Legalize Abortion?

[giddyboy]

---

Noted ob-gyne says contraceptives not abortifacients
Updated May 26, 2009 12:00 AM
Philstar.com

MANILA, Philippines – A leading Filipino obstetrician and gynecologist has stressed in an interview that contraceptives, in particular oral contraceptive pills, are not abortifacients because their action is to prevent ovulation and consequently conception, thus no abortion occurs.

Citing the debate over pending legislation that aims for greater availability and access to reproductive health (RH) education and services in the country, Dr. Santiago del Rosario, a former president of the Philippine Medical Association (PMA) and the Philippine Obstetrical and Gynecological Society (POGS), says assertions that contraceptives are abortifacients amount to disinformation, and data used to support such claims are speculative at best and contrary to scientific evidence.

“If taken as prescribed, contraceptive pills prevent ovulation or the production of an egg, so that there is nothing for sperm cells to fertilize, hence there is no pregnancy and there will be no abortion,” he explains. “If you analyze the reproductive chain, there is nothing to abort. Before prescribing contraceptive pills, the doctor makes sure that the patient is not pregnant, using reliable diagnostic procedures. There is no pregnancy, much less abortion. If the pills are taken as prescribed during the first five days of menstruation, the possibility of accidental ovulation (not pregnancy) is very small, and this is addressed by advising the patient to add seven days more of abstinence, or to use another contraceptive method during those seven days.”

He adds, “When a particular hormone pill in use is too weak for an individual patient, there is bleeding, signaling that escape ovulation may become a risk in a few days. The patient is advised to abstain or use a second contraceptive method to avoid only even the risk of escape ovulation, and not pregnancy.”

According to the highly respected ob-gyne, the term “contraceptive” is actually a misnomer, since contraceptive pills actually prevent ovulation, not conception. “It would be more accurate to call them anti-ovulation pills or anti-ovulants rather than contraceptives,” Dr. Del Rosario points out. “Those who oppose the reproductive health legislation have often repeated that contraceptive or hormonal pills are abortifacients. This is not correct. It spreads wrong information about contraceptive pills by calling them abortifacients. This disinformation can confuse and mislead lay people.”

Dr. Del Rosario is currently the chair of the PMA Commission on Ethics and Medical Practice. He represents the PMA and the POGS in legislative proceedings on health concerns. Both the PMA and the POGS support the passage of the RH legislation.

full article:
Noted ob-gyne says contraceptives not abortifacients | The Philippine Star >> Lifestyle Features >> Health And Family

[quatri]

tuga2x ug palami tapos deli man d ay ka suporta sa ila biga...ingon ani nba ka maot ang ato society? pacencya ha pero tan.aw nko mora man ug grabeh pag decay sa ato society...liman ka lantaran nkaau ang ila ka buang...

[giddyboy]

Ooooppsss, bok. You're confusing the subject. The prolife side says that the RH bill is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. That means the law is invalid as per Article II, section 12. That is different from being illegal, which means there is a punishment for a specific crime. You're confusing the two. A law can be declared unconstitutional. That isn't the same as saying that an act that the law promotes has a punishment.

Grabe bro, how you're always trying to fool people. Why cant you even make honest arguments?

no i am not confused. i say condoms, pills, and IUD (if properly dispensed and prescribed) are not "illegal" coz our Penal laws and RAs didn't say these contraceptives are illegal. and if the laws say they are not illegal or does not specify, it only means either it is clearly constitutional, ambiguous, or, there is yet no law that makes it illegal.

Proof that these contraceptives are legal and following the Constitutional provisions is the glaring, "in-your-face" fact that they are sold to and used by consumers in the Phils! and peeps like u r the only ones who refuse to see it!

and if u still insist it is unconstitutional, then by all means u have to bring that case to Court and let the Court alone to determine if it's unconstitutional --- not you, nor the anti-lifers, nor the Church, nor the streets, and nor the media.

busa ayaw ibuwag ang Constitutional provisions ug atong mga balaud. they are all intertwined! Gets?

Aw cmon. You're just being "pikon" because your side is LOSING in this poll by a LANDSLIDE!

pikon? how can i even see or react to the results of the poll if i have not even voted in the first place? toinks! LOLs

OK, OK, para mahuman, i will answer it:

Question: Should abortion and abortifacients be legalized thru the RH Bill?

Answer: No. coz I always say NO to abortion. The RH Bill explicitly treats abortion as a crime under our laws. Therefore, I support the RH Bill.

so u see, how could i lose or be pikon when im even on the NO side! hikhikhik
but take note, I answered by treating it as an open question...that's the best way to answer a "tricky" double bind. tehee

Those are the facts that have been proven over and over again. Those are also the assumptions of the poll. Yoi don't like it? Then stop whining and don't take the poll.

again, can u categorically say that my proposed poll questions are misleading and why? u can't can u? that's why u resort to ad hominem argument by saying "stop whining". instead, i shud say "stop beating around the bush and answer it squarely and fairly". i even threw a challenge (whatever happened na ato ui).

Then why do you keep bringing up the SWS poll before. That was biased and proven to be biased. But did you care about it then? NNNOOOOOO!!!! You only cry about bias and fairness when YOUR side is LOSING. What a hypocrite!

DID I? if i did, it was only to provide news updates. hoy mga peeps, kanusa man nahitabo dre nga crime or misleading ang pag post ug news articles dre? please refresh my memory...hahaha

mind u, if ever i did, wala gyud koy malice intended when i posted that SWS survey news. wala man sab cguro nagdungan ug gawas ang balita sa survey ug ang balita sa pag criticize sa survey di ba? the former has to come first and the latter comes later of course! ang ang, asa gud ko mangahoy intawn ug article of criticism kng wala pay survey nahitabo...LOLs

and again, if im not mistaken, it was not the SWS poll that i discussed. It was the Pulse Asia surveys...ngano imo man pugson nga "SWS" nga "Pulse Asia" man to? tutuki ug maayo if pareha ba ug spelling ang SWS ug Pulse Asia...ngano imo gyud pugson? ky wala man moy masulti against sa Pulse Asia kundi ka2 sa SWS ra...ilara ko tits!

and to refresh ur memory:

from Pulse Asia (again, not from SWS ha):

(1) 63% of Filipinos support the Reproductive Health Bill.
(2) 76 to 91 % across geographic areas and socio-economic classes said that gov't should teach couples regarding modern methods of family planning, with 82 % saying that proper services and materials should also be provided.

from SWS survey:

(1) 71% Catholics and 68 % non-Catholics favor the passage of the bill.
(2) SEVEN out of 10 families favor the passage of the reproductive health bill.

and even if we say the SWS survey is flawed, still the Pulse Asia survey reinforces the glaring fact that majority of Filipinos supports the RH Bill. what's their difference anyway? eight percent?

NO TO ABORTION. YES TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH! YES TO INFORMED CHOICE OF FAMILY PLANNING! NO TO THE TYRANNY OF THE CHURCH AND ANTI-LIFERS!

[haroldjizdeortega]

pwede sad aron ma sulbad na ang illegal maka kwarta pa ang goberno, maka tabang patag pugong sa unwanted pregnancy.

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

The poll is misleading.... can i make a new poll? or do i have to make a new thread for a new poll?

[toinker]

I say Yes..
Dapat pareho ta sa China, one child policy..

kung naa nay anak tapos ma buntis ang babae, dapat i abort.

psst. adto daw mo sa mga slum area beh tan-awa pila ka anak kada pamilya.. wla na gani makaon sige pa ug anak... ahak oi.. kung gamay ra unta cla anak di gamay ra magbahinbahin sa pagkaon....

[joshua259]

I say Yes..
Dapat pareho ta sa China, one child policy..

kung naa nay anak tapos ma buntis ang babae, dapat i abort.

psst. adto daw mo sa mga slum area beh tan-awa pila ka anak kada pamilya.. wla na gani makaon sige pa ug anak... ahak oi.. kung gamay ra unta cla anak di gamay ra magbahinbahin sa pagkaon....

dili na sila maminaw nimo kay MYTH ra daw ang overpopulation.

[bedik1973]

I say Yes..
Dapat pareho ta sa China, one child policy..

kung naa nay anak tapos ma buntis ang babae, dapat i abort.

nganong kailangan man ta mosunod sa China bro na kbaw man ta na sayup man ni..
What if ganahan imo ma asawa og big family, yaw ko ingna na dli nalang madaun ang pangandoy sa imo asawa tungod ani na law..

[toinker]

nganong kailangan man ta mosunod sa China bro na kbaw man ta na sayup man ni..
What if ganahan imo ma asawa og big family, yaw ko ingna na dli nalang madaun ang pangandoy sa imo asawa tungod ani na law..

uu lagi naaman uban mga tao ganahan ug dako na pamilya, daghan anak. pero kay tungod pwede ta na daghan anak abusuhon pud ug halos wala nay makaon. naa ko example ha...
kung usa ka pamilya taxi driver ang tatay, walay trabaho ang nanay, 12 ka anak.. O, kaya lagi niya pakan-on iya pamilya pero dili man gihapon niya kaya pa iskwelahon tanan..

next example, kami sa amo pamilya, lawyer ako papa, ako mama teacher. amo gap ng ako magulang kay 4 years, duha ra mi ka bata. san carlos mi nag college, o kung dili pa 4 years amo gap, mag lisod man mi pag budget na kami duha sa san carlos mag college. although pwd man mo mo ingon na naa man daghan lain iskwelahan pero tapos naman naa naman na, wla naman tay mabuhat..

imagina ra gud napulo ka anak, unsaon nimo na pagpaskwela..

[giddyboy]

The poll is misleading.... can i make a new poll? or do i have to make a new thread for a new poll?

Misleading coz it is a tricky double bind question.

Thus, you are 'damned if you do, and damned if you don't'.

The poll makes u think it is a closed question that can be answered by a yes or a no, but in fact not...

What if ganahan imo ma asawa og big family, yaw ko ingna na dli nalang madaun ang pangandoy sa imo asawa tungod ani na law..

pls don't be confused between our Abortion law and the proposed RH Bill. they are 2 entirely different matters. The RH Bill does not also impose a 2-child policy. It only encourages two children as the ideal family size. This is neither mandatory nor compulsory and no punitive action may be imposed on couples having more than two children.The RH Bill promotes birth spacing and family planning methods, which are medically safe and legally permissible.

---000---

@wakkanaka and mannyboy: u see how ur misleading and deceptive efforts resulted into? one said the poll is misleading. and i am pretty sure not only one noticed it. u see im not the only one here who sees it. deny pa mo ana?

and another one here myt already be confused between our Abortion law and the proposed Reproductive Health Bill...unsa cge pata ani?

NO TO ABORTION! YES TO REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND INFORMED CHOICE ON FAMILY PLANNING METHODS! NO TO DISINFORMATION!