ATTY. MARWIL LLASOS AND FILIPINOS 4 LIFE CONTINUE DRIVE AGAINST RH BILL

MANILA, August 30, 2011–As news reports on inconsistencies in statistical numbers and in the agenda of the Reproductive Health (RH) bill and its proponents continue to come out, hundreds of parishioners in Paranaque City got the lowdown on the controversial bill through informative talks delivered by members of Filipinos for Life (F4L).

Following a multi-media presentation on pro-life issues, Anthony James Perez, Anna Cosio and Atty. Marwil Llasos tackled different aspects of House Bill 4244 at an afternoon activity organized by Mary, Mother of Good Counsel Parish and attended by some 300 parishioners, most of them students.

Perez, F4L founder, discussed the reasons for the group’s opposition to the bill, explaining why the legislative measure was not the solution to the country’s problems.

Citing incontestable statistics, Perez debunked the overpopulation myth on which population control advocates have based their claims.

Nurse instructor Cosio tackled the medical and health-related issues surrounding the bill. Armed with science-based research and findings, she proved that human life starts at fertilization–or the meeting of the egg and sperm cells.

As part of the RH bill is the taxpayer-funded procurement and distribution of artificial contraceptives, Cosio also went into a discussion of the harmful–and sometimes fatal–effects of birth control drugs and devices on women.

Tackling the moral, constitutional and legal aspects was Llasos, who declared that the bill was anti-God, anti-human and anti-Filipino. Included in the lawyer’s presentation were explanations as to the constitutional infirmities of portions of the bill.

As the talks concluded, a woman among the participants brought up the situation of an unmarried friend who had considered getting rid of her unborn baby, given that the child’s father refused to acknowledge his responsibility to the mother and child.

Llasos’ advice to the woman was to tell her friend to inform her parents about the situation. Abortion is not an option, he added, and there are government, private and religious institutions that can help women in such situations.

The lawyer also offered F4L’s help in facilitating adoption placement for the baby.

Meanwhile, members of the Speakers’ Bureau of the Vicariate of Real Infanta and General Nakar, Prelature of Infanta, Quezon province boosted their understanding of the issues pertaining to the culture of life through a recent seminar about the RH bill.

As part of the family and life ministry’s series of trainors’ training seminars, Buhay Partylist pro-life advocacy staff Jose Descallar delivered a day-long talk on issues pertaining to the legislative measure to 45 participants–including school principals, teachers and city councilors–upon the invitation of the prelature’s Vicar-General Fr. Mario Establecida.

According to Descallar, the open forum was quite interesting due to questions about the “fine-tuned” version of the bill, supposedly an initiative of Malacanang.

“Hindi pa din okey sa inyo ‘yung amendments na ginagawa dun sabill?” queried one of the participants.

Descallar explained that such amendments changed nothing because “it’s the bill’s framework that’s the problem. Even if you amend it and all that’s left are four sections–declaration of policy, guiding principles, appropriations, and the penal provisions–hindi pa din okey ‘yan. It is still within the same framework.”

H.B. 4244, authored by Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, continues to face a growing opposition due to its mandate of taxpayer-funded procurement and distribution of a “full range” of birth control drugs and devices including abortifacients, six-year sex education program from Grade 5 to 4th year high school in all schools as well as among out-of-school youth, provision of birth control drugs, devices and services by employers to their employees, and punitive measures for those who speak out against the bill. (CBCP for Life)

Multiple studies show declining number of maternal deaths; ‘11 a day’ an outdated statistic

MANILA, August 30, 2011–Indeed, maternal deaths are a problem requiring a real solution. But is it true that 11 women die each day due to childbirth? Based on hard statistics from the Philippine government, international agencies, and experts abroad, the answer is no.

In fact, data from the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) show that the real figure ranges from just 4.8 to 8.3 based on 2008 figures, the latest available. That year, the maternal mortality ratio was estimated at 99-169 per 100,000 live births.

A total of 1,784,316 live births were recorded in the country in 2008.

The NSCB defines maternal mortality ratio or MMR as the “ratio between the number of women who died (for reasons of pregnancy, childbirth and puerperium) to the number of reported live births in a given year, expressed as the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births.”

The period 1990 to 2010 showed a marked decline in maternal mortality, government data showed. MMR declined by 21% from 121 in 1990, to just 95 in 2010, even in the absence of a “reproductive health” (RH) law.

What other studies show

For those who prefer not to rely solely on government statistics, two separate studies released in 2010 provide even lower estimates of MMR for the Philippines.

“Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990 to 2008,” with estimates developed by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), and the World Bank, estimated the Philippines’ MMR at 94 per 100,000 live births in 2008, equivalent to 4.6 a day.

The same report estimated maternal deaths at 2,100 in 2008, and based on this figure, there were 5.75 deaths a day.

The Philippines is in fact “making progress” in reducing maternal mortality, with the estimated MMR plunging by 48% – nearly half – from 1990 to 2008, the report by five international agencies showed.

The Philippines also did a better job of reducing maternal deaths – in terms of the percentage drop in MMR – than Russia, Malaysia, Hungary, Israel, and even Germany, the report indicated.

Maternal death is defined by the WHO as the “death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management but not from accidental or incidental causes.”

Meanwhile the study “Maternal mortality for 181 countries, 1980–2008: a systematic analysis of progress towards Millennium Development Goal 5,” published in the respected journal The Lancet and funded by Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, placed the Philippines’ maternal mortality ratio at just 84 per 100,000 live births.

This is equivalent to 4.1 deaths per day – a far cry from the 11 a day that RH lobbyists are using in their bid to push for the controversial and divisive RH bill.

The Lancet article was written by Margaret Hogan, Kyle Foreman, Mohsen Naghavi, Stephanie Ahn, Mengru Wang, Susanna Makela, Alan Lopez, Rafael Lozano, and Christopher J. L. Murray. Most of the researchers came from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation of the University of Washington in Seattle.

Based on their data, the Philippines, even without an RH law, reduced its MMR by 81% between 1980 and 2008, and 52% between 1990 and 2008.

“Our analysis of all available data for maternal mortality from 1980 to 2008 for 181 countries has shown a substantial decline in maternal death,” the researchers concluded.

“Compared with previous assessments of maternal mortality, we have narrowed the uncertainty around global and national estimates of the MMR. This improved accuracy is a result of an extensive database and the use of analytical methods with increased explanatory power and improved out-of-sample predictive validity,” they added.

The source of ‘11 maternal deaths a day’

Now, where did the “11 a day” figure come from? It is from the outdated report “Maternal Mortality in 2000: Estimates developed by WHO, UNICEF and UNFPA.”

It estimated the Philippines’ MMR at 200 in the year 2000, equivalent to 9.8 a day. It placed the number of maternal deaths that year at 4,100, or 11.2 a day.

The report, however, is seven years old, published way back in 2004.

The outdated report carried an important caveat: “The 2000 estimates cannot be used to analyze trends because of the wide margins of uncertainty associated with the estimates.”

“The margins of uncertainty associated with the estimated MMRs are very large, and the estimates should not, therefore, be used to monitor trends in the short term. In addition, cross country comparisons should be treated with considerable circumspection because different strategies have been used to derive the estimates for different countries, making it difficult to draw comparisons,” the 2004 report said.

The same international agencies, in their 2010 report, pointed out that the latest (2008) estimates are more reliable.

“[I]t should be noted that the data and methods have improved over time. The 2008 estimates should not be compared with those from the previous exercises to assess changes in time. Trends in maternal mortality calculated using the same improved methodology and presented for years 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, and 2008 in this report show the changes over time.” (Dominic Francisco)