimbangon (Cebu)

87. Sarmiento (Catanduanes)

88. Socrates (Palawan)

89. Suarez (Quezon)

90. Syjuco (Iloilo)

91. Teves (Negros Oriental)

92. Tiangco (Navotas)

93. Tieng (Buhay)

94. Ting (Cagayan)

95. Ty (LPGMA)

96. Umali (Nueva Ecija)

97. Unabia (Misamis Oriental)

98. Unico (Camarines Norte)

99. Valencia (Mindoro Oriental)

100. Velarde (BUHAY)

101. Velasco (Marinduque)

102. Vergara (Baguio City)

103. Violago (Nueva Ecija)

104. Yap, A. (Bohol)

ABSTAIN

1. Ferrer (Negros Occidental)

2. Gunigundo (Valenzuela City)

3. Remulla (Cavite)

 

On Tito Sotto the Plagiarizer’s ‘blogger lang’ remark

Plagiarism + sloppy researching = Tito Sotto

(NB: I am not a fan of Senator/part-time noontime show host Vicente “Tito” Sotto III. Shortly before the May 2010 elections, I labeled him together with Senators Bong Revilla and Lito Lapid as “The Three Stooges.” Philippine Star’s Boo Chanco reprinted that post in his April 9, 2010 column.)

The list of public personalities embroiled in plagiarism scandals in different contexts has gotten longer recently. Early this year, the House Justice Committee voted to impeach Supreme Court Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo for plagiarizing excerpts from a foreign journal article parts for a decision he penned. A year before that, Palanca-award Hall of Famer Krip Yuson was found to have plagiarized another writer’s work for a magazine article.

Overseas, Hungarian president resigned last April after it was revealed that he plagiarized parts of his doctoral dissertation twenty years ago. Just this August, Time magazine managing editor and CNN TV host Fareed Zakaria was slapped a one month suspension (which has since been rescinded) for writing a column which contains a paragraph copied without any attribution from a New Yorker article. Sotto is obviously in good company.

Pal Schmitt of Hungary resigned as president because of a plagiarism scandal. (Credits: BBC News)

Plagiarism in educational institutions is considered a crime. For example, professors at the University of the Philippines can refer students who are caught plagiarizing in the Student Disciplinary Tribunal for due process. If found guilty, erring students can face any of the following penalties, as stipulated in the Student’s Code – suspension, expulsion, and revocation of the degree earned (if the act is discovered after the student has already graduated).

Aside from being ridiculed publicly, plagiarizers outside the academe do not really have to worry about any legal consequence. Will an author whose work had been plagiarized go as far as filing a case against the offending party in relation to the Intellectual Property Code? In the present Congress, Rep. Winston Castelo of Quezon City proposed a bill that recommends tough sanctions against guilty individuals. Download Castelo anti-plagiarism bill here.

Last Wednesday, the Senator-comedian delivered part II of his so-called “turno en contra” on the reproductive health bill. The full text of his speech can be read in the Senate website. Two days before that, he made headlines by claiming that the 1975 death of his first son with actress Helen Gamboa was caused by a contraceptive pill (a claim immediately rebutted by former health secretary Esperanza Cabral). Aside from the loopholes in Sotto’s arguments, it was also discovered that huge chunks of his two speeches was copied word-for-word without proper attribution from FIVE BLOGGERS.

Instead of giving a public apology (which is what business magnate Manny Pangilinan did in 2010), Sotto went on the offensive. Speaking to Karen Davila on ABS-CBN News Channel’s Headstart, Sotto claimed that he should not quote American blogger Sarah Pope anymore since they are just both citing the work of Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride. As an added punch line, Sotto said: “Bakit ko naman iko-quote ang blogger? Blogger lang iyon.”

Tito Sotto: “Bakit ko naman iko-quote ang blogger? Blogger lang iyon.” (credits: Kiks de la Tonga/LIKHAAN)

Blogs can be a useful source of information, and yes, as Sotto and his chief-of-staff contends, their contents are readily available in the public domain. However, information obtained from blogs should be treated with a grain of salt. The easiness by which one can put up a blog is the medium’s greatest weakness. Aside from being poorly written, many blogs out there contain trash.

Except on rare instances like when the subject of the story is the site owner, blogs are secondary sources of information. When we discuss other peoples’ research in our work, we more often than not add our own interpretation of it. Sotto would have been free from charges of plagiarism had he said in his speech something like: “According to Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, as cited by American blogger Sarah Pope…”

Nevertheless, Sotto’s aides are still guilty of sloppy researching. Why settle for a secondary source when accessing the primary reference will take you just a few minutes more of researching?  This is the problem with those who rely on Wikipedia hook, line, and sinker. Rather than relying on what a Wikipedia article on a certain subjects says, researchers should check out the list of references at the bottom of the said page instead for fact-verification.

The plagiarism scandal involving Sotto has now been reported in ABC News, Washington Post, The Guardian in Great Britain, and many other foreign media outlets. This whole episode should raise awareness not just among politicians but to everyone that detecting plagiarism is as easy as perpetrating the act itself, thanks to online search engines.

tito sotto plagiarism - washington post

The plagiarism scandal involving Tito Sotto has been reported by foreign media outlets. (Screenshot from Washington Post website)

In this particular case, online users not affiliated with media outlets are the ones that first proved Sotto’s plagiarism. Two factors have worked against Sotto:1) Google has made it almost effortless to detect plagiarism, and 2) The dubious nature of Sotto’s claims in his speech (ergo, that a contraceptive pill caused the death of his first child) naturally invited scrutiny into it.

What should we expect from here? Sotto is not likely to face any legal charges for what he did (hence, he had the gall to dare bloggers to sue him). Concerned parties may instead file a complaint against Sotto through the Senate Ethics Committee but it is improbable for Senators to censure one of their own.

Even more preposterous is for anyone to expect Sotto to resign his Senate seat. His term ends in 2016, and he is eligible for reelection. As it is, engaging in plagiarism in school can get you expelled, but if you’re an honorable senator, plagiarism carries no tangible consequence.

Postscript: Red Tani of the Filipino Freethinkers has published an article questioning the scientific credentials of Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, Sotto’s alleged expert source. Before you concern yourself about citing an author properly, you should first assess the credibility of that source.

2010 Philippine Census of Population – a case for passing the RH bill

The National Statistics Office released earlier this month the results of the 2010 Census of Population and Housing. The figures were made official by President Benigno Aquino III through Proclamation 362, which he signed last March 30. The census, conducted from May 14 to June 17, 2010 with May 1, 2010 as reference date, show that there were 92,337,852 Filipinos during the study period.

NSO noted in a press statement that the Philippine population increased by 15.83 million from its 2000 total of 76.51 million. The agency added that this translates to a population growth rate (PGR) of 1.9 percent from 2000 to 2010. This figure is nominally lower than the 2.34 percent population growth rate recorded from 1990 to 2000.

For the twenty year period between 1990 and 2010, the population grew by 2.12 percent. Prior to 2010, the last census was done in 2007. It placed the national population at 88,566,732 with a growth rate of 2.04 percent from 2000.

The conduct of a national census is governed by Batas Pambansa Blg. 72 and Commonwealth Act 591. The Philippine Star’s Iris Gonzales reported two years ago that “about 58,000 enumerators, 11,500 team supervisors, 3,300 census area supervisors, and 2,800 assistant census area supervisors” will be involved in the 2010 census. A total budget of P2.16 billion had been allotted for the entire project.

Does the lower PGR mean that the long-pending reproductive health bill isn’t needed anymore? In her 2008 State of the Nation Address (SONA), then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo noted that the 2.04 percent growth rate recorded in the 2007 census was achieved by her administration “by promoting natural family planning and female education.”

In 2008, then-President Arroyo said: “Informed choice should mean letting more couples, who are mostly Catholics, know about natural family planning.”

And in a statement that must have slighted former President Fidel Ramos who is present during that SONA, Arroyo added that the said PGR is lower than “the 2.36 (PGR recorded) in the 1990s, when artificial birth control was pushed.” Arroyo lamented that “long years of pushing contraceptives made it synonymous to family planning.” She (wrongly) declared: “Informed choice should mean letting more couples, who are mostly Catholics, know about natural family planning.”

It will be presumptuous for groups and individuals opposed to the Reproductive Health (RH) bill to cite the lower PGR (as of 2010) as a sign that the said measure is no longer needed. Although the 1.9 percent PGR recorded in 2010 is lower relative to previous censuses, it is still the second highest in the whole Southeast Asia. Timor Leste’s PGR of 1.96% may be higher than the Philippines, but that country has a population of just a little over a million, according to the US Central Intelligence Agency’s 2012 World Fact Book.

There are several factors that may have contributed to the continuing nominal decline of the national population growth. In response to Arroyo’s 2008 SONA, Dr. Grace Cruz from the University of the Philippines Population Institute clarified that population growth has slowed down “not through natural family planning but due to lower fertility and higher use of contraceptives.”

It is safe to assume that more and more women are taking it upon themselves to use birth control methods despite strong pressure from the Catholic Church against contraceptives because they are aware of the economic hardships they will have endure because of an unplanned pregnancy. Some may even be inclined to practice abstinence or delay marriage plans altogether.

Ramon San Pascual is the outgoing director of Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD)

Ramon San Pascual, outgoing director of the Philippine Legislators’ Committee on Population and Development (PLCPD), stressed in a statement that the Philippines can achieve a lower birth rate if not for the absence of a comprehensive national RH policy. San Pascual, who will soon lead the Asian Forum of Parliamentarians for Population and Development in Bangkok, Thailand, also reiterated that 33 percent of total pregnancies among Filipino women are either mistimed or unplanned.

Further aggravating the situation, according to him, is the lack of access to family planning education and services by the poor. In declaring the need to improve maternal health as one of its eight-point Millennium Development Goals, the United Nations noted: “Giving birth is especially risky in Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, where most women deliver without skilled care.”

For his part, Benjamin de Leon, president of the Forum for Family Planning and Development (The Forum), echoed San Pascual’s appeal for Filipinos not to regard the census figures as plain statistics. “We should look beyond the numbers and think about what this means in terms of provision of services.  Each year, 1.7 million more Filipinos will demand and deserve basic services of food, shelter, health and education to name a few,” De Leon expounded.

He cited as an example the lingering shortage of classrooms and other school essentials in public education institutions around the country. “Education and access to health are connected,” De Leon pointed out. The results obtained from censuses is said to be important because it will be used by the government in policy making. If that is truly the case, then lawmakers should take due notice and pass the RH bill.

Please like the Facebook page of “Notes from the Philippines”!

Student leaders to solons: Decide on the RH bill before 2013 polls

With just thirteen months left before next year’s midterm elections, newly-elected student leaders from universities around Metro Manila have once again reiterated their call for lawmakers to vote on the long-stalled Reproductive Health (RH) bill, saying that it is important in the promotion of the youth’s interests.

JC Tejano, national spokesperson of the Student Council Alliance of the Philippines, said that students have a huge stake in the said measure since adolescent reproductive health is important. He noted that only 6 % of those who engage in premarital sex use contraceptives and that one out of three Filipino women will get pregnant by age 20.

Me and JC Tejano, SCAP national spokesperson

He also said that since the youth are not properly educated on the subject, many among them turn to pornography to know more about sex. “We know that porn usually shows unsafe sexual practices,” he said. “We want to warn solons that are anti-RH bill that they being anti-youth. If you are denying reproductive health to us, you are denying us our future,” Tejano said. Their group, he said, is ready to ‘unleash the full force of the youth’ to vouch for the bill and this includes campaigning against anti-RH lawmakers.

Tejano’s stand was seconded by Hanz Ocampo, president-elect of the University of the East student council. He explained that sex education must be started before a child reaches puberty. “Children are curious about sex. They should know what is going on inside their bodies,” Ocampo said. He, however, pointed out that parents themselves were not properly educated about the subject because of the “stigma” associated with sex.

The news conference was organized by The Forum for Family Planning and Development

The SCAP spokesperson added that more and more young Filipinos are at risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases. According to figures from the National Epidemiology Center, 704 or 30% of the 2,349 new cases of HIV reported in 2011 came from the 15-24 age group. This is an increase from the 489 cases recorded for the said age bracket for 2010. International news agency Agence France-Presse earlier reported that the Philippines is one of only seven countries in the world to have rising infection rates in 2010.

For Heart Diño, incoming chair of the UP Diliman USC, passage of the RH bill is a means for Philippines to achieve social development, right to information, and youth empowerment. Aside from the absence of a comprehensive sex education for the youth, Diño stated that there are also no discussions in school as regards gender orientation and sexual identity. Diño is the first transgender to be elected as head of a student government in the country.

With Heart Diño, UP Diliman University Student Council chair

Diño stressed that the RH bill would be the top agenda of the youth in next year’s polls. She asked lawmakers to be “progressive enough” and not oppose the bill “to get the support of certain voting blocks.”  She brushed aside suggestions for the bill to be decided through a plebiscite by 2013, saying that the legislative process must be followed.

Gibby Gorres, SCAP’s national secretary general, for his part lambasted Filipino politicians for being “inutile” in representing their constituents’ views on the RH bill. A survey conducted by Social Weather Stations last August 2011 shows that almost three-fourths of Filipinos agree that the government should disseminate information on all legal family planning methods. Only 29% of respondents in the said survey regarded using contraceptives like condoms, pills, and IUDs as abortion.

With Gibby Gorres, SCAP national secretary general

“Being anti-RH is essentially a crime. They (anti-RH solons) are letting mothers dies indiscriminately. This is as big a deal as extrajudicial killings and budget cuts in education,” Gorres said. He added that there is no scientific study which indicates that the promotion of reproductive health leads to an increase in premarital sexual activities.

Asked about the argument that implementing the RH bill would be too costly for the government, Leona Arcellana of the UP Manila USC stressed that pending on the RH bill is “nothing compared to spending on health issues.” Arcellana added: “Trying to save a mother’s life is costlier than buying a condom. It will prevent the government from spending more, especially on the urban poor.”

The news conference was organized by The Forum for Family Planning and Development (The Forum) last March 22. The Forum is a non-government organization that advocates for the passage of the RH bill.

Must read:

Winning 2nd place in Go Negosyo essay writing tilt

Let me share to all readers of my blog this piece of good news. I recently won 2nd place in the recently concluded 2012 Babae Kapuso Ka ng Bayan essay writing competition. It was organized by the Philippine Center for Entrepreneurship (PCE), a group best known for their Go Negosyo initiative.

The contest aims to “promote and encourage conscious awareness of the contributions of Filipino women in the different levels of society, in the different social strata, and in all fields imaginable.” Read their official contest announcement here.

My article "Empowering Pinay entrepreneurs as key players in achieving national progress" has been published in the Go Negosyo website

My winning entry is titled Empowering Pinay entrepreneurs as key players in achieving national progress, where I wrote that “limited access to capital and business know-show should never be allowed to be a glass ceiling for Filipina entrepreneurs.” The essay is now published in the PCE Go Negosyo website.

Deofelyn Ocayo and Angelica Jazmin Cabrera won first and third place, respectively. Winning participants received a certificate of recognition, a set of Go Negosyo books, among other items.

The contest was open to all Filipinos, even to those based overseas. Entries were judged based on the following criteria: relevance to the theme, 50 percent; style and grammar, 20 percent; and appeal to intellect and emotion, 30 percent.

Receiving the certificate for winning in the Go Negosyo essay writing tilt (photo taken at the Go Negosyo headquarters in Mandaluyong City)*

An awarding ceremony was originally scheduled last March 2 as part of PCE’s 4th Women Entrepreneurship summit held at the World Trade Center, but the organizers failed to announce the list of winners in time for the event. Nevertheless, I am still very thankful for this award.  :-)

(Photo credits: Philippine Center for Entrepreneurship)

Will Philippine lawmakers show courage and vote on the RH bill?

International Women’s Day special

Chris Christie, the Republican governor of New Jersey (NJ) in the United States, last month vetoed a bill that would have legalized same-sex marriages in the said state. According to him, the issue should be up to the people of NJ to decide through a referendum. He described the set-up as a “bargain” for gay marriage advocates. Christie’s indecisiveness on the matter is understandable.

Chris Christie, the Republican governor of New Jersey

Supporting the initiative means alienating himself toward his party’s base – something he certainly wouldn’t want to happen since he is considered a Republican star. Many Republicans had earlier urged him to run in this year’s presidential elections against Barack Obama (he ultimately decided not to). On the other hand, coming out against the measure would mean being out-of-step with the majority of his constituents. A January 2012 poll by Quinnipiac revealed that 52% of NJ voters are supportive of gay marriages. Faced with such a dilemma, Christie chose the side of political caution.

Philippine lawmakers are also confronted by a similar predicament, particularly vis-à-vis the long-pending Reproductive Health (RH) bill. The proposed RH bill has been around since the 1990s but has gotten no clear traction toward passage for many years. The dillydallying of lawmakers on the subject is quite understandable.

The Catholic hierarchy remains steadfast in their opposition to the bill. One of their allies, ex Senator Francisco Tatad, even claimed that “no true Catholic can support the RH bill.” However, a survey conducted by Social Weather Stations last August 2011 found out that almost three-fourths of Filipinos agree that the government should disseminate information on all legal family planning methods, which is a key goal of the bill. Notably, only 29% of the respondents agreed with the proposition that using birth control means like condoms, pills, and IUDs is tantamount to abortion.

Occupy for RH bill banner (credits: http://www.rhbill.org)

Not willing to lose the mythical “Catholic vote” come election time, many solons must have believed that it will be better for them not to remain noncommittal about the bill altogether. This evident lack of political will pushed the bill’s advocates to launch “Occupy for RH” late last year, with the goal of urging solons to put the bill to a vote before 2011 ends. The impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Renato Corona as well as other legislative roadblocks further delayed a possible plenary vote on the bill.

Two days ago, House Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales Jr. outlined a possible path toward approval for the RH bill by mid-2012. Gonzales has already proposed to Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. to terminate the debates on the measure before the Congress goes on a five-week break come March 23. “At some point, we have to put an end to the interminable discussions. This bill cannot continue to be in a state of suspended animation,” Gonzales told The Philippine Star.

At least, the good solon from Mandaluyong has acknowledged that the ball is in their hands and that they must do something about it. The 1987 Constitution bestows upon the House of Representatives and the Senate the power to legislate. Will our legislators pass the RH bill once and for all, or will they do a Chris Christie and make the people decide on the issue through a referendum come 2013, as Eastern Samar Rep. Ben Evardone proposed last year? Will they display political courage and not cowardice? Abangan.

“(President Benigno Aquino III) should show the same zeal in pushing for (the RH bill) as in getting impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona convicted,” – unnamed lawmaker