Poverty alleviation is all about family size

When poverty is at the forefront of wild debates, more likely, a slight reference to population will surely heat it up. Just like the debates among religious leaders, however, as to what denomination paves the right path to heaven, there is no end in sight as far as the identification of poverty alleviation approaches that may be deemed effective and appropriate. While the more conservative sectors opined that good governance is the key to prosperity, the more radical groups are batting for population control through the use of contraceptives as the more logical way of addressing the menace. Consequently, proponents of the contraceptive’s use and the leadership of the denomination as well as its supporters that oppose it are at loggerheads, all the time, in the slightest of provocation.

To appease the protagonists, PNoy recently made known his own version of a poverty alleviating measure, the Responsible Parenthood Bill or RP Bill. Purportedly, it is the middle ground between what the proponents of Reproductive Health Bill are pushing at and what the Catholic Church is adhering in. Whether or not the RP Bill will be mutually acceptable by the warring parties, we do not know. What is certain, however, is the fact that since 1967, all presidents have been addressing the issue on population and have never attained any success so far.

History tells us that as early as in 1967, same year our country joined the Association of Southeast Nations (ASEAN), then President Marcos (together seventeen heads of state) signed the United Nations Declaration on Population. Such declaration stressed, among others, that “the population problem must be recognized as a principal element in long-range planning, if governments are to achieve their economic goals and fulfill the aspirations of their people”. 

In 1987, during the Aquino (Cory) Administration, the POPCOM Board issued a policy statement that: "the ultimate goal of the Population Program is the improvement of the quality of human life in a just and humane society… The achievement of this goal requires recognition of the close interrelationships among population, resources and environmental factors". 

In 1993, the Ramos Administration marked the adoption of the Philippine Population Management Program and the Population, Resources and Environment Framework. In 1999, the Estrada Administration reformulated the Philippine Population Management Program with emphasis of Responsible Parenthood. 

In 2005, in a statement of support, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo joined “the community of nations in expressing support for the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD).”  The statement also reiterated the principles that guide the Philippine government in the implementation of population program.  These principles are based on the four (4) pillars of responsible parenthood, respect for life, birth spacing, and informed choice.

The aforementioned chronological events clearly established the country’s attempt to impress upon our population, among others, the value of birth spacing, respect for life, informed choice and responsible parenthood. Despite these endeavors, however, the same problem persists. The informal settlers (the sector that has family sizes way beyond neglect) continued to sprout.

Last year, on account of PNoy’s brave and unprecedented support of the RH bill, the population issue and concerns on women’s welfare were once again resurrected. On account of the initial brave and unprecedented support of the president on the RH Bill that gives couples the freedom of choice, it gained a head start. However, demonstrating the Roman Catholic hierarchy’s usual dictatorial tendencies, they threatened to excommunicate the president for such support. Whether for show or something else, a congressman, likewise, cautioned the president of a possible impeachment if he signs the bill into law should it passes the two houses. Whether it is possible considering that impeachment shall be initiated by the same congresses that pass the law, let’s set aside this inconsistent remark momentarily. Backing down a bit, the PNoy mulled the RP Bill, to allegedly attain a middle ground.

Indeed, though poverty alleviation is their common objective, their approaches are oceans apart. With such unavoidable disparities in points of view, conflicts or disagreements naturally pervaded. Nonetheless, before we delve further into their animosities, let us objectively dissect the very root of their disagreements. Actually, it all boils down to the government’s position to give couples the freedom to use either the natural or artificial birth control methods in determining their appropriate family sizes. In these issues, the government’s and the country’s catholic hierarchy’s positions are similar, except that the former encourages the use of contraceptives while the latter strongly emphasized abstinence from sex.

The so-called pro-life advocates or anti-contraceptive backers even went further by entertaining some thoughts that there is no need to curb population. They are emphasizing that countries with bigger population than us are, obviously, enjoying better lives. Therefore, they alleged, that being plenty has no direct correlation with poverty. 

Before new threats of excommunication and people power or impeachment will even again float in the air, let us go deeper into our misconceptions about population per se. Standing alone as a statistic, population data is nothing but an incomprehensible assembly of numbers. For instance, despite the level of congestion in countries like Monaco or Singapore, the average number of children per family in these countries is just about two. More often, some are just happy with one kid. Due to limited space, they are living in world-class tenements even comparable to what we popularly referred to us “high-end condominiums”.   Clearly, in these progressive countries, the common denominator isn’t their sheer number of residents or the density factor of their population. Apparently, these countries have kept their family sizes at manageable levels. 

Learning from these countries’ experiences isn’t difficult. Understanding their ways of managing their families isn’t incomprehensible too. Having manageable sizes of families simply bring about positive consequences. Obviously, taking care of dozen children is so different from taking care of just two. The parents can spend quality time with their kids and can handily remember their birthdays and immunization schedules. In a very manageable family size, the wives or mothers benefit the most. They can find jobs or do more productive chores apart from taking care of the kids. With all these preoccupations, women will try to space their pregnancy or most probably just be contended of having a few. With both parents doing productive undertakings, families’ needs would be handily and responsibly taken cared off.

However, as more and more couples are rendered jobless, they just make it a preoccupation to have more babies. Also, most families tend to breed more kids, so that, there will be more warm bodies to send to the dumpsites to collect recyclable garbage or simply having more hands to work as meagerly paid farm workers, or, worst, to have more appropriately dressed kids to beg in the streets. 

Clearly, therefore, having the right family size is a matter of fiscal responsibility. If one is a billionaire, then he can be like Solomon because he can afford to give better lives to a hundred children. On the other hand, if he is a pauper, for heaven sake, he must not think of having more kids just so he’ll have more hands to soon bail his family out of poverty.

For your comments and suggestions, please email to [email protected].