"We risk losing the gains we have already made in fighting poverty."
"We risk losing the gains we have already made in fighting poverty."
Is it possible to reduce poverty in the Philippines without at the same time implementing an honest-to-goodness family planning program?
The answer, as far as the Commission on Population and Development (PopCom) is concerned, is a big, fat NO.
PopCom Executive Director Juan Antonio Perez III, who is also an undersecretary of the Department of Health, believes that the national program on family planning is a crucial—and therefore indispensable—element in substantially reducing poverty incidence in the country.
His statement follows close on the heels of the latest pronouncement from the National Economic and Development Authority that the poverty rate in the Philippines can be cut in the years between 2016 and 2022.
While the direct impact of family planning programs is within individual households, its beneficial effects could be felt even at the macroeconomic level.
“Efforts in family planning bear both an immediate and eventual influence on the Philippine economy,” Perez pointed out.
“For instance, the reduction of prevalence of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies translates to potential savings for many families. Those funds could be allocated for collectively improving the quality of life of family members, such as for healthcare, education, livelihood, and many others as possible investments for a better future.”
The Health undersecretary explained that it is at the household level where improvements in the quality of life should manifest: “Having fewer children, or having the number of children one can afford, leads to increased household savings, improved nutrition and better educational opportunities.”
Households headed by the youngest mothers stand to benefit the most from a family planning program that also addresses early childbearing or adolescent/teen pregnancy.
Perez cited a 2016 study by Alejandro Herrin, "Education, Earnings and Health Effects of Teenage Pregnancy in the Philippines," which found that early childbearing reduces an adolescent’s future earning capacity, as it diminishes the chances of completing high school, or K to 12. Lack of a diploma results in a loss of P300 a day income for young mothers, the study found.
Given this, PopCom believes it is crucial for the Philippines to address the family planning and reproductive health needs of the poorest and youngest mothers, in order to make a dent on core hunger and poverty in the country.
Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia earlier said the intensified implementation and full funding of the National Program on Population and Family Planning or NPPFP for the next three years will widen its scope and impact.
To help curb teenage pregnancies, PopCom will assist the Department of Education in boosting the nationwide school-based rollout of comprehensive sexuality-education programs.
While Pernia has emphasized the practice of savings as protection against unexpected income losses or expenses, Perez explained that responsible parenthood, as a way of life, will make a family less vulnerable to financial shocks.
“Part of PopCom’s crusade is to help deliver the government’s goal of enabling comfortable and secure lives for Filipinos by 2022 through family planning. By then, we can measure the level of our success hopefully against a drastically diminished prevalence of poverty throughout the Philippines," the Health undersecretary emphasized. Perez is on the right track in linking the importance of family planning and responsible parenthood in reducing poverty incidence in the country.
But while I commend Neda, PopCom and the Department of Health for pushing for the full implementation of the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Law, or Republic Act No. 10354, they also face an uphill climb in doing so.
The RH Law guarantees universal access to methods on contraception, fertility control, sexual education, and maternal care. But its approval by the legislature came only after intense debates between those who supported it and those who staunchly opposed it.
While there was general agreement on its provisions on maternal and child health, those against the measure, such as politicians, academic and religious institutions, frowned on the widespread distribution of family planning devices such as condoms, birth control pills and intrauterine devices or IUDs. The Supreme Court delayed the implementation of the law in March 2013 in response to legal challenges. On April 3, 2014, the Court ruled that the law was "not unconstitutional" but struck down eight provisions.
Responsible parenthood and family planning programs should be integral parts of government's economic development programs. With our 108 million population—and counting as we speak—we cannot have sustained economic development amid runaway population growth at 1.6 percent that's among the highest in this part of the world. Otherwise, we risk losing the gains we have already made in fighting poverty.
ernhil@yahoo.com
