Pregnant, pro-life, and pro-RH

“So, has your stand on the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill changed because you’re pregnant?”

I looked at my friend incredulously and laughed. Why would my being pregnant change my stand about the RH Bill?

Weeks after our conversation, I realized where she was coming from with her question. The “debate” about the RH bill has not been a real debate using facts and logic. Those who are vehemently against it on the ground of their religion have used appeals to emotion (using pictures of dead fetuses, for example, as if the RH Bill legalizes abortion) and even conspiracy theories (rich nations do not want populations of poor countries to increase and only want a market to sell their artificial contraceptives).

In the muddle that ensues, assumptions that have no basis, such as “people who are in favor of the RH Bill do not want to have babies,” which my friend probably thought of, are made. It seems like a corollary to the “pro-life” description that anti-RH Bill groups have appropriated for themselves. From this argument, anyone who supports the RH Bill is anti-life. My friend took this to mean that since a person who supports the RH Bill is anti-life, he or she would not want to have any children. Since I am pregnant, I would be pro-life and therefore, anti-RH Bill.

I love life and support the RH Bill because it gives women the right to choose what they want to do with their bodies and to obtain enough information about the choices available to them. It is the right of a woman to make choices about her body that is at the heart of the controversy. Everything else is noise.

I have no problem with leaders and members of the Catholic Church speaking out against the RH Bill. Freedom of expression is available to everyone under the Constitution. I also have no problem with leaders of the Catholic Church threatening to excommunicate members whom they consider to be violating its teachings. It’s an organized religion and it can do whatever it wants to do with its members, including kicking them out of the group.

What I dislike are the lies and misinformation being spread about the RH Bill. Among those I heard are that the RH Bill allows abortion and that it mandates that seven-year-olds be taught about how to have sex. One only has to read House Bill 96, authored by Representative Edcel Lagman, to know that the RH Bill does not have those provisions.

I am grateful to have had a life that made it possible for me to have access to information that allowed me to pick the birth control method I felt best suited me. I am grateful to have had the resources to pay for the contraceptives I chose. It has been argued that there is no need for the government to make contraceptives available because they can be bought at the same sari-sari store that sells dried fish. That is missing the point.

Without the RH Bill, women who are not as lucky as I am would not be able to know what choices are available to them. They will not have access to birth control methods that they would have otherwise chosen because would not know that these existed. Even if they knew what their contraceptive options were, most Filipinas would probably not be in a position to afford these.

Under the RH Bill, hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, injectables, and other safe and effective family planning products and supplies shall be part of the National Drug Formulary and included in the regular purchase of essential medicines and supplies of all national and local hospitals and other government health units.

Author Elie Wiesel wrote: “Once you bring life into the world, you must protect it. We must protect it by changing the world.” I am pregnant and I support the RH Bill. By supporting the RH Bill, I seek to give more Filipino women the choices that were available to me. That is changing the world.

* * *

Email: [email protected].