Contraception and sex education in the Philippines

Legal change on contraception and sex education may be arriving in the Philippines, which has a birthrate almost double that of the United States:

After years of discussion in the Philippine Congress, the House of Representatives finally decided in August to end debate on a reproductive health bill that would subsidize contraception and require sex education in the Philippines, a country with one of the highest birthrates in Asia. If it passes in the House, which returned to session on Monday, the bill will also need to be approved by the Senate. (Source: The New York Times)

The reasons for teaching women and men the basics of human reproduction and making contraception free and available are hard to dispute. First, women should have more control over the timing and spacing of pregnancies as a matter of personal autonomy and dignity. Second, a basic tenet of international development is that poor countries do better economically and developmentally when birthrates go down. Lower birthrates are also correlated with increased gender equity, as the girls in the family are less likely to get shorted on family resources when there are a smaller number of children. Third, the health of children and mothers improve. There are more resources within the family and from the healthcare system available to each child. And mothers, able to space their pregnancies and limit the overall number of children they have, live healthier lives and have lower maternal mortality rates.

While the American debate over the 'contraceptive mandate' revolves around religious conscience and the supposed subsidization of sexual license for women, in the Philippines the logic of government-funded contraception is hard to rebut: Women are largely too poor to pay for contraceptives themselves. If contraception is not provided for free, then it will not be used. As one woman stated:

“I don’t want to have any more babies,” she said, wiping tears from her eyes. “I would take the pills, but we don’t have money to buy those. We’ll try ‘control,’ ” she said, using the local term for abstinence. (Source: The New York Times)

The Philippines is a heavily Catholic country where the Church is still powerful, so there is going to be a fight over contraception and sex education. According to Church doctrine, having control over family planning beyond what 'the rhythm method' allows is not acceptable-- and even the rhythm method is difficult to do where sex education is not provided. That leaves abstinence and coitus interruptus as a couple's methods for preventing pregnancy-- assuming the husband goes along with it.

Furthermore, the Church in the Philippines is apparently under the mistaken impression that the country's high birth rate is a key to reducing poverty in the country:

“Our country’s positive birthrate and a population composed of mostly young people are the main players that fuel the economy,” said Jose Palma, the president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines.

If the Philippines had a low birthrate and declining population, coupled with a wealth of natural resources-- like Russia, say-- then, yes, a higher birthrate might seem like a good thing. In the country as it actually is, this makes no sense. Contraception and sex education does.

Links:

Article in The New York Times (November 9, 2012): Manila Hospital, No Stranger to Stork, Awaits Reproductive Health Bill's Fate

Article in the National Catholic Reporter (November 11, 2012): Condoms pit bishops against health workers in Philippines

Guttmacher Institute "In Brief" fact sheet (pdf)(May 2010): Facts on Barriers to Contraceptive Use In the Philippines