We Don't Need an RH Bill 7/15/2011 10:36:00 PM

While I was a medical student, I rotated at the local regional government hospital for a total of 15 days. Though I was there for only a short period of time, I came to the conclusion that there is no need for any further legislation (i.e. the Reproductive Health Bill) regarding the use of contraception or sterilization. The mechanism is already in place right at this level.

As soon as an indigent patient is brought to the delivery room,and subsequently advised to undergo a second caesarian section (or succeeding thereof), one is immediately advised to have a bilateral tubal ligation as well and then wife and husband are asked to sign a consent form. I observed this to be the standard operating procedure. No further explanations are made to help the patient in labor pains to come to an informed decision. I guess the few staff around were too busy attending to more patients coming in that giving said patient all the information she needs such as explanations of what to expect, pros and cons, including possible side effects (i.e. ectopic pregnancies in the blocked fallopian tube) would take too much of their time.

I was completely appalled when one mother about to have a third caesarian section was berated and bad-mouthed by resident physicians, nurses and midwives for deciding not to have a bilateral tubal ligation at the same time, what is known as C/S + BTL in medical parlance. The said patient was already crying (from the emotional barrage and the pains of labor) but firmly stuck to her decision. The husband was also unwilling to sign the consent. I decided to whisper to her to be strong and stick to her choice. The residents gave as reason that there are usually a lot of adhesions (Aren’t there surgical SOP’s done to prevent this from happening?) and when the next caesarian section is done, the procedure becomes technically difficult. A good enough argument, yet are not doctors supposed to honor the patient’s decision (without coercing her to change it by emotional abuse) and render their expertise with competence? If the uterus thus becomes so scarred after having been cut open several times as to render it diseased, hysterectomy thus may be performed without violating the bioethical principle of bodily integrity. I know of several persons who have had multiple caesarian sections (one had at least 7) and may have had difficult deliveries but mother and children come out fine, thanks to medical advances and the proficiency of attending OB-GYNE’s.

My personal experience with conscientious objection to assisting the OB-GYNE resident in performing a bilateral tubal ligation after doing a caesarian section was met with rolling of eyeballs and snide remarks in the operating room. In other circumstances, it might also mean a few more days rotation within that department (serving an extension, as we call it) or other such sanctions. With the passage of this bill, I pity the young aspiring doctors who want to be consistent with their faith and ethics who would now be faced with large fines and/or imprisonment for such actions.

At the out-patient services department, mothers who have at least two children are at once instructed on the different methods they can avail of during their first post-natal check-up. There is bias for artificial contraceptives, of course as all manufactured products have shelf lives and need to be disposed of as soon as possible (not a few of these contraceptive devices are surpluses from elsewhere). Anyway, in medical school there is little mention of natural family planning (NFP) which is always mentioned while dismissing it as “highly unreliable”. I wish they also gave us time to learn how to teach these methods to couples as part of our medical curriculum, in the same manner that they teach us to write prescriptions for artificial chemical contraceptives or show us how to insert IUD’s in medical school. In that way, there would be absolutely no bias for those wanting to go in this specialized field of medicine to just write down a prescription rather than take time to explain a method.

It also seems that government hospitals may also have a certain quota for sterilization procedures as one friend of mine noted that during an endorsement, the chairperson of the department of obstetrics and gynecology queried her residents regarding the fact that their census for said procedures had gone down for the month. They did not know that it was thanks to the way my friend tactfully and slowly explained to the mothers in the delivery room NFP and the value of openness to welcome another life even in the midst of poverty: Not another mouth to feed but two more hands to help.



Note: I initially wrote this as a letter to the editor (It was never published.) I think I then posted it I Oppose the RH Bill facebook group discussion forum. It was eventually placed in 100% Katolikong Pinoy facebook community page (using just my initials) without my knowledge. I eventually acknowledged it as my post and I now wish to post it here in my personal blog as well. 

What you don't know about the goings-on in our public hospitals... 10/26/2010 12:21:00 AM

Let me add some of my impressions in the midst of the big issue on the RH Bill...
While I was a medical student five years ago, I rotated at the local regional government hospital for a total of 15 days. Though I was there for only a short period of time, I came to the conclusion that there is no need for any further legislation (i.e. the Reproductive Health Bill) regarding the use of contraception or sterilization. The mechanism is already in place right at this level. 
As soon as an indigent patient is brought to the delivery room,and subsequently advised to undergo a second caesarian section (or succeeding thereof), one is immediately advised to have a bilateral tubal ligation as well and then wife and husband are asked to sign a consent form. I observed this to be the standard operating procedure. No further explanations are made to help the patient in labor pains to come to an informed decision. I guess the few staff around were too busy attending to more patients coming in that giving said patient all the information she needs such as explanations of what to expect, pros and cons, including possible side effects (i.e. ectopic pregnancies in the blocked fallopian tube) would take too much of their time.
I was completely appalled when one mother about to have a third caesarian section was berated and bad-mouthed by resident physicians, nurses and midwives for deciding not to have a bilateral tubal ligation at the same time, what is known as C/S + BTL in medical parlance. The said patient was already crying (from the emotional barrage and the pains of labor) but firmly stuck to her decision. The husband was also unwilling to sign the consent. I decided to whisper to her to be strong and stick to her choice. The residents gave as reason that there are usually a lot of adhesions (Aren't there surgical SOP's done to prevent this from happening?) and when the the next caesarian section is done, the procedure becomes technically difficult. A good enough argument, yet are not doctors supposed to honor the patient's decision (without coercing her to change it by emotional abuse) and render their expertise with competence? If the uterus thus becomes so scarred after having been cut open several times as to render it diseased, hysterectomy thus may be performed without violating the bioethical principle of bodily integrity. I know of several persons who have had multiple caesarian sections (one had at least 7) and may have had difficult deliveries but mother and children come out fine, thanks to medical advances and the proficiency of attending OB-GYNE's.
My personal experience with conscientious objection to assisting the OB-GYNE resident in performing a bilateral tubal ligation after doing a caesarian section was met with rolling of eyeballs and snide remarks in the operating room. In other circumstances, it might also mean a few more days rotation within that department (serving an extension, as we call it) or other such sanctions. With the passage of this bill, I pity the young aspiring doctors who want to be consistent with their faith and ethics who would now be faced with large fines and/or imprisonment for such actions. 
At the out-patient services department, mothers who have at least two children are at once instructed on the different methods they can avail of during their first post-natal check-up. There is bias for artificial contraceptives, of course as all manufactured products have shelf lives and need to be disposed of as soon as possible (not a few of these contraceptive devices are surpluses from elsewhere). Anyway, in medical school there is little mention of natural family planning (NFP) which is always mentioned while dismissing it as "highly unreliable". I wish they also gave us time to learn how to teach these methods to couples as part of our medical curriculum, in the same manner that they teach us to write prescriptions for artificial chemical contraceptives or show us how to insert IUD's in medical school. In that way, there would be absolutely no bias for those wanting to go in this specialized field of medicine to just write down a prescription rather than take time to explain a method.
It also seems that government hospitals may also have a certain quota for sterilization procedures as one friend of mine noted that during an endorsement, the chairperson of the department of obstetrics and gynecology queried her residents regarding the fact that their census for said procedures had gone down for the month. They did not know that it was thanks to the way my friend tactfully and slowly explained to the mothers in the delivery room NFP and the value of openness to welcome another life even in the midst of poverty: Not another mouth to feed but two more hands to help.
As you may have well guessed, I am totally pro-life and uncompromising with regards to my Catholic Faith.

A "Lord of the Rings" Twist to the Population Question 5/12/2009 09:44:00 PM

Since I am currently reading "The Lord of the Rings" (I'm now in the first few chapters of the "Twin Towers"), I found this take by Elizabeth Lev juxtaposed with the population issue most intriguing...
***
Tolkien's Dark Lord at the UNHobbit Alliance Brings Triumph of Hope
By Elizabeth Lev
ROME, APRIL 9, 2009 (Zenit.org).- It was an epic tale of triumph worthy of J.R.R. Tolkien. The events at the U.N. Population and Development Commission last week could have been taken straight out of his great trilogy "The Lord of the Rings."
Last week, representatives from 47 countries gathered in New York for the annual meeting of the commission on population and development of the United Nations Economic and Social Council. In view of a world population projected to hit 9 billion in 2050, the commission reviews and assesses the Program of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development approved by the United Nations in 1994.
Behind the optimistic façade of concern for the welfare of a burgeoning population, a darker, most sinister agenda loomed. A new language was insinuating itself amid the hopeful statements of the earlier U.N. documents.
The main agenda item was "sexual and reproductive health and rights" -- the terminology under which many NGOs and U.N. committees promote abortion -- and the codification of a language that would open the door to an array of demands by homosexual activists.
Like the one ring forged by Sauron in the depths of Mount Doom, this term revealed the master plan: "One Ring to rule them all" and to bring them into darkness. Changing the word 'ring' to 'agency,' the specter of the Dark Lord could be replaced by Planned Parenthood, one of the most active NGOs at the meeting.
A prescient few saw the impending menace. Archbishop Celestino Migliore, permanent observer of the Holy See to the United Nations, noted that "one cannot help but get the impression that populations are seen as the hindrance to greater social and economic development." The prelate also warned that the commission "is giving priority to population control and getting the poor to accept these arrangements rather than primarily focusing upon its commitments to addressing education, basic health care, access to water, sanitation and employment."
But the armies of darkness were strong and seemed invincible. China, Great Britain, Brazil, the Russian Federation, Spain and Germany could be expected to promote this language. The United States, under a new administration in thrall to the culture of death, would use all of its might to advance the reign of Planned Parenthood. All seemed lost.
These international giants, the leaders in economy, development and technology, were certain that no obstacle remained to their plan.
In the statement made by Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, the executive director of the United Nations Population Fund, the plan was revealed. She invoked the world financial crisis, and the subsequent difficulty in sustaining programs to improve the health and education of the world's poor. “The financial crisis was threatening to wipe out this hard-won progress." But her solution was to ensure that "greater attention is paid to population issues and more resources are devoted to women's empowerment and reproductive health, including maternal health care and family planning."
Translating this to the common tongue, her proposal is to teach women that childbearing is dangerous and oppressive; therefore abortion is healthy and liberating. Even the Evil Lord of Mordor never tried to pass off his agenda of death and enslavement of the human race as something "positive" and "empowering."
Obaid then reminded the commission that the Cairo conference had agreed that "every person has the right to sexual and reproductive health," and exhorted the commission "to keep the promise to ensure universal access to reproductive health by 2015."
The great nations nodded and applauded, much like the ring wraiths whose will had long been bound to that of their wicked overlord. The culture of life braced itself to take another loss among the many it had already suffered.
Then help came from an unexpected quarter. Iran took the floor and protested that the "right to sexual and reproductive health" could not be substituted with "sexual and reproductive health and rights."
The Iranian delegate pointed out that this phrase had never been included in any negotiated U.N. document before and urged the commission to revert to previously agreed upon and carefully negotiated language from the original 1994 Program of Action, which is understood not to create any right to abortion.
Immediately four Catholic countries -- Ireland, Peru, Chile and Poland -- picked up Iran's call to strike the wording. It was an unusual alliance, not unlike the dwarves and elves overcoming their differences to fight the common enemy.
Although the Christian community and Iran find themselves opposed on many issues, it was a heartening vision to see the diverse nations cooperating in defense of alliance and dialogue through the culture of life.
But as in Tolkien's great adventure of the fellowship of the nine, it was the smallest of all that saved the day. Like the four indomitable hobbits of Tolkien's epic, the Holy See (a tiny 104-acre state), Comoros (which I had to look up on Googlemaps -- it's in the Indian Ocean near Madagascar) Santa Lucia and Malta all joined the fellowship to break the stranglehold of the forces of evil.
These four hobbit-like states, whose collective national products probably don't equal the operating budget for Planned Parenthood, spoke loudly and convincingly. Malta decried the consistent attempts by the commission to expand "reproductive health" to include abortion. The delegate from Santa Lucia saw to the heart of the proposed wording and stressed that her delegation understood that this provision did not threaten the right of health care providers to refuse to perform or be complicit in abortions as a matter of conscience.
As Galadrial said to the wavering Frodo, "even the smallest person can change the course of the future."
At the last moment at the close of the meeting, the ring of power was thrown back into the fires of Mount Doom from whence it came. "Sexual and reproductive health and rights" was struck from the text.
In these days of imminent conscience coercion, massive government funding of abortion and other gloomy signs on the horizon, this little fellowship at the United Nations demonstrated what Tolkien's characters whisper during the darkest hours and Pope Benedict XVI exclaims from nation to nation: "There is still hope."
***
Unfortunately, our dear mostly Roman Catholic country was not among the cited "hobbits". We happen to be still in the midst of the reproductive health bill debate without realizing that this catch-all phrase happens to undermine the protection of life from the moment of conception that is actually protected by our constitution. Yet, there will now be government funding for contraceptives which have an abortifacient side effect. If people want to use artificial contraceptives, by disregarding the voice of reason of the Church to accept into their homes the number of children God has ordained to send them at his own good time, let them spend for it themselves. If they don't want to spend for contraceptives, why can't they learn the natural methods of family planning and apply it without spending a centavo. I am a single, and a taxpayer who does not believe that such contraceptives are necessary thus why should my taxes go to such programs when they can be used to offer basic hygiene classes as well as livelihood projects for the underprivileged instead?

Birth-control pills poison everyone? 7/21/2007 10:27:00 AM

I picked this up in one thread of the Catholic Answers Forum. I Find it interesting since aside from being a medical doctor, I also took a bachelor's degree in biology as an undergraduate course. Here's the article link: Birth-control pills poison everyone?

Another Look at Openess to Life 6/02/2007 02:21:00 PM

I couldn't help but place a comment on this MercatorNet article... http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/shock_troops_in_the_culture_wars/#c_274