MANILA, Philippines - Thirty-six years ago, while taking up the Population Management Program at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (courtesy of Dean Jimmy Laya and Popcom head Clipper Lorenzo), I came up with projections on the Philippine population for the next 20-50 years.
For 2010, the projected population was in the range of 54 million Filipinos, based on a decreasing population growth rate from 3.5 percent then and the population management programs in place under the Marcos regime. Today, the Philippines has reached almost 100 million, nearly double my projections made in 1974. Should we not be happy since as all of us know, people are resources for any country's development? A healthy, educated, and working population is the foundation of a country's progress. Regretfully, this is not the case for the Philippines.
With insufficient health services, dwindling food production, and high poverty levels leading to a significant proportion of Filipinos suffering from sickness and diseases; with lack in school buildings and teachers and again poverty resulting in large numbers of drop-outs and low quality of graduates; and with low investments and widespread unemployment and underemployment, the Philippine human resources are not in the position to spearhead the growth of the Philippine economy. The contrast with our neighbors, big and small, is instructive. Thailand which had the same 34-million population as the Philippines in the early '70s has 24 million less people than the Philippines today. The Thai people are relatively better educated, healthy, and have good domestic working opportunities. Their government through the years has promoted a variety of family planning approaches and provided birth control devices, including condoms.
The Thai leaders have stressed the need for a family size appropriate to the resources of the parents and highlighted the positive aspects of having a small family that parents can give enough attention and care to the children. China with its teaming billions took a more aggressive and proactive approach, even enacting legislation limiting the number of children allowed - one for the urban families and two for the rural areas. The medical services also allowed abortions, which led to the male Chinese outnumbering the female Chinese with some socially negative results. I do not think we should follow the Chinese model as we do not have the serious problems brought about by high population growth in the early years of China - famine, civil disturbances. However, illegal and induced abortion of 900,000 Filipinas mostly in the 15-24 age range would have been prevented by reproductive health and family planning information and services. The Thai model seems better with a focus on a well-informed public and the provision of the wide range of population planning approaches and tools available.
It is regret table that the Catholic Church has decided to use its muscle to force its dogma on the Philippine government and the Filipino population. If its teachings prescribe only one method for family control, then it should use its pulpit to convince the adherents to the Catholic faith. But the Church should keep its hands off from legislation and not threaten civil disobedience. Come to think of it, maybe we should not blame the Catholic Church leaders. They are just defending the faith. We should condemn the political leaders, who, knowing what is right for the country's development, still buckle under the pressure from the bishops and priests.
Thank God, President Benigno Simeon Aquino III is made of sterner stuff! Business Bits. Golfers are invited to the 3rd Rafael M. Salas Cup on Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2010, at the Riviera Golf & Country Club, Silang, Cavite. Toto Cay was the first Executive Director (with the rank of undersecretary) of the UN Population Fund and the architect of Philippines' rice sufficiency in the 70's.
