Official Website of Representative Edcel C. Lagman

: Press Statements; 05 August 2012

Rep. Edcel C. Lagman
Independent – Albay
05 August 2012
0916-6406737 / 0918-9120137
 
The lies of the clergy and lay allies against the RH bill must be condomized to prevent the spread of black propaganda, political intimidation and virulent malevolence.
 
Congressmen and Senators must legislate for the general welfare based on verifiable realities, unperturbed by fear of hellfire or reprisals at the polls.
 
While the freedom of expression guarantees the Catholic hierarchy and its lay supporters to express their differing views on any pending legislation, propagating falsehoods and intimidating legislators constitute license not covered by the mantle of free speech.
 
Play of words purveying misinformation, falsities and deceit is not protected by the Constitution and statutes.
 
The prayer of the clergy against the RH bill unwarrantedly overlooks the reality of the inevitable linkage between population and poverty; mocks scientific and medical data on the safety of non-abortive contraceptives; and defies empirical and periodic surveys that Filipinos overwhelmingly want the enactment of the RH bill.
 
Contrary to the Church’s statement that contraception is corruption, it is the denial to women of access to medically safe, legal and effective contraception which corrupts their inalienable right to health and which could lead to maternal death.
 
How can contraceptives harm the impervious soul when they do not even inflict any serious harm on women’s bodies? Decades of scientific and medical research confirm that contraceptives do not cause any more harm than the usual side effects of ordinary medicines like paracetamol, aspirin and antibiotics.
 
On the contrary, high risk, unwanted and teenage pregnancies which the RH bill seeks to prevent, result in the escalating rate of maternal mortality and morbidity.
 
Extensive research from seven different studies from 1980 to 1997 all conclude that the risk of dying from riding a car for one year, which is 1 in 5,900, is much greater than using either pills or an IUD where the risk ratio is 1 in 200,000 and 1 in 10 million, respectively, while the risk of dying from a pregnancy is 1 in 10,000.
 
Saying that “contraceptive is the mother of all abortions” is an irresponsible and unfounded hyperbole.
 
In fact, the RH bill is anti-abortion not only because it repeatedly provides that abortion is illegal, punishable and not a method of family planning, but it has also been established that regular and correct non-abortive contraception by choice reduces the abortion rate by 85% because high risk, unwanted and teenage pregnancies, which are usual candidates for abortion, are prevented.
 
The RH bill cannot be labeled as anti-life because it is precisely intended to promote quality life, prevent maternal and infant mortality and enhance the attainment of sustainable human development.
 
It is not anti-life to prevent 30% of maternal mortality and foreclose one million infant deaths worldwide as documented by the WHO and UNICEF.
 
It is erroneous for bishops to claim that reproductive health and sexuality education will result in irresponsible behavior among the young because the contrary has been established by years of research and study by the United Nations and countries which have institutionalized sexuality education.
 
The beneficent results of sexuality education according to these studies and researches are the following:
(1) Proper sex values are inculcated in the young so much so that irresponsible sex experimenting is discouraged and prevented;
(2) Entry to sexual relations is delayed;
(3) Abstinence before marriage is promoted;
(4) Multiple sexual partners is likewise prevented; and
(5) The spread of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases is avoided.
 
Consequently, instead of spawning sex perverts and promiscuity among the young, sexuality education breeds sexually informed and responsible youngsters.
 
The Church should not be alarmed by the listing of contraceptives as essential medicines because the complications arising from pregnancy and childbirth result in maternal and infant mortality which can be avoided by legal and medically-safe contraceptives.
 
The function of medicines is either preventive or curative and the use of contraceptives is medical prevention of maternal and infant fatalities.

: Press Statements; 03 August 2012

Rep. Edcel C. Lagman

Independent – Albay

02 August 2012

0916-6406737 / 0918-9120137

The withdrawal of some minority members as co-authors of the RH bill is a mere partisan support for former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s opposition to the controversial measure.

Many of those who withdrew as co-authors are long-standing RH advocates like Rep. Danilo Suarez who has been a consistent and vocal co-author for three Congresses dating back to the 13^th Congress.

Arroyo has not articulated her specific objections to the RH bill except for a claim that it is against her Catholic faith, and neither has she pointed out what particular provisions of the bill is she against.

The much-ballyhooed withdrawal is not crucial to the final outcome which the RH advocates will win.

Arroyo’s rejection of the RH bill is a departure from her admission that she used contraceptive pills when she was a young mother, presumably to limit the number of her children and for birth spacing. She made this candid admission in March 2003 at a luncheon with pro-family planning legislators in Malacanang.

The former President’s opposition to the RH bill amounts to depriving Filipino women of the same right she herself enjoyed and the choice of availing themselves of non-abortive contraceptives.

If a woman of means has the right to contracept, why should she deny other women, particularly in the marginalized sectors, from using contraceptives to meet their fertility goals and desired family size.

Virtually all women in the topmost quintile of Philippine society have the number of children they want to have, which is two, as documented by the latest 2008 National Demographic and Health Survey (NDHS)

In the poorest quintile, women are still having an average of almost six children which is equivalent to the total fertility rate in the country some 40 years ago and almost twice their fertility goal according to the same National Demographic and Health Survey of 2008.

The RH bill remedies this glaring disparity by mandating the government to extend RH information, services and supplies to poor women who are acceptors of voluntary family planning.

Among the poorest 10% of women of reproductive age, a whopping 44% of pregnancies are unwanted [2006 Family Planning Survey conducted by the Department of Health (DOH)].

The bottom line is, if women are given the chance to make responsible family planning decisions, they almost always decide to have smaller families and their children will invariably be healthier, better educated and have at least a fighting chance of living full and dignified lives.

Without this ability, most women will often find it more difficult – some may find it impossible – to finish their education, find remunerative work or have a say in their future.

This is the ability and the future which the former President is denying her fellow Filipinas, particularly the poorest of the poor who undergo serial pregnancies.

: Press Statements; 03 August 2012

Office of Rep. Edcel C. Lagman

Independent-Albay

0918-9120137 09166406737

03 August 2012

President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s current stance against the RH bill is a complete abandonment of the Statement of Support for the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) which she signed on 25 January 2005 on behalf of the Philippine government.

It will be recalled that the Philippines was among the 179 countries which were signatories to the ICPD Program of Action 18 years ago.

Arroyo anchored the government’s support for ICPD on four pillars, namely: (1) responsible parenthood; (2) respect for life or policy against abortion; (3) birth spacing; and (4) informed choice.

All of these fundamentals are the foundation of the Reproductive Health bill.

In said Statement of Support, the former President said that the country “promotes Responsible Parenthood, which is the will and ability to respond to the needs and aspirations of the family. It promotes the freedom of responsible parents to decide on the timing and size of their families in pursuit of a better life.”

The foregoing statement is identical to the definition and import of responsible parenthood as provided for in the RH bill.

The Statement of Support underscored that the “State promotes Respect for Life. The 1987 Constitution protects the life of the unborn from conception. Abortion is unacceptable as a method of family planning. Pursuant to this principle, we endorse the term Reproductive Health or Reproductive Health Services only on the condition that is explicitly excludes abortion.”

The foregoing commitment against abortion is repeatedly provided for in the RH bill when it emphasizes that abortion is illegal, punishable and is not a prescribed method of family planning.

Arroyo further stated that the Philippines “promotes Birth Spacing. Proper spacing of 3 to 5 years from recent pregnancy enables women to recover from pregnancy and improves their wellbeing, as well as the health of the child and the relationship between husband and wife and between parents and children.”

The right of parents to freely and responsibly determine the number and spacing of their children is among the basic human rights being protected and promoted by the RH bill.

In the said Statement of Support, Arroyo also undertook that the “State respects Informed Choice. Couples and individuals may choose the methods that they will use to exercise Responsible Parenthood in accordance with their religious and ethical values and cultural background, subject to conformity with universally recognized international human rights.”

The freedom of informed choice accorded to parents, couples and women is central to the RH bill together with respect for religious beliefs.

Since former President Arroyo’s Statement of Support for ICPD parallels the provisions of the RH bill, she has no reason to reject the measure.

: Press Statements; 29 July 2012

Rep. Edcel C. Lagman

Independent - Albay

28 July 2012

0916-6406737 / 0918-9120137

     Will the Good Lord listen and respond to a novena against the RH bill which aims precisely to improve maternal health, prevent high-risk, unwanted and teenage pregnancies, alleviate widespread poverty and promote voluntary family planning and non-abortive contraception by choice?

     God will listen to prayers which elevate human life and development, and not to supplications which denigrate people’s quality of life and children’s advancement.

    Bishops will cease to be intermediaries to God if they go against the well-intentioned clamor of the people which is the voice of God.

     Empirical and periodic surveys have documented that the Filipino people want the immediate enactment of the RH bill and for government to use public funds for family planning including the purchase and distribution of non-abortive contraceptives.

    RH is not about sex and religion, it is about health, human rights and sustainable human development.

: Press Statements; 25 July 2012

PRESS STATEMENT

Office of Rep. Edcel C. Lagman

Independent-Albay

0918-9120137 09166406737

23 July 2012

The President’s renewed and categorical endorsement of the enactment of the RH and responsible parenthood bill truly complements his determination to solve the backlogs in education and ills in health.

The President is fully aware that the population problem impacts adversely on major human development indicators like health, education, employment, food security, mass housing and the environment.

RH advocates share the President’s view that an RH law is the antidote against the country’s relapsing to shortages in teachers, school buildings, textbooks and desks and the instrument to help reduce maternal mortality and enhance women’s health.

The President is cognizant that no development agenda will succeed without the government addressing simultaneously and positively the population issue.

The RH bill does not provide for any compulsion because the core the measure is freedom of informed choice wherein women and couples are empowered to freely and responsibly decide the number and spacing of their children.

The RH bill is not a population control measure because it has no demographic target.

The eventual deceleration of the population growth rate is the beneficent result of contraception by choice.

The bill is not pro-abortion. In fact, it is against abortion because the correct and consistent use of legal, medically safe and truly effective family planning methods reduces abortion rates by as much as 85%.

The RH bill repeatedly provides that abortion is illegal and it is neither a form of contraception nor a legal family planning method.

Page 162 of 217

Contact Details

The lies of the clergy against the RH bill must be condomized

minority members' withdrawal of support is a mere partisan support for FPGMA

FPGMA's current stance against the RH bill is a complete abandonment for her support to ICPD

RH is not about sex and religion, it is about health, human rights and sustainable human development

PNOY's SONA endorsed RH and Responsible Parenthood Bill