The main problem with government-sponsored population control measures like the proposed RH bill is that it starts from the premise of a nanny or welfare state: education is government responsibility, healthcare is government responsibility, housing is government responsibility, credit, public works, justice, traffic, cash transfer, etc. are all government responsibility. So the bigger the population, the bigger the public spending for social and economic services. So to reduce public spending and the high public debt in the future, controlling fast population growth is also government responsibility.
Theoretically, it is possible to have 3 or more kids and be an irresponsible parent. Why? government has feeding program, it has free education from elementary to high school, and cheap/highly subsidized uninversity education, even free if one is a government scholar; there are lots of mass/social housing, there are free medicines, free healthcare for the poor, cash transfer for the poor, agrarian reform for the poor, and so on.
One adverse effect of all these nannyism is the corruption of parental values. Why assume more parental responsibility when there are lots of government responsibility that are already in the laws and are regularly budget every year? So drink and party as often as possible, smoke as many cigarettes as much as possible. If their internal organs get dilapidated, they can run to the state because "health is a right".
Most problems related to high unemployment, high poverty, are caused by government through bureaucratism, high taxation, lots of prohibitions and regulations. Corruption is just an icing on the cake.
Take this report, Doing Business 2011: Philippines produced annually by the WB and IFC. For average companies in the Phlippines: To start a business, it will take 15 procedures (with various government agencies) in 38 working days, costing nearly 30 percent of the per capita income. Take note that the assumption here is zero corruption. If certain bureaucracies will insist on getting bribes, otherwise the waiting period will not just be 38 working days but 2x or 3x that period.
Paying taxes for an average corporation, 47 different taxes and fees per year(!) that will require 196 hours (or 24.5 working days or more than 1 month). Profit tax is 21.3 percent, but when various mandatory or obligatory labor and social security contributions are included, the total tax rate would rise to 45.8 percent of a corporation's profit.
So government creates lots of direct taxation, mandatory contributions (which are indirect taxation) and other forms of regulations and prohibitions (one is prohibited by law to conduct any business unless those regulations are obeyed and followed). When these restrictions and prohibitions are enforced, many people and entrepreneurs will be forced to kneel and bow before certain government officials, pay bribes or what just to hasten a supposedly non-criminal, non-prohibitive action like putting up a small business, or hiring new workers.
(I took this picture of various government permits in a water purifying/distilling shop near our place in Makati). If the poor and the lower middle class want to stand on their own and not depend on government welfare, they put up a vulcanizing shop or barber shop or carinderia or fishball/barbeque stall, the government officially says NO. Unless the trying-hard entrepreneur will first get barangay permit, sanitation permit, garbage collection permit, fire department permit, mayor's business permit, DTI permit, SSS permit, BIR permit, Pag-IBIG permit, etc. Most of the "underground or informal" economy that we see are tolerated by some national government agencies but not by the local govt and local police. That is why "arkabala" and bribes to certain city hall or police officers are practiced.
After succeeding to create lots of poverty and high unemployment, government and its multilateral patrons (the UN, WB, EC, ADB, etc.) would blame high population growth.
Government would rather see the poor begging for more welfare, more subsidies, because the endless welfare programs -- education for the poor, healthcare for the poor, housing for the poor, credit for the poor, cash transfer for the poor, condoms and ligation for the poor, etc. -- will be continued and all the hundreds of billions of pesos of annual budget and new loans (and ever-rising interest payment) to the foreign aid banks will continue.
-------
See also:
Welfarism 9: Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT), November 12, 2010
Welfarism 10: Spanish Problem, the Euro or the State?, December 01, 2010
A discussion venue about the role (and misrule) of big government and high taxes. Also a second website of Minimal Government Thinkers.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Sunday, April 10, 2011
When coercion and arms rule: Libyan war
War is ruthless. Whichever way you look at it, war means destruction, shooting and killing. That is why we should aim for a peaceful society, a society based not on coercion but on voluntary exchange among people.
While the bulk of humanity's progress and modernization is on the positive side, meaning the construction of many structures to allow people to live and work in peace, a sizable amount of human invention and modernization is used to develop weapons of destruction and death. All these are currently happening in Libya.
All pictures here are taken from the New York Times photo gallery. And most of the armed men here are rebels. Foreign journalists are not at liberty to take any pictures they wish to take as they are being monitored by the Libyan government in the capital.
Being in power for 42 years now, Muammar Gadhafi (or Qaddafy or Gaddafi or Khadafy...) has stockpiled enough armaments and bombs to kill potential rebels who will challenge his reign of power. Even if the Allied aerial bombardment has decimated his choppers and fighter jets, lots of weaponry are on the ground -- tanks, missiles, rifles, bombs and ammunitions.
The rebels, mostly civilians who took instant training in actual combat, are generally less skilled in the art of shooting and killing. But they are fighting for a cause, the desire to be free from Gadhafi dictatorship.
It's eerie to see all those fighting. The greed and hatred that had been planted in the hearts and mind of people under many decades of political dictatorship are now getting actual outlet. People bearing guns and bombs.
The Gadhafi forces are more fierce in their defense of the status quo. They have tasted power and large-scale coercion for many years now. It is something that they do not want to be taken away from them, especially with the prospect of rebel victory. The greed for continued power and coercion over other people is what drives them to become brutal killers of those who challenge them and their leader.
The practice of political coercion and stockpile of heavy armaments is not unique to Libya of course. Almost all BIG governments have big stockpile of such weapons of death and destruction. Because BIG governments rely on large-scale coercion and deception in order to keep the people docile or kept ignorant.
Why would people tolerate a situation where they work hard, only to see that a big portion of their earnings go to the government, a big portion of which will be used to procure armaments and to train tens or hundreds of thousands of able-bodied men on the art of killing and destruction.
Woe unto the people who do not like such kind of arrangement, but nonetheless have to go through the same path of taking up violence in order to control or stop mainstream violence by the state.
Rockets, like fighter jets, are weapons of long-distance killing and destruction. The pictures of rockets here are again, from the rebel side. The accuracy of those rockets to really hit their targets, usually armored trucks, tanks and bunkers, is not 100 percent, especially if in the hands of new recruits from the civilians who have no formal military training. So those rockets and missiles are capable of hitting civilian structures and houses.
I understand that the UN has certain "rules of conduct" during war. But who pays attention to such UN regulation? The best rules of conduct during war is no war. Dictators, both in government and among ordinary civilians, often hate peaceful debate. They are allergic to debates, they want a short cut to settle debates through the use of arms, violence and coercion.
We will have to look at the role of the weapons manufacturing companies, mostly in the US, Russia, Germany, UK, France, China and Israel. But being private enterprises, they generally respond to incentives. When there is big demand for missiles, rockets, bombs, tanks, fighter jets and related products by many governments, they produce more to cash in and earn huge profits.
And here are the ordinary Libyan civilians. Torn between armed government troops and armed rebels firing missiles and guns against each other everyday, the civilians, especially the weak, the sick, the old and the young, are the worst affected.
I wish to see the end of violence in Libya and elsewhere. I believe that Gadhafi must go, but the new government, from among the various groups in the rebel forces, must assure the civilians that the old system of political and economic repressions should not be repeated. Otherwise, the current destruction and killing will just be repeated in the future.
Coercion is evil. The use of arms and violence to advance whatever political or philosophical agenda is evil. BIG governments thrive on coercion and the stockpile of weapons of violence and destruction, to harass if not kill, those who will seriously challenge the coercion and deception that the BIG state has inflicted on the citizens.
Let us keep this mind always.
While the bulk of humanity's progress and modernization is on the positive side, meaning the construction of many structures to allow people to live and work in peace, a sizable amount of human invention and modernization is used to develop weapons of destruction and death. All these are currently happening in Libya.
All pictures here are taken from the New York Times photo gallery. And most of the armed men here are rebels. Foreign journalists are not at liberty to take any pictures they wish to take as they are being monitored by the Libyan government in the capital.
Being in power for 42 years now, Muammar Gadhafi (or Qaddafy or Gaddafi or Khadafy...) has stockpiled enough armaments and bombs to kill potential rebels who will challenge his reign of power. Even if the Allied aerial bombardment has decimated his choppers and fighter jets, lots of weaponry are on the ground -- tanks, missiles, rifles, bombs and ammunitions.
The rebels, mostly civilians who took instant training in actual combat, are generally less skilled in the art of shooting and killing. But they are fighting for a cause, the desire to be free from Gadhafi dictatorship.
It's eerie to see all those fighting. The greed and hatred that had been planted in the hearts and mind of people under many decades of political dictatorship are now getting actual outlet. People bearing guns and bombs.
The Gadhafi forces are more fierce in their defense of the status quo. They have tasted power and large-scale coercion for many years now. It is something that they do not want to be taken away from them, especially with the prospect of rebel victory. The greed for continued power and coercion over other people is what drives them to become brutal killers of those who challenge them and their leader.
The practice of political coercion and stockpile of heavy armaments is not unique to Libya of course. Almost all BIG governments have big stockpile of such weapons of death and destruction. Because BIG governments rely on large-scale coercion and deception in order to keep the people docile or kept ignorant.
Why would people tolerate a situation where they work hard, only to see that a big portion of their earnings go to the government, a big portion of which will be used to procure armaments and to train tens or hundreds of thousands of able-bodied men on the art of killing and destruction.
Woe unto the people who do not like such kind of arrangement, but nonetheless have to go through the same path of taking up violence in order to control or stop mainstream violence by the state.
Rockets, like fighter jets, are weapons of long-distance killing and destruction. The pictures of rockets here are again, from the rebel side. The accuracy of those rockets to really hit their targets, usually armored trucks, tanks and bunkers, is not 100 percent, especially if in the hands of new recruits from the civilians who have no formal military training. So those rockets and missiles are capable of hitting civilian structures and houses.
I understand that the UN has certain "rules of conduct" during war. But who pays attention to such UN regulation? The best rules of conduct during war is no war. Dictators, both in government and among ordinary civilians, often hate peaceful debate. They are allergic to debates, they want a short cut to settle debates through the use of arms, violence and coercion.
We will have to look at the role of the weapons manufacturing companies, mostly in the US, Russia, Germany, UK, France, China and Israel. But being private enterprises, they generally respond to incentives. When there is big demand for missiles, rockets, bombs, tanks, fighter jets and related products by many governments, they produce more to cash in and earn huge profits.
And here are the ordinary Libyan civilians. Torn between armed government troops and armed rebels firing missiles and guns against each other everyday, the civilians, especially the weak, the sick, the old and the young, are the worst affected.
I wish to see the end of violence in Libya and elsewhere. I believe that Gadhafi must go, but the new government, from among the various groups in the rebel forces, must assure the civilians that the old system of political and economic repressions should not be repeated. Otherwise, the current destruction and killing will just be repeated in the future.
Coercion is evil. The use of arms and violence to advance whatever political or philosophical agenda is evil. BIG governments thrive on coercion and the stockpile of weapons of violence and destruction, to harass if not kill, those who will seriously challenge the coercion and deception that the BIG state has inflicted on the citizens.
Let us keep this mind always.
Friday, April 08, 2011
PH Pharmacists 2: Patient Rights and Responsibilities
(Note: this is my article today in thelobbyist.biz)
Patients have the right to receive considerate, respectful and compassionate care regardless of age, gender, religion, nationality, sexual orientation or disabilities, from hospitals and other healthcare institutions they go to. But patients have the responsibility to provide complete and accurate information about their full name, address, health and medical history, present condition, past illnesses and related information when required.
These are among the topics that we discussed yesterday in Day 2 of the 3-days National Convention of the Philippine Pharmacists Association (PPhA) held at the Capitol Convention Center, Camsur Watersports Complex (CWC), Naga City, Camarines Sur.
The convention center was fully packed with possibly 1,500 people in the audience. I was one of three speakers yesterday morning. I talked on the “Patient Perspective” while Dr.. Eleonor Almoro, an OB-Gyne specialist andand faculty member of St. Lukes College of Medicine, talked on the “Physician Perspective.” Ms. Leonila Ocampo, current President of the Association talked about the PPhA Declaration of Patient Rights.
I thanked Leonie and Ma’am Mita Leyesa, past President of PPhA, for inviting me to this big Convention. I have known them for about two years now, they read my papers and articles including my book Health Choices and Responsibilities, that is why they invited me to be among the speakers in their event.
Patient rights and responsibilities refer to a set or bill of rights that a patient is expected to get from a hospital and its health professionals. Other patient rights include: (a) Right to receive care in a safe environment free from all forms of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment; (b) Right to be told the names of their doctors, nurses, and all health care team members providing healthcare; and (c) Right to have a family member or person of their choice and their own doctor notified promptly if admitted to the hospital, and so on.
The other patient responsibilities include: (a) To ask questions when patients do not understand information or instructions. Related to their treatment plan. If they do not follow the treatment plan, patients are responsible for the outcomes; and (b) Participate actively in their pain management plan, inform their doctors, nurses, pharmacists, other team members of the effectiveness of their treatment, and so on.
Each hospital and healthcare facility has, or is supposed to have, its own set of patient rights and responsibilities, This is important as it clearly delineates the distribution of responsibilities between the patients (and their guardians) and the hospital and health facilities management and health professionals. In a sense, there is a strong assignment of personal responsibility in healthcare and treatment of patients.
Talking about personal (and parental) responsibility of healthcare, the National Statistics Office (NSO) released the Death Statistics 2007 sometime middle of last month. It showed that the top 4 diseases were responsible for nearly 50 percent of all deaths in the country in 2007. These are: (1) Heart diseases: Coronary, cardiovascular, heart failure; (2) Cerebrovascular diseases: Brain dysfunction, hypertension, stroke; (3) Cancer: lung, liver, prostate, 200+ types; and (4) Pneumonia: Lung inflammation due to virus, bacteria, fungi, parasites. The 5th killer disease is Tuberculosis.
These are mostly lifestyle-related diseases. Gone are the days where the top killer diseases in the country are polio, malaria, dengue, flu and so on.
So, is “more government responsibility” in healthcare feasible?
Technically YES. All government spending is a political act. Whether the public debt is as high as Mt. Apo, if politicians will decide to increase spending on any particular sector, they can. But is it feasible without further long-term damage to fiscal situation and future spending on healthcare and other social services?
The answer is NO. Here are the outstanding debt of the national government: from P2.2 trillion in 2000, up to P3.4 trillion in 2003, up to P3.8 trillion in 2006, then P4.4 trillion in 2009, and P4.7 trillion as of end-2010.
The total budget in 2010 was about P1.7 trillion. Or our public debt is now more than 3x the total expenditures for the year. It’s a number that we cannot really be proud of.
Out of those trillions of pesos of public debt, how much are we paying each year?
From P227 B in 2000 to P470 B in 2003, P854 B in 2006, P622 B in 2009 and P670 B last year. There were lots of maturing debts that have to be paid middle of last decade. After that, debt payment somehow declined but still at a high level of close to P700 billion.
Interest payment constitutes about 40 percent of those annual debt payment. Almost P300 billion in interest payment alone in 2010, What does it mean?
It means that for every P5 of total government expenditure, P1 goes to interest payment alone. Principal amortization takes away more than P1 of that. So that ALL the sectors combined – healthcare, education, housing, agriculture, public works, social work, justice system, police, armed forces, the judiciary, congress, the various constitutional commissions like Comelec and COA – will have to fight it out with the remaining less than P3.
Increasing borrowings and bloating the public debt for whatever new programs, therefore, will be counter-productive as it will only mean less resources even for existing and continuing programs.
I added in my presentation, patient rights with respect to the pharmacists. This include the right to confidentiality of patient records, and the right to proper advice in rational use and non-abuse of medicines, especially if medicines are to be distributed free by government and other civic organizations.
On the issue of drug-switching in particular, some patients’ have the tendency to switch arbitrarily to the cheapest generic to get savings. Pharmacists should be able to explain to patients about the issue of bio-equivalence, pharma equivalence and related issues. Getting the cheapest generic drugs available is understandable, but if patients will experience some adverse effects later if the switched drug do not contain the necessary ingredients that a particular patient’s “bio-markers” will need, then other health problems will occur later.
Someday, pharmacists will be more integratedl within the health care system with more patient care skills, and not just selling and dispensing medicines.
Patients have the right to receive considerate, respectful and compassionate care regardless of age, gender, religion, nationality, sexual orientation or disabilities, from hospitals and other healthcare institutions they go to. But patients have the responsibility to provide complete and accurate information about their full name, address, health and medical history, present condition, past illnesses and related information when required.
These are among the topics that we discussed yesterday in Day 2 of the 3-days National Convention of the Philippine Pharmacists Association (PPhA) held at the Capitol Convention Center, Camsur Watersports Complex (CWC), Naga City, Camarines Sur.
The convention center was fully packed with possibly 1,500 people in the audience. I was one of three speakers yesterday morning. I talked on the “Patient Perspective” while Dr.. Eleonor Almoro, an OB-Gyne specialist andand faculty member of St. Lukes College of Medicine, talked on the “Physician Perspective.” Ms. Leonila Ocampo, current President of the Association talked about the PPhA Declaration of Patient Rights.
I thanked Leonie and Ma’am Mita Leyesa, past President of PPhA, for inviting me to this big Convention. I have known them for about two years now, they read my papers and articles including my book Health Choices and Responsibilities, that is why they invited me to be among the speakers in their event.
Patient rights and responsibilities refer to a set or bill of rights that a patient is expected to get from a hospital and its health professionals. Other patient rights include: (a) Right to receive care in a safe environment free from all forms of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment; (b) Right to be told the names of their doctors, nurses, and all health care team members providing healthcare; and (c) Right to have a family member or person of their choice and their own doctor notified promptly if admitted to the hospital, and so on.
The other patient responsibilities include: (a) To ask questions when patients do not understand information or instructions. Related to their treatment plan. If they do not follow the treatment plan, patients are responsible for the outcomes; and (b) Participate actively in their pain management plan, inform their doctors, nurses, pharmacists, other team members of the effectiveness of their treatment, and so on.
Each hospital and healthcare facility has, or is supposed to have, its own set of patient rights and responsibilities, This is important as it clearly delineates the distribution of responsibilities between the patients (and their guardians) and the hospital and health facilities management and health professionals. In a sense, there is a strong assignment of personal responsibility in healthcare and treatment of patients.
Talking about personal (and parental) responsibility of healthcare, the National Statistics Office (NSO) released the Death Statistics 2007 sometime middle of last month. It showed that the top 4 diseases were responsible for nearly 50 percent of all deaths in the country in 2007. These are: (1) Heart diseases: Coronary, cardiovascular, heart failure; (2) Cerebrovascular diseases: Brain dysfunction, hypertension, stroke; (3) Cancer: lung, liver, prostate, 200+ types; and (4) Pneumonia: Lung inflammation due to virus, bacteria, fungi, parasites. The 5th killer disease is Tuberculosis.
These are mostly lifestyle-related diseases. Gone are the days where the top killer diseases in the country are polio, malaria, dengue, flu and so on.
So, is “more government responsibility” in healthcare feasible?
Technically YES. All government spending is a political act. Whether the public debt is as high as Mt. Apo, if politicians will decide to increase spending on any particular sector, they can. But is it feasible without further long-term damage to fiscal situation and future spending on healthcare and other social services?
The answer is NO. Here are the outstanding debt of the national government: from P2.2 trillion in 2000, up to P3.4 trillion in 2003, up to P3.8 trillion in 2006, then P4.4 trillion in 2009, and P4.7 trillion as of end-2010.
The total budget in 2010 was about P1.7 trillion. Or our public debt is now more than 3x the total expenditures for the year. It’s a number that we cannot really be proud of.
Out of those trillions of pesos of public debt, how much are we paying each year?
From P227 B in 2000 to P470 B in 2003, P854 B in 2006, P622 B in 2009 and P670 B last year. There were lots of maturing debts that have to be paid middle of last decade. After that, debt payment somehow declined but still at a high level of close to P700 billion.
Interest payment constitutes about 40 percent of those annual debt payment. Almost P300 billion in interest payment alone in 2010, What does it mean?
It means that for every P5 of total government expenditure, P1 goes to interest payment alone. Principal amortization takes away more than P1 of that. So that ALL the sectors combined – healthcare, education, housing, agriculture, public works, social work, justice system, police, armed forces, the judiciary, congress, the various constitutional commissions like Comelec and COA – will have to fight it out with the remaining less than P3.
Increasing borrowings and bloating the public debt for whatever new programs, therefore, will be counter-productive as it will only mean less resources even for existing and continuing programs.
I added in my presentation, patient rights with respect to the pharmacists. This include the right to confidentiality of patient records, and the right to proper advice in rational use and non-abuse of medicines, especially if medicines are to be distributed free by government and other civic organizations.
On the issue of drug-switching in particular, some patients’ have the tendency to switch arbitrarily to the cheapest generic to get savings. Pharmacists should be able to explain to patients about the issue of bio-equivalence, pharma equivalence and related issues. Getting the cheapest generic drugs available is understandable, but if patients will experience some adverse effects later if the switched drug do not contain the necessary ingredients that a particular patient’s “bio-markers” will need, then other health problems will occur later.
Someday, pharmacists will be more integratedl within the health care system with more patient care skills, and not just selling and dispensing medicines.
Labels:
Death statistics,
Leonila Ocampo,
Normita Leyesa,
Patient rights and responsibilities,
Philippine Pharmacists Association,
Philippine public debt
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
PH Pharmacists 1: Convention in Naga
This afternoon, I am going to Naga City, Camarines Sur, Bicol region. There is an on-going Philippine Pharmacists Association (PPhA) National Convention there, today until Friday. Tomorrow morning, I will be one of the panel speakers and I will speak on "Patient Rights and Responsibilities: Patient perspective".
I thanked Ms. Leonie Ocampo, the current President of PPhA, and Ma'am Mita Leyesa, the immediate past President of PPhA, for inviting me as one of their speakers. I kidded them that since the title of my book is Health Choices and Responsibilities, and I will speak on Patient Rights and Responsibilities, I can just copy-paste some of the things that I wrote in the book and present to the audience :-)
I have known Ma'am Mita (2nd from right) and Leonie (4th from right) since two years ago, at the various health fora and at the DOH Advisory Council on Price Regulation. They read my papers on health policy, they said they like my ideas. This picture I took from their website photo gallery.
They know how subversive my mind and ideas are, on the role and misrule of certain government interventions, on the potentials and limits of markets. They are risking their professional stature for inviting me as a speaker because I might turn my subversive mind on them :-)
See you PPhA guys tonight and tomorrow.
---------
I wrote this last August 25, 2010:
A Night with Filipino Pharmacists
I thanked Ms. Leonie Ocampo, the current President of PPhA, and Ma'am Mita Leyesa, the immediate past President of PPhA, for inviting me as one of their speakers. I kidded them that since the title of my book is Health Choices and Responsibilities, and I will speak on Patient Rights and Responsibilities, I can just copy-paste some of the things that I wrote in the book and present to the audience :-)
I have known Ma'am Mita (2nd from right) and Leonie (4th from right) since two years ago, at the various health fora and at the DOH Advisory Council on Price Regulation. They read my papers on health policy, they said they like my ideas. This picture I took from their website photo gallery.
They know how subversive my mind and ideas are, on the role and misrule of certain government interventions, on the potentials and limits of markets. They are risking their professional stature for inviting me as a speaker because I might turn my subversive mind on them :-)
See you PPhA guys tonight and tomorrow.
---------
I wrote this last August 25, 2010:
A Night with Filipino Pharmacists
In the various discussions on drug price control policy of the Philippine government, like at the DOH Advisory Council on Price Regulation, I have met some of the top leaders of the Philippine Pharmacists Association (PPhA). I have befriended them, and would occasionally ask some data from them, which I used for some of my articles on the subject.
Last Friday, August 20, the PPhA celebrated its 90th anniversary and appreciation night, and a day before that, I was invited by its current President, Mrs. Leonila "Leonie" Ocampo, to join them. Leonie is a good friend and I have asked some data from her on the price-controlled drugs from her drugstore chain. So when Leonie invited me, I immediately said Yes.
They gave a special award to several personalities that night, like the immediate past President, Dr. Normita Leyesa, and DOH USec Alex Padilla. Top officials of some drugstores, big and small, were also there.
In this picture, Leonie beside me, 3 officers and members of PPhA, and Ms. Leyesa at extreme right. In the dinner table, I have also met some academics -- Deans and faculty members of the College of Pharmacy of some universities here.
The event was held at the Bayanihan Center of United Laboratories (UL or Unilab), the biggest pharma company in the country, a local firm, with sales probably equivalent to the combined sales of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th biggest pharma companies here, all multinationals -- GSK, Pfizer and... I forgot the 4th one. It was the first time that I set foot on UL compound too. From the size of the compound alone, UL is indeed a giant corporation in the pharma industry. Here, a picture of Mr. Jose Campos, UL founder.
I am thankful to Leonie, also Ma'am Normita, for the opportunity to join them that night.
Last Friday, August 20, the PPhA celebrated its 90th anniversary and appreciation night, and a day before that, I was invited by its current President, Mrs. Leonila "Leonie" Ocampo, to join them. Leonie is a good friend and I have asked some data from her on the price-controlled drugs from her drugstore chain. So when Leonie invited me, I immediately said Yes.
They gave a special award to several personalities that night, like the immediate past President, Dr. Normita Leyesa, and DOH USec Alex Padilla. Top officials of some drugstores, big and small, were also there.
In this picture, Leonie beside me, 3 officers and members of PPhA, and Ms. Leyesa at extreme right. In the dinner table, I have also met some academics -- Deans and faculty members of the College of Pharmacy of some universities here.
The event was held at the Bayanihan Center of United Laboratories (UL or Unilab), the biggest pharma company in the country, a local firm, with sales probably equivalent to the combined sales of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th biggest pharma companies here, all multinationals -- GSK, Pfizer and... I forgot the 4th one. It was the first time that I set foot on UL compound too. From the size of the compound alone, UL is indeed a giant corporation in the pharma industry. Here, a picture of Mr. Jose Campos, UL founder.I am thankful to Leonie, also Ma'am Normita, for the opportunity to join them that night.
Labels:
Leonila Ocampo,
Normita Leyesa,
Patient rights and responsibilities,
Philippine Pharmacists Association
Responsible Parenthood cannot be legislated, Part 2
After posting Responsible Parenthood cannot be legislated, I got five comments, three at the Comments section, and two by email. Let me enumerate the five points.
My reply to the above comments:
On #1. It is difficult to produce the estimates of how much the Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood (RH-RP) bill will cost. In Sec. 5, hiring of thousands of new midwives; In Sec. 6, creation of new hospitals in EACH province and city which have no hospitals yet, and for those which have ones already, to modernize them. These 2 sections alone would cost several hundred millions, if not billions, per year already. I am sure the various government agencies involved in the implementation should this bill becomes a law, have the numbers, but they should be hiding it now to the public.
On #2. I think this is clear advocacy for a big, nanny state. People cannot be trusted to take care of themselves; parents cannot be trusted to make appropriate planning about their households, much less take care of their kids. Thus, there has to be a BIG and monster institution, the government, that will guide people how they should take care of themselves and their kids. A big nanny state is like a socialist state. It is supposed to give you everything but it will also take everything you've got.
All existing government socio-economic programs were created in the past with long-term view. Education for the poor, healthcare for the poor, housing for the poor, credit for the poor, agrarian reform for the poor, social welfare for the poor, justice for the poor, public works for the poor, currently conditional cash transfer for the poor, and soon, population control for the poor...
3. The government desire of limiting family size is implicit, not explicit. The most recent data, 2.0 percent RP population growth rate per year is deemed "too high" by international standards, thus the government, with cheering up from the UN, WB, WHO, other foreign aid bodies, is "urging" couples to limit the number of their kids.
The issue of "irresponsible parenthood can be prevented through proper legislation" is answered by my points above.
4. It seems that the RH/RP bill, when it becomes a law, is a panacea for all the 11 problems mentioned above, like prevention of maternal deaths, infant mortality, unintended pregnancies, HIV and STD, and so on. Government is a superman. It can stop and prevent all the mentioned problems. Really?
When the Department of Education (currently DepEd, previously called DECS, MECS, MEC, DEC, Dept. of Instruction, etc.) was created more than a century ago. the goal was to prevent high illiteracy, prevent high drop out rate among children, prevent low quality education, prevent early pregnancy via civic and good manners subjects, and so on. Did this happen?
If this happened as well as to other sectors, then those students would have been productive citizens many decades ago, and the need for expanded public education in the succeeding generations would have been reduced if not eliminated as people have become well-educated and self-reliant adults.
Educating couples about RH and giving them access to devices -- should government do this? These can not be done by other parents, various civic groups, corporate foundations, NGOs, church-based groups?
It is noticeable that there is too much focus on population size - economic growth link. Granting that this is true, which causes which?
On #5. The above reply would apply here. I suggested to Reiner that there is BIG danger if we allow government to have another round of heavy intervention on the citizens' lives, down to the bedroom level. Many of those things that the RH-RP bill mandates can be done by the market, by civil society, by voluntary organizations. The pharma industry has already experienced the heavy hand of government when it unilaterally imposed drug price control.
In my essay last month, What is the role of government?, I wrote,
What causes poverty is heavy government intervention and taxation while not promulgating the rule of law. By enacting many restrictions and prohibitions on ordinary citizens but not applying the same restrictions to government people themselves and their friends. Poverty has little to do with high population growth.
1. One thing the sponsors and rabid supporters of this bill has not discussed is the actual cost of this bill, its impact on the fiscal balance (currently in historic deficit levels) and whether any future taxes are required. Hope you can have some numbers on this.
2. Good parenting needs to be legislated at the taxpayers expense by programs such as Positive Parenting which promote optimal parenting skills so obviously lacking. Damaged children are not productive citizens and become expensive casualties.
3. The RH Bill intends to help parents who already want to limit the number of their children; it does not tell them how many children to have. It is the population of our countrymen from classes C, D and E that continue to rise and they are the ones who need the services that government provides (through increased borrowing). I agree that responsible parenthood cannot be legislated, but irresponsible parenthood can be prevented through proper legislation.
4. Here is Reasons Why We Need the RH Law by Clara Rita Padilla of EnGenderRights, Inc., publication funded by the UN Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM). The 18-pages paper lists 11 reasons why: To respond to the clamor of the population who want the RH bill; To prevent unintended pregnancies; To prevent maternal deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth; To prevent infant mortality; To help individuals choose responsibly when to have children; To reduce abortion rates; To give rape victims a better chance to heal from their ordeal; To prevent early pregnancy and STDs among adolescents; To address the rising HIV/AIDS cases; To avoid the negative impact of large families on the poor; and To free women's bodies from politics and fundamentalism.
5. Nonoy, I think you are missing the point. The law is not to legislate responsibility it's to educate people and to give them access to devices so that they can exercise responsible parenthood. Cheers. -- Reiner Gloor, PHAP Executive Director (I am posting this comment with his permission)
My reply to the above comments:
On #1. It is difficult to produce the estimates of how much the Reproductive Health, Responsible Parenthood (RH-RP) bill will cost. In Sec. 5, hiring of thousands of new midwives; In Sec. 6, creation of new hospitals in EACH province and city which have no hospitals yet, and for those which have ones already, to modernize them. These 2 sections alone would cost several hundred millions, if not billions, per year already. I am sure the various government agencies involved in the implementation should this bill becomes a law, have the numbers, but they should be hiding it now to the public.
On #2. I think this is clear advocacy for a big, nanny state. People cannot be trusted to take care of themselves; parents cannot be trusted to make appropriate planning about their households, much less take care of their kids. Thus, there has to be a BIG and monster institution, the government, that will guide people how they should take care of themselves and their kids. A big nanny state is like a socialist state. It is supposed to give you everything but it will also take everything you've got.
All existing government socio-economic programs were created in the past with long-term view. Education for the poor, healthcare for the poor, housing for the poor, credit for the poor, agrarian reform for the poor, social welfare for the poor, justice for the poor, public works for the poor, currently conditional cash transfer for the poor, and soon, population control for the poor...
3. The government desire of limiting family size is implicit, not explicit. The most recent data, 2.0 percent RP population growth rate per year is deemed "too high" by international standards, thus the government, with cheering up from the UN, WB, WHO, other foreign aid bodies, is "urging" couples to limit the number of their kids.
The issue of "irresponsible parenthood can be prevented through proper legislation" is answered by my points above.
4. It seems that the RH/RP bill, when it becomes a law, is a panacea for all the 11 problems mentioned above, like prevention of maternal deaths, infant mortality, unintended pregnancies, HIV and STD, and so on. Government is a superman. It can stop and prevent all the mentioned problems. Really?
When the Department of Education (currently DepEd, previously called DECS, MECS, MEC, DEC, Dept. of Instruction, etc.) was created more than a century ago. the goal was to prevent high illiteracy, prevent high drop out rate among children, prevent low quality education, prevent early pregnancy via civic and good manners subjects, and so on. Did this happen?
If this happened as well as to other sectors, then those students would have been productive citizens many decades ago, and the need for expanded public education in the succeeding generations would have been reduced if not eliminated as people have become well-educated and self-reliant adults.
Educating couples about RH and giving them access to devices -- should government do this? These can not be done by other parents, various civic groups, corporate foundations, NGOs, church-based groups?
It is noticeable that there is too much focus on population size - economic growth link. Granting that this is true, which causes which?
On #5. The above reply would apply here. I suggested to Reiner that there is BIG danger if we allow government to have another round of heavy intervention on the citizens' lives, down to the bedroom level. Many of those things that the RH-RP bill mandates can be done by the market, by civil society, by voluntary organizations. The pharma industry has already experienced the heavy hand of government when it unilaterally imposed drug price control.
In my essay last month, What is the role of government?, I wrote,
It boils down to only one important function: Promulgate the rule of law. Government has laws against killing, against stealing, against kidnapping, against corruption, against plunder, against carnapping, etc. Let government implement ALL of them, ZERO EXCEPTION....
What about the very poor? Who will take care of them?... if the poor will put up a vulcanizing shop, a barbeque stand, a barber shop, or plant kamote and pechay in vacant lots, or buy those farm products and sell in a corner stall, government should get out. Do NOT require these small and micro entrepreneurs to secure costly and bureaucractic business permit, barangay permit, sanitation permit, location permit, various other permits and pay lots of taxes and fees.
In short, if the poor will become industrious and would want to stand on their own, government should step back. If the poor will become lazy and steal, government should arrest them and put them behind bars. The rule of law says NO STEALING. It does not matter if the theft is the President of the country or a Congressman or the poorest man on earth. No one should steal, period. No ifs, no buts, no preconditions, no exceptions.
What causes poverty is heavy government intervention and taxation while not promulgating the rule of law. By enacting many restrictions and prohibitions on ordinary citizens but not applying the same restrictions to government people themselves and their friends. Poverty has little to do with high population growth.
Labels:
maternal deaths,
parental responsibility,
population control,
Reproductive health bill,
UNIFEM
Tuesday, April 05, 2011
Asian free market websites
I personally know most of the leaders of the free market think tanks and groups in Asia. Some of these groups do not have websites yet though.
This afternoon, I checked with alexa.com the global traffic rank (out of possibly a billion or more blogs and websites worldwide) of the websites of my friends. Here they are.
1. www.cfe.org (CFE, Seoul, S. Korea)
1 month 562,219
3 month 975,89
2. www.newasiarepublic.com (NAR, Singapore)
"… We estimate that 83% of the site's visitors are in Singapore, where it has attained a traffic rank of 3,529."
1 month 727,229
3 month 955,756
3. www.unirule.org.cn (Unirule, Beijing, China)
"…We estimate that 63% of visitors to Unirule.org.cn come from China, where it has attained a traffic rank of 139,641."
1 month 934,154
3 month 1,002,001
4. www.ccsindia.org (CCS, Delhi, India)
"... The site has attained a traffic rank of 100,748 among users in India, where about 89% of its audience is located."
1 month 935,512
3 month 882,876
5. www.deas.org.my (IDEAS, KL, Malaysia)
"…. Almost all visitors to the site come from Malaysia, where it has attained a traffic rank of 22,024"
1 month 2,267,858
3 month 2,221,634
6. www.freemarket.kg (CAFMI, Bishkek, Kyrgyztan)
1 month 3,487,932
3 month 5,143,729
7. http://azadliqciragi.org (Free Minds Association, Azerbaijan)
1 month 4,726,623
3 month 1,863,469
8. www.lionrockinstitute.org (LRI, Hong Kong)
1 month 5,327,369
3 month 4,275,359
9. www.minimalgovernment.net (MGT, Manila, Philippines)
1 month 6,521,950
3 month 6,007,220
10. www.readtheboss.com (The Boss, Kathmandu, Nepal)
1 month 7,335,497
3 month 4,288,41
11. www.akademimerdeka.org (Freedom Institute, Jakarta, Indonesia)
1 month 9,321,814
3 month 7,488,574
12. www.doimoi.org (Reform and Development, Hanoi, Vietnam)
1 month 13,856,101
3 month 17,559,789
13. www.asinstitute.org (AS Institute, Lahore, Pakistan)
1 month -
3 month 9,150,947
14. www.samridhi.org (Prosperity Foundation, Kathmandu, Nepal)
1 month -
3 month 16,607,890
15. www.indefenceofliberty.org (Liberty Institute, Delhi, India)
1 month -
3 month 17,213,858
16. www.ebi.mn (EBI, Ulanbaatar, Mongolia)
1 month -
3 month 25,249,798
This is not a complete list. There may be other free market think tanks and groups in our continent that I am not aware of. Besides, some of those groups and think tanks that I know do not have websites yet, or acquiring a new website after encountering some problems with their old sites.
Unlike in North America and Europe where there are plenty of liberty- and free market-oriented think tanks, groups and publications, there are just a few in Asia. But nonetheless, these groups and individuals are showing their presence, expressing their views, in our respective countries and the rest of the world wide web.
This afternoon, I checked with alexa.com the global traffic rank (out of possibly a billion or more blogs and websites worldwide) of the websites of my friends. Here they are.
1. www.cfe.org (CFE, Seoul, S. Korea)
1 month 562,219
3 month 975,89
2. www.newasiarepublic.com (NAR, Singapore)
"… We estimate that 83% of the site's visitors are in Singapore, where it has attained a traffic rank of 3,529."
1 month 727,229
3 month 955,756
3. www.unirule.org.cn (Unirule, Beijing, China)
"…We estimate that 63% of visitors to Unirule.org.cn come from China, where it has attained a traffic rank of 139,641."
1 month 934,154
3 month 1,002,001
4. www.ccsindia.org (CCS, Delhi, India)
"... The site has attained a traffic rank of 100,748 among users in India, where about 89% of its audience is located."
1 month 935,512
3 month 882,876
5. www.deas.org.my (IDEAS, KL, Malaysia)
"…. Almost all visitors to the site come from Malaysia, where it has attained a traffic rank of 22,024"
1 month 2,267,858
3 month 2,221,634
6. www.freemarket.kg (CAFMI, Bishkek, Kyrgyztan)
1 month 3,487,932
3 month 5,143,729
7. http://azadliqciragi.org (Free Minds Association, Azerbaijan)
1 month 4,726,623
3 month 1,863,469
8. www.lionrockinstitute.org (LRI, Hong Kong)
1 month 5,327,369
3 month 4,275,359
9. www.minimalgovernment.net (MGT, Manila, Philippines)
1 month 6,521,950
3 month 6,007,220
10. www.readtheboss.com (The Boss, Kathmandu, Nepal)
1 month 7,335,497
3 month 4,288,41
11. www.akademimerdeka.org (Freedom Institute, Jakarta, Indonesia)
1 month 9,321,814
3 month 7,488,574
12. www.doimoi.org (Reform and Development, Hanoi, Vietnam)
1 month 13,856,101
3 month 17,559,789
13. www.asinstitute.org (AS Institute, Lahore, Pakistan)
1 month -
3 month 9,150,947
14. www.samridhi.org (Prosperity Foundation, Kathmandu, Nepal)
1 month -
3 month 16,607,890
15. www.indefenceofliberty.org (Liberty Institute, Delhi, India)
1 month -
3 month 17,213,858
16. www.ebi.mn (EBI, Ulanbaatar, Mongolia)
1 month -
3 month 25,249,798
This is not a complete list. There may be other free market think tanks and groups in our continent that I am not aware of. Besides, some of those groups and think tanks that I know do not have websites yet, or acquiring a new website after encountering some problems with their old sites.
Unlike in North America and Europe where there are plenty of liberty- and free market-oriented think tanks, groups and publications, there are just a few in Asia. But nonetheless, these groups and individuals are showing their presence, expressing their views, in our respective countries and the rest of the world wide web.
Labels:
CAFMI,
Center for Civil Society,
Center for Free Enterprise,
Liberty Institute,
Lion rock institute,
Minimal Government Thinkers,
New Asia Republic,
The Boss,
Unirule
Filipino free market blogs, part 2
Is the free market voice and perspective gaining some foothold in the Philippines?
I would like to think that the answer is: Yes, somehow. Why?
Four free market blogs by Filipinos are ranking good in the alexa.com global traffic rank. Three of them are with blogger/google, the other one is with wordpress. Please note that blogger, and I'm not sure if wordpress too, is banned in China, along with facebook and other famous global social networking sites.
Thus, if your blog has ".blogger.com" address to it, thousands, and possibly millions, of potential readers from China cannot see your blog. This reduces your global viewership. One can add therefore, that if the Chinese communist government has not banned blogger there, the global traffic rank of your blog would be higher than its current rank. Nice consolation.
Anyway, I checked again this afternoon the alexa.com's global traffic rank and any brief discussion by alexa, here is the result.
1. Government and Taxes, http://funwithgovernment.blogspot.com
"… We estimate that 54% of the site's visitors are in the US, where it has attained a traffic rank of 494,821."
1 month 1,495,303
3 month 2,143,082
2. The Vincenton Post, http://fvdb.wordpress.com
"… We estimate that 39% of its visitors are in the US, where it has attained a traffic rank of 684,401."
1 month 1,657,948
3 month 2,388,381
3. Prudent Investor Newsletters, http://prudentinvestornewsletters.blogspot.com
1 month 1,985,848
3 month 3,111,745
4. Colorful Rag, http://colorfulrag.blogspot.com
1 month 7,353,863
3 month 12,091,475
Now, the Filipino Freedom Fighter blog, http://filipinofreedomfighter09.blogspot.com, has no global traffic rank yet. The owner, a university student here in Manila, has been busy with his studies the past few months, he stopped blogging for about 3 months. Now that it's summer break, he resumed blogging. I saw his papers last month and this month, I believe that it's on its way to joining the above 4 blogs in getting high viewership someday.
Keep writing, FFF.
Then there is HarryLeaks, http://harryleaks.blogspot.com/. The owner, Harry Santos, is another young freedom-loving Filipino. He is more busy with his other blog, Beating the Search Engine, http://beatingthesearchengine.blogspot.com/ that is getting thousands of pageviews per week. But his political and philosophical views are expressed in HarryLeaks.
For other Filipino freedom loving individuals, whether here in the Philippines or abroad, may I urge you to start blogging. If you have an existing blog now, just keep writing. In my case for instance, it took me more than 5 years to reach the current ranking.
But it's not the ranking that counts. It's the freedom and achievement of expressing oneself. Of letting our friends, acquaintances, and later on, other people whom we do not know, of the value of advancing individual freedom, individual liberty, individual expression.
(See my discussion last month, Filipino free market blogs)
I would like to think that the answer is: Yes, somehow. Why?
Four free market blogs by Filipinos are ranking good in the alexa.com global traffic rank. Three of them are with blogger/google, the other one is with wordpress. Please note that blogger, and I'm not sure if wordpress too, is banned in China, along with facebook and other famous global social networking sites.
Thus, if your blog has ".blogger.com" address to it, thousands, and possibly millions, of potential readers from China cannot see your blog. This reduces your global viewership. One can add therefore, that if the Chinese communist government has not banned blogger there, the global traffic rank of your blog would be higher than its current rank. Nice consolation.
Anyway, I checked again this afternoon the alexa.com's global traffic rank and any brief discussion by alexa, here is the result.
1. Government and Taxes, http://funwithgovernment.blogspot.com
"… We estimate that 54% of the site's visitors are in the US, where it has attained a traffic rank of 494,821."
1 month 1,495,303
3 month 2,143,082
2. The Vincenton Post, http://fvdb.wordpress.com
"… We estimate that 39% of its visitors are in the US, where it has attained a traffic rank of 684,401."
1 month 1,657,948
3 month 2,388,381
3. Prudent Investor Newsletters, http://prudentinvestornewsletters.blogspot.com
1 month 1,985,848
3 month 3,111,745
4. Colorful Rag, http://colorfulrag.blogspot.com
1 month 7,353,863
3 month 12,091,475
Now, the Filipino Freedom Fighter blog, http://filipinofreedomfighter09.blogspot.com, has no global traffic rank yet. The owner, a university student here in Manila, has been busy with his studies the past few months, he stopped blogging for about 3 months. Now that it's summer break, he resumed blogging. I saw his papers last month and this month, I believe that it's on its way to joining the above 4 blogs in getting high viewership someday.
Keep writing, FFF.
Then there is HarryLeaks, http://harryleaks.blogspot.com/. The owner, Harry Santos, is another young freedom-loving Filipino. He is more busy with his other blog, Beating the Search Engine, http://beatingthesearchengine.blogspot.com/ that is getting thousands of pageviews per week. But his political and philosophical views are expressed in HarryLeaks.
For other Filipino freedom loving individuals, whether here in the Philippines or abroad, may I urge you to start blogging. If you have an existing blog now, just keep writing. In my case for instance, it took me more than 5 years to reach the current ranking.
But it's not the ranking that counts. It's the freedom and achievement of expressing oneself. Of letting our friends, acquaintances, and later on, other people whom we do not know, of the value of advancing individual freedom, individual liberty, individual expression.
(See my discussion last month, Filipino free market blogs)
Labels:
Filipino bloggers,
free market,
individual liberty
Responsible Parenthood cannot be legislated
Question: If you are a parent, has one or more kids, do you need the government to tell you that you should be a responsible parent?
Think quick. Yes or No?
....
....
....
If you answer Yes, then I believe there is something wrong with your personal values. If you answer No, then I congratulate you. You know your role as an individual and as a parent.
But now, we in the Philippines are faced with a congressional proposal with an ugly title called "Responsible Parenthood" bill. Parental responsibility is a non-issue. It's a given. If you are a parent, you HAVE responsibilities to your kids, to your family, no alibis.
So how come that a supposedly non-issue has become a big national issue?
I think the quick and simple answer is: Government. The government wants to impose another round of coercion and mandatory actions. And there are penalties and fines for non-obedience to such new round of coercion.
This highly controversial, highly divisive, highly emotional congressional bill, will require long discussions. Section by section if necessary.
For now, I will limit this article to only one thing: HUGE budgetary requirements to implement this proposal if it becomes a law. I will reserve additional discussions in the continuation of this new discussion series.
The authors, sponsors and advocates of this bill seem to think that this problem does not exist -- high public debt as a result of endless annual budget deficit, a result of endless borrowings to plug those deficit. High debt will require high repayment, both in principal and interest payment.
And thus, they thought of these programs with still undetermined, high, and new expenditures on top of existing expenditures:
Sec. 5. Midwives for Skilled Attendants.
The Local Government Units (LGUs) with the assistance of the Department of Health (DOH), shall employ an adequate number of midwives to achieve a minimum ratio of one (1) fulltimeskilled birth attendant for every one hundred fifty (150) deliveries per year...
Sec. 6. Emergency Obstetric Care.
Each province and city, with the assistance of the DOH, shall establish or upgrade hospitals with adequate and qualified personnel, equipment and supplies to be able to provideemergency obstetric care. For every 500,000 population, there shall be at least one (1)hospital with comprehensive emergency obstetric care and four (4) hospitals or other health facilities with basic emergency obstetric care...
Sec. 7. Access to Family Planning.
All accredited health facilities shall provide a full range of modern family planning methods,except in specialty hospitals which may render such services on optional basis. For poorpatients, such services shall be fully covered by PhilHealth Insurance and/or governmentfinancial assistance on a no balance billing...
Sec. 9. Maternal Death Review
All Local Government Units (LGUs), national and local government hospitals, and other publichealth units shall conduct annual maternal death review in accordance with the guidelines setby the DOH.
Sec. 10. Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines
Products and supplies for modern family planning methods shall be part of the National DrugFormulary and the same shall be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines andsupplies of all national and local hospitals and other government health units.
Sec. 11. Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies
The DOH shall spearhead the efficient procurement, distribution to Local Government Units (LGUs) and usage-monitoring of family planning supplies for the whole country.
Sec. 13. Roles of Local Government in Family Planning Programs
The LGUs shall ensure that poor families receive preferential access to services, commodities and programs for family planning. The role of Population Officers at municipal, city and barangay levels in the family planning effort shall be strengthened. The Barangay Health Workers and Volunteers shall be capacitated to give priority to family planning work.
Sec. 14. Benefits for Serious and Life-Threatening Reproductive Health Conditions
All serious and life threatening reproductive health conditions such as HIV and AIDS, breast and reproductive tract cancers, obstetric complications, menopausal and post-menopausal related conditions shall be given the maximum benefits as provided by PhilHealth programs.
SEC. 15. Mobile Health Care Service
Each Congressional District shall be provided with at least one Mobile Health Care Service(MHCS) in the form of a van or other means of transportation appropriate to coastal ormountainous areas.
SEC. 16. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education
Age-appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education shall be taught by adequately trained teachers in formal and non-formal educational system starting from Grade Five up to Fourth Year High School using life-skills and other approaches.... The Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and the Department of Health (DOH) shall formulate the Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education curriculum. Such curriculum shall be common to both public and private schools, out of school youth...
SEC. 19. Capability Building of Barangay Health Workers
Barangay Health Workers and other community-based health workers shall undergo training on the promotion of reproductive health and shall receive at least 10% increase in honoraria, upon successful completion of training. The amount necessary for the increase in honoraria shall be charged against the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) componentof the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) program of the DSWD. In the event the CCT is phased out, the funding sources shall be charged against the Gender and Development(GAD) budget or the development fund component of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA).
SEC. 24. Right to Reproductive Health Care Information
...The DOH and the Philippine Information Agency (PIA) shall initiate and sustain a heightened nationwide multi-media campaign to raise the level of public awareness of the protection and promotion of reproductive health and rights...
Twelve sections leading to still undetermined amount, several billions of pesos per year of new spending to control high population growth. Determining the size of family is now government responsibility, not parental responsibility. Then taking care of the kids -- their education, healthcare, nutrition, other needs -- is also implied to be largely government responsibility, not parental responsibility.
Since when have the values of parents been corrupted this way?
Additional discussions to follow in the coming days and weeks.
-------
Related articles here are Increasing population, no problem
Population policy: Big Govt or Big Church?
Think quick. Yes or No?
....
....
....
If you answer Yes, then I believe there is something wrong with your personal values. If you answer No, then I congratulate you. You know your role as an individual and as a parent.
But now, we in the Philippines are faced with a congressional proposal with an ugly title called "Responsible Parenthood" bill. Parental responsibility is a non-issue. It's a given. If you are a parent, you HAVE responsibilities to your kids, to your family, no alibis.
So how come that a supposedly non-issue has become a big national issue?
I think the quick and simple answer is: Government. The government wants to impose another round of coercion and mandatory actions. And there are penalties and fines for non-obedience to such new round of coercion.
This highly controversial, highly divisive, highly emotional congressional bill, will require long discussions. Section by section if necessary.
For now, I will limit this article to only one thing: HUGE budgetary requirements to implement this proposal if it becomes a law. I will reserve additional discussions in the continuation of this new discussion series.
The authors, sponsors and advocates of this bill seem to think that this problem does not exist -- high public debt as a result of endless annual budget deficit, a result of endless borrowings to plug those deficit. High debt will require high repayment, both in principal and interest payment.
And thus, they thought of these programs with still undetermined, high, and new expenditures on top of existing expenditures:
Sec. 5. Midwives for Skilled Attendants.
The Local Government Units (LGUs) with the assistance of the Department of Health (DOH), shall employ an adequate number of midwives to achieve a minimum ratio of one (1) fulltimeskilled birth attendant for every one hundred fifty (150) deliveries per year...
Sec. 6. Emergency Obstetric Care.
Each province and city, with the assistance of the DOH, shall establish or upgrade hospitals with adequate and qualified personnel, equipment and supplies to be able to provideemergency obstetric care. For every 500,000 population, there shall be at least one (1)hospital with comprehensive emergency obstetric care and four (4) hospitals or other health facilities with basic emergency obstetric care...
Sec. 7. Access to Family Planning.
All accredited health facilities shall provide a full range of modern family planning methods,except in specialty hospitals which may render such services on optional basis. For poorpatients, such services shall be fully covered by PhilHealth Insurance and/or governmentfinancial assistance on a no balance billing...
Sec. 9. Maternal Death Review
All Local Government Units (LGUs), national and local government hospitals, and other publichealth units shall conduct annual maternal death review in accordance with the guidelines setby the DOH.
Sec. 10. Family Planning Supplies as Essential Medicines
Products and supplies for modern family planning methods shall be part of the National DrugFormulary and the same shall be included in the regular purchase of essential medicines andsupplies of all national and local hospitals and other government health units.
Sec. 11. Procurement and Distribution of Family Planning Supplies
The DOH shall spearhead the efficient procurement, distribution to Local Government Units (LGUs) and usage-monitoring of family planning supplies for the whole country.
Sec. 13. Roles of Local Government in Family Planning Programs
The LGUs shall ensure that poor families receive preferential access to services, commodities and programs for family planning. The role of Population Officers at municipal, city and barangay levels in the family planning effort shall be strengthened. The Barangay Health Workers and Volunteers shall be capacitated to give priority to family planning work.
Sec. 14. Benefits for Serious and Life-Threatening Reproductive Health Conditions
All serious and life threatening reproductive health conditions such as HIV and AIDS, breast and reproductive tract cancers, obstetric complications, menopausal and post-menopausal related conditions shall be given the maximum benefits as provided by PhilHealth programs.
SEC. 15. Mobile Health Care Service
Each Congressional District shall be provided with at least one Mobile Health Care Service(MHCS) in the form of a van or other means of transportation appropriate to coastal ormountainous areas.
SEC. 16. Mandatory Age-Appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education
Age-appropriate Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education shall be taught by adequately trained teachers in formal and non-formal educational system starting from Grade Five up to Fourth Year High School using life-skills and other approaches.... The Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and the Department of Health (DOH) shall formulate the Reproductive Health and Sexuality Education curriculum. Such curriculum shall be common to both public and private schools, out of school youth...
SEC. 19. Capability Building of Barangay Health Workers
Barangay Health Workers and other community-based health workers shall undergo training on the promotion of reproductive health and shall receive at least 10% increase in honoraria, upon successful completion of training. The amount necessary for the increase in honoraria shall be charged against the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) componentof the Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) program of the DSWD. In the event the CCT is phased out, the funding sources shall be charged against the Gender and Development(GAD) budget or the development fund component of the Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA).
SEC. 24. Right to Reproductive Health Care Information
...The DOH and the Philippine Information Agency (PIA) shall initiate and sustain a heightened nationwide multi-media campaign to raise the level of public awareness of the protection and promotion of reproductive health and rights...
Twelve sections leading to still undetermined amount, several billions of pesos per year of new spending to control high population growth. Determining the size of family is now government responsibility, not parental responsibility. Then taking care of the kids -- their education, healthcare, nutrition, other needs -- is also implied to be largely government responsibility, not parental responsibility.
Since when have the values of parents been corrupted this way?
Additional discussions to follow in the coming days and weeks.
-------
Related articles here are Increasing population, no problem
Population policy: Big Govt or Big Church?
Labels:
condoms,
government coercion,
parental responsibility,
population policy,
Reproductive health bill,
Responsible parenthood
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
















