As
the Philippines tries to cope with the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan,
some callous commentators are calling the disaster a failure of
population control
by by Anne Morse and Steven Mosher
The Philippines has long been under pressure from the U.S
and elsewhere to adopt a China-like population control program, with the
latest argument being that the mandatory provision of contraceptives
will reduce maternal mortality in the island nation.
The Philippines is a target because of its size and its
still robust fertility. It is one of the 15 most populous nations in the
world and has an annual population growth rate of over 2%.
[1]
Only three countries in the world fit this description (the other two
are Ethiopia and Nigeria), and all are in the crosshairs of the
population controllers. In the Philippines this pressure takes the form
of the controversial “Reproductive Health Bill” (RH Bill).
Proponents of the bill make many arguments, some ridiculous
on their face and others less easily dismissed. It is easily to laugh
off the suggestion that, “If the Philippines had had fewer people, fewer
people would have died in the recent typhoon.” It is harder to dismiss
the suggestion that: “If Philippino women had more access to
contraception, they would have lower rates of maternal mortality.” The
maternal mortality rate remains stubbornly high in the Philippines, and
proponents of the RH Bill attribute this to a lack of contraception. But
is this really the problem?
Last week, one of us (Anne Morse) attended a forum on
public health in the Philippines attended by representatives of the
principal agencies pushing population control on the country, including
the chief of the Office of Health at US Agency for International
Development (USAID) in the Philippines and a senior advisor to the
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
Some of the presenters were honest about where the
problem lies. Dr. Naveen Rao, the executive director of Merck for
Mothers, for example, admitted that the main problem is not lack of
contraception. Rao stated: “We are approaching [maternal mortality] by
focusing on the two big killers, and the two big killers worldwide are
postpartum hemorrhage and preeclampsia. Again, we know why they are
dying, and we know how to save them.”
Of course, being a representative of a Big Pharma company
that makes billions from abortifacient contraceptives, he ended with a
sales pitch: “And the third pillar is family planning and reproductive
health, because if you don't get pregnant, you won’t die from it.
[Laughter from audience] So we’re focusing on these three targets.”
But the numbers don’t lie, even if the population
controllers do. The causes of maternal death in the Philippines are well
known. More than half the deaths are caused by hemorrhage (bleeding),
52% to be exact, while eclampsia (characterized by seizures) accounts
for another 27%. Ruptured uteruses and other causes account for the
remainder.
[2]
So if we take care of women who are hemorrhaging and suffering from
eclampsia, we would reduce the number of women dying in childbirth by
four-fifths.
To put it another way, women aren’t dying because they
don’t have family planning. They are dying from postpartum hemorrhage
and preeclampsia. They are dying because they lack primary health care.
The Philippines has a contraceptive prevalence rate of 51% and a
maternal mortality rate of 209 deaths for every 100,00 births. Japan, a
developed country, has an almost identical contraceptive prevalence
rate, at 54%. But Japan has one of the lowest maternal mortality rates
in the world, suffering only 5 maternal deaths per every 100,000 births.
[3]
To repeat, Filipinas are not dying from a lack of so-called “modern
contraception.” They are dying from a lack of real health care.
Those who promote contraception under the guise of reducing
maternal mortality also claim that they are simply “giving women what
they want.” This is simply not true. Filipino women want children—they
just don’t want to die while giving birth to them.
Half of of all maternal deaths in the Philippines occur during a woman’s first three pregnancies.
[4] Filipino women express a desire for 2.5 children on average, so their first three children are
wanted children.
And consider this: The poorest women in the Philippines—those who
suffer the most maternal deaths—say they would like to have three or
four children.
[5]
In other words, international agencies who attempt to reduce maternal
mortality by preventing women from conceiving children are violating the
rights of these women to decide for themselves how many children they
should have. They are throwing wanted babies out with the dirty bath
water of maternal death.
The truth is that those who promote family planning are
much more interested in controlling fertility than in actually helping
women. In fact, according to the numbers, they are about
three times
more interested in controlling fertility. The most recent numbers from
USAID show that while USAID spent 15 million dollars on family planning
in the Philippines, it only spent $5 million on maternal health, and a
measly $1.7 million on clean water and sanitation.
[6]
Let us not be fooled by the latest deception of the
population controllers, namely, that they are simply interested in
reducing maternal mortality. No woman should ever die in childbirth, but
she does not have to give up her dream of being a mother to avoid this
fate. Tens of millions of women safely give birth in developed nations
every year, not because of contraception, but because they receive
adequate prenatal and postnatal care. Artificial contraception does not
make pregnancies safer, it just makes pregnancy less frequent.
If international aid agencies and their Filipino
stooges are truly concerned with helping Filipino women, they will focus
on increasing access to primary health care. They will work to reduce
maternal deaths, rather than to reduce maternity itself.
Of course, that would mean they would have to abandon their obsession with “overpopulation.”
[1]
"Central Intelligence Agency." The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2119.html#rp>.
[2]
GARCES, ROSTON G. "Reproductive Age Mortality Studies (RAMOS): Analysis on the Risk Factors of Maternal Death, Bukidnon, 2008."
[3]
"Philippines." Data Finder. Population Reference Bureau, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <
http://www.prb.org/DataFinder/Geography/Data.aspx?loc=399>.
[4]
GARCES, ROSTON G. "Reproductive Age Mortality Studies (RAMOS): Analysis on the Risk Factors of Maternal Death, Bukidnon, 2008."
[5]
"STATcompiler." STATcompiler. Demographic and Health Surveys, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <
http://www.statcompiler.com/>
.
[6]
"Health in the Philippines." Dollars to Results. USAID, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <
http://results.usaid.gov/philippines/health>.
The
pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human rights
abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending
counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of
"overpopulation." Find us at pop.org.
