SB1979 Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Bill in the Philippines Draws Vigorous Discourse Over the Proposed CSE Program, Not Realizing that CSE is under implementation in the Philippines since 2020-21.
Links to the bill which is pending 2nd Reading at the Senate, discussion of certain clauses, and links to selected resources for your further research on this critical and highly divisive bill below.
Early teenage pregnancy is a concern in the Philippines. In 2023, 9.8% of all births were among teenage mothers, with 2,343 births registered to girls younger than 15, and 138,933 births to girls aged between 15 and 19. For 25 of the youngest girls (<15-yo) the birth in 2023 was that of their second child. For the girls aged 15-19, 19,092 gave birth to their second child, 1,412 to their 3rd child, 70 of them gave birth to their 4th child. One 15-19 yo girl gave birth to her 7th child in 2023, having already spent more than 5 years of her young life pregnant.
Too early childbearing (before a girl has finished growing and secondary education) is detrimental to health and future of the girl and her baby. Ideally babies are wanted, planned and born into supportive family and wider community environments.
Vigorous debate is currently ongoing with regards to the Government’s introduction of SB1979, a bill meant to address adolescent pregnancies. Please bear with me as I provide some initial background and discussion of this topic and some explanation of the bill; and more importantly, links so you can personally take a look if you are interested.
Procedure for the passing of laws in the Philippines
The bill is prepared.
The House of Representatives has its first reading.
A Committee Consideration/Action session is held.
The House of Representatives (HOR) has its second reading.
The House of Representatives has its third reading.
The approved bill is transmitted to the Senate, it has its Reference No. changed from a HB (House Bill) number to a SB (Senate Bill) number; the bill may be modified/ rewritten by the sponsoring senator(s).
A conference committee is assembled.
The bill is transmitted to the President of the Philippines to be signed and passed.
HB8910 - House Version of Teenage Pregnancy Bill was Approved 3 Sept 2024.
The HOR version of the bill, HB8910 was approved after 3rd reading by the House of Representatives last 3 September 2024.
This bill removes all impediments for teenagers engaging in sexual activity to access reproductive health care, including any need for parental consent, with teenagers defined as children aged 10 to 19.
A copy of the HOR bill may be viewed, here. Selected clips from the bill are briefly discussed:
This bill specifically refers to children aged 10 - 19 years of age; there is no mention of younger children.
While I agree that Society as a whole, including family, community, and government (preferably in that exact order), should be working to prevent young teenage pregnancies, and consider that many of the clauses in the bill are sound, there are some provisions and assumptions in this bill that raise questions: -
Section 2 Declaration of Policy - it shall be the policy of the State to:
This “responsible decisions for themthemselves” could refer to a 10-year-old child. Should (could?) a 10-year-old child be making responsible decisions about sexual activity and reproductive health for themselves? Can they make responsible decisions? Shouldn’t a child be protected by parents / caregivers and not need to be making such decisions? This bill could allow parents / guardians to be excluded from the decision process.
The bill supports encouraging adolescent parents to continue education and skills aquisition, which is essential, though isn’t this already being encouraged through existing programs?
The bill refers to “Comprehensive Adolescent Sexuality Education” (CASE).
It contains the “Mature minor doctrine”, which is concerning, because it provides a pathway for bypassing parents / guardians surrounding very important life decisions. There is no way a 10-yo, a 12-yo or even a 15-yo can fully understand the implications of certain decisions, and they may be easily swayed by power-adult figures. There is a reason that children are minors and that their parents/ guardians are involved in making important decisions with them. The gender transitioning / gender surgery fiasco that is unravelling now is a tragic example of children being swayed to make major decisions with lasting consequences.
The staffing of the proposed adolescent pregnancy prevention inter-agency council will be critical; they must be devoid of vested interests and globalist agendas. I become more cautious with Section 5 and the inclusion of NGOs….. will this include Bill Gates and his foundations, Globalist Interests?
“Culturally-Sensitive, Age and Developmentally-Appropriate” wording looks good. But the devil could be in the detail; WHO determines what is culturally sensitive, and by what standards is “age and developmentally appropriate” set?
CASE becomes compulsory for all schools.
Certainly, there could be cases where children need access to services and care and can’t involve parents/guardian due to abuse, violence or extreme deprivation, but the lack of wording emphasizing the role of the family first and as priority is concerning.
Item (c) does require inputs from parents / guardians for younger children who are not ‘mature minors’. Who decides if a child is a mature minor or not?
The above bill and clips represent the bill that passed at the house level. After approval the bill moves to the Senate.
Senate Bill SB1979, Prevention of Adolescent Pregnancy Act of 2023 is Pending Second Reading
The Senate Version of the Bill is SB1979 is currently under scrutiny and is triggering vigorous debate in social and mainstream media.
The Bill still refers specifically to children aged 10 - 19, but has some wording / content differences from the House Bill Version; I haven’t done a comprehensive comparison and have only pulled out just a couple of points:
CASE (Comprehensive adolescent sexuality education) is replaced with CSE (Comprehensive Sexuality Education). CSE is a very specific WHO/UNESCO curriculum-based process of teaching and learning about the cognitive, emotional, physical and social aspects of sexuality (starts at kindergarten). Concerned citizens and church groups worry that the program contains inappropriate materials and will introduce inappropriate concepts to very young children.
CSE is already mandated by DEPED, has had an implementation plan approved in 2020, and has been starting implementation as part of the K-12 program since 2020-2021 (Source: UNFPA Case Study Report). It is likely too late to stop CSE; it is important that the contents of the current CSE be carefully scrutinized for relevance to Filipino culture and core societal values.
Details about the ongoing CSE implementation in the Philippines, including international and local laws are set out in this UNESCO link.
Back to SB1979. Following is the definition of CSE from SB1979, as applicable to the target 10 - 19 YO population.
The mature minor doctrine has been removed. There is reference to “positive masculinity”. Is this terminology innocuous or could it be linked with toxic masculinity, gender fluidity, DEI, reverse discrimination, etc?
Under Section 5. Organization and Mobilization of Regional and Local Integrated Information and Delivery Services Network for Adolescent Health and Development, clause c importantly emphasizes cultural values, gender sensitivities and medical ethics requiring acceptability to both adolescents and their communities.
Section 6, covers Age and Developmentally Appropriate CSE. Developmentally appropriate based on whose (which agency?) determination? The program will be “guided by DEPED and international standards”? This clause paves the way for WHO/UNESCO and NGO vested interest party approaches to be imposed. The implementation details will be critical. CSE is to be standardized (by DEPED and international bodies (?)) with no school modifications permitted, it will be compulsory and a requirement for school accreditation. Religious or other philosophy-based schools may have a problem with the materials. Parents may also have a problem with the materials. How much problem is not knowable without access to review the proposed curriculum. Community leader involvement, from across society, would be relevant.
Should recent (controversial and very recently starting to move towards out of favor) specific concepts of gender fluidity and LBGTQIA be put into lasting law; can these be covered simply by reference to avoidance of discrimination and rights and responsibilities of each member of society.
Under Sec. 8, parents are to be involved, to be educated and made aware about adolescent sexuality and bodily autonomy. Curriculum content will matter.
Adolescents younger than 15 must get consent from their parents, or an authorized adult; social worker, Dr. etc. to access Sexual & Reproductive health services, except for children who are already engaging in sexual activity or are survivors of abuse. This clause provides a route to exclude parents from involvement in their < 15 YO children’s access to information and services.
There is a slippery slope as observed in the US: where children are groomed to change gender, to transition, to block puberty or undergo surgery, without parental involvement; cases where counselling and support for normal changes in adolescence and for addressing other psychosocial problems should have been the focus rather than the pushing drastic irreversible lifechanging interventions. Philippines should be very wary!
Section 12 ends requiring additional services to be made available for pregnant adolescents, and with confirmation on adherence to the principles of non-discrimination and confidentiality, and the rights of adolescents.
Section 14, very importantly expounds on provision of Protective Services in Cases of Sexual Violence.
My Thought on SB1979
I would encouraged concerned parties to read the Senate Bill. I think it contains some very good and important clauses; I wonder how many of the proposed measures are new and how much are already being provided by other agencies? There certainly are also valid concerns with certain clauses and particularly related to the content and implementation of CSE, the compulsory nature of the CSE, and the routes for bypassing of parental/guardian involvement.
Imposing standardized, and at least partially internationally dictated, CSE on all educational institutes and at all levels of implementation is a huge sticking point and church groups and religious-based schools, which live by and teach specific values surrounding relationships, sexuality, family and values, are understandably very concerned. So are value driven parents!
CSE does not enter with this bill; CSE programs are already being put into place (K-12). Critically concerned parties may need to have oversight and input into the existing CSE programs and their further development.
Confidentiality for adolescents needs to be balanced very carefully against the role and responsibility of upstanding parents and guardians who should always be the primary parties raising, guiding, and protecting their minor children (not the state); while also recognizing that some adolescents may not have the support or guidance that they need, deserve, and should be provided.
All parties should move wanting only the very best for our children and their future. There must be room for compromise and respect for different paths to achieving the same outcomes which is well-adjusted, responsible and principled, happy and contributing members to a society that values every single member and strives for every person to reach their highest potential.
I end this very long discourse with recent articles surrounding the debate on this topic. I hope that this discussion will give some clarity and food for thought about this bill, its content, its relevance and how it should proceed, as it ultimately will.
Vigorous debate on this bill and its contents is needed, along with careful crafting of revisions. If this bill proceeds, the community must be involved in implementation to ensure that Filipino values are upheld. With or without this bill, the community need to support their children, their adolescents; our future.
CONCERNED GROUPS AND MEDIA
Project Dalisay, founded by the National Coalition for the Family and the Constitution (NCFC), have now started an online petition, oppose the program, and have raised concerns with regards to SB1979.
They shared a clip discussing CSE.
And have published a statement, FB Post, here.
Author of the Bill, Senator Hontiveros is calling out Project Dalisay’s opposition to the bill as outright lies.
Escudero is generally supportive of the bill but is looking at amendments to address concerns.
Discussion and summary of concerns on both sides; I have clipped a few paragraphs.
Sen. Hontiveros has said that the bill does not refer to UNESCO/WHO CSE guidelines. Yet the bill does refer to “international standards”. UNESCO is already involved in CSE in the Philippines.
Philippines Government only run by Filipinos without external vested interests?!? The events of the past 5 years would bely that claim. The Philippines is very much working hand-in-hand with WHO, UNESCO, UN, WEF and other global agencies… funding and aid is dependent on it! CSE is unlikely to escape such vested interests!
Stay vigilant, get involved! We create the society we deserve by our action or inactions.
I guess this is kind of an "Op Ed" :)
I am both a dad and a granddad, and on the surface I am very hesitant to assent to government stepping in on this topic. However, having lived in this country for almost 50 years, and seeing how often young girls are put into this situation, and far too often by unspeakable circumstances, if parents are not going to step up and do right by their kids, and especially daughters, how can we dismiss outside (government) efforts to educate and help these unfortunate cultural victims of what, in my opinion, cannot be considered to be anything short of "abuse?"
In my opinion, there is no better proof of "poor parenting" in this country than the statistics you shared. How can a father (and mother) stand by idle while their child becomes sexually active and gets pregnant, and especially more than once, while she is still herself a child?
I may not like the bill, but I despise the failure of the parents, especially the fathers!
And lets not forget the boys that complete the "conception union" in all this! How many little snots pressure their girlfriends into submission simply to fulfill a hedonistic desire, very often driven by the messages in songs and other cultural pressures that thrive among the young, with absolutely no thought, idea, or care whatsoever for the consequences their exploits might bring upon the girls, about whom they supposedly care so much? It's disgusting!
Until we all who are tasked to oversee and raise the kids, accept responsibility and do our job according to the way God wants it done, authorities will see fit to intervene and do things in a way that God might not want.
Either way, do not our daughters here deserve better than what they are currently receiving?
Mature minor is an oxymoron, invented by pedophiles to lower the age of sexual consent.