I never thought that people in Hollywood would bother to put into film something as beautiful as Life of Pi (written by Yann Martel), a story about an Indian boy, Pi, from Pondicherry who survived a shipwreck and was stranded on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. Yann Martel’s Man Booker Prize awardee book is indeed popular however, I never thought that it would reach this mainstream level with the typical Hollywood movies. But make no mistake; this film is no Hollywood trash. It’s almost like the kind of story Inception has: a story that’s intricate and disturbing that one wouldn’t think it could be translated into film and yet, it became so. The movie, Life of Pi, came into silver screen with a magnificent story that became even more splendid with outstanding direction and cinematography. I can’t imagine, though, if this film would be made by M. Night Shyamalan, as was originally planned…

It was said that this film tells of a “story that can make you believe in God”. I have read the book, and knew where it’s going, but with a line like this thrown every now and then to promote the film, I was afraid that the movie might take on the more religious perspective. I’m glad, though, that it has remained true to the book, even though there had been some more emphasis on the religious perspective in many points during the film. I would love it more if the “science” side of things were also given more exposure. If you’ll be reading the book, you’d notice that Pi learned a lot about animals and how they behave. He made his philosophical pondering around it but there’s as much as faith as there is reason in the book.

The audience will be left with this thought, even long after the end-credits have rolled: which story was true?

With the way the screenplay was written, the choice was given to the audience. One has to notice, though, how the two versions of the “truth” were put in contrast: the story with the tiger in it were told in vivid sequences and with outpouring of emotions while the story without the tiger was told plainly while 16-year old Pi was recuperating in the hospital, being interviewed by agents from the Japanese ship company (Suraj Sharma should get an award for his portrayal of young Pi in this film; it is no mean feat that a young actor such as he can hold an audience’s attention for more than 70% of the time of the entire film). This contrast between religion and reason were played again and again all over the movie: when Pi’s dad tells him that he cannot have three religions all at once and perhaps it would be better if he started with reason while Pi’s mother tells him that science can give the explanation to things but religion explains what the heart feels; his dad is a reflection of the new India while his mother would rather stick with the remnants of the past by pursuing the traditions of Hinduism.

For me, the message being sent across is this, to explain why there has two be two stories: with those who want to see things through reason, to learn of the truth is enough to give meaning to life; for those who need to see things through faith or religion, sometimes, the truth can be so unbearable that faith or religion can give that extra boost, the added spice, to make it a whole lot more palatable or bearable. Even if what faith or religion offers is not true in the strictest sense, for some people, it pushes them to do the extraordinary. On my part, though, why is there a need to delude oneself? Why do I need to tell myself that I survived a shipwreck with a Bengal tiger killing all the other occupants when it is not true? Am I not capable of accepting the facts that there had been horrible events that took place in the course of surviving such a disaster? Can I not take comfort in the fact that I have survived it despite all the hardships, the lack of resources, and seeming hopelessness?

Overall, this is a film that can leave you pondering for a while even after you have seen it. This is also a nice conversation piece among friends, believers and non-believers alike.

First of all, I have to say that, even if the Connecticut School shooting happened thousands of miles away from where I am now, I’d say that I personally feel the horror and the sadness this incident brought to hundreds of lives that surely will reverberate in the years to come. This is simply not just a loss of 26 lives…these 26 human beings had family members and friends who are deeply affected by it. And even if they did not die of the shooting, all of them will suffer some form of trauma, which will take years before complete healing sets in. This is simply not a massacre of 26 lives. It’s an attack to a community…a state…a nation…to a world whose simple dream is to live peacefully. No, it may not be in the scale of that terrorist attacks. But still, the Connecticut School shooting wasn’t merely an attack on 26 lives. It attacked an idea…that comfortable thought that in such a place like Sandy Hook Elementary, nothing like it would happen. And yet it did.

Like all of the onlookers and survivors of the shooting, I am plagued by so many questions and yet, the answers are so few and vague. How can anyone commit such a horrific crime? How can anyone have the nerve to march up inside that school filled with children, with guns and ammunition, and shoot 6 adults and 20 children before finally deciding to kill himself? Is this the work of an insane person? Or does he know the evil he’s inflicting every step of the way? I take it that some may feel comfort in the idea that perhaps the shooter was a madman; perhaps, he was so immersed in his version of reality that he doesn’t know that what he’s doing is evil. Perhaps, he isn’t really that “evil” at all; merely a person so detached from reality. But sadly, this scenario isn’t always true. As for the case of the Connecticut school shooting, as far as I know, the authorities have not yet established if Adam Lanza was in an insane state when he committed those crimes. It was only said that he suffered from Asperger’s syndrome, a disease described as a mild form of autism and not in risk for developing violent behavior, only prone to social awkwardness. Also, looking at the timeline of school violence that CNN published, it can be noted that not every shooter committed suicide or found insane. And so with these realities, we must accept that there are persons who are evil enough to commit these acts knowingly and with purpose. This is perhaps the source of our anguish and fear.

But a shimmer of hope lies in all these atrocities. If I could thank the teachers that stayed with the children during this horrific event and tried their best to alleviate their pain and fear, I would, with all sincerity and respect. Sandy Hook Elementary school is lucky to have these teachers during the crucial times. It would have been easy for any of them to maybe just lock the children in their rooms and flee or hide on their own, which could have had increased their chances of escaping unscathed. But they took their duty to heart. And for that, we must respect and thank them.

And maybe the reason why people across the globe mourn up to this time with America is this: it was a school of little children in a generally peaceful suburban area that the sudden attack of a lone shooter was made. It could actually happen anywhere. And so, personally, we felt the anguish, the fear, and the sadness…because if it could happen in a school of children, it could happen anywhere.

Like the other school-shooting incidents, this roused the hot debate on gun control once more. I must admit, I have been a supporter of right to bear arms for quite some time. I believed that one cannot simply eradicate guns; until one gun exists in the world, it needs another to balance the power. I believed that this is not the sole way to put down the seemingly continuous increase of gun-related violence (there are almost always one incident of school violence involving guns every year, according to the CNN timeline). And perhaps, I may be partially right: the problem isn’t simply gun control. It’s a multifactorial problem and the factors are quite significant.

In “The Geography of Gun Deaths” published in The Atlantic last January 2011, it was said that “10.2 out of every 100,000 people were killed by firearms across the United States, but that rate varies dramatically from state to state”. Statistical correlations between firearm deaths and a variety of psychological, economic, social, and political characteristics of states were charted and analysis brought interesting conclusions.

taken from: The Geography of Gun Deaths, published in The Atlantic, January 2011

It may be common assumption that illegal drug use, mental illness and neuroses will entail higher risk for increased gun-related violence. However, the statistics show that it doesn’t figure much. More interestingly, it is the economic factors that figure more significantly in the increase of gun-related violence, like social class hierarchy, poverty, and inequality. On the other hand, improved living conditions and opportunities for creativity with regulation of gun ownership seem to decrease the risk.

Proponents of gun ownership would often argue the case of Switzerland, where most males were conscripted into the army and each household prescribed guns. Switzerland has relatively high gun ownership rates with low crime rates associated with gun violence. However, to relate gun ownership rates with crime rates would be oversimplifying it. What lessens gun-related violence in Switzerland exactly, when apparently even the Swiss themselves consider it dangerous having these firearms at home? The article wasn’t quite clear about it, but it simply states that perhaps “they have little to fight about”. With the good economic profile of the country, most were only concerned with domestic sources of violence. America may have relatively good economic profile, but it definitely has internal and external security threats that it needs to be guarded from, something that Switzerland fortunately does not have.

On the other end of the spectrum is the land of the rising sun, the land virtually rid of guns, Japan. However, cultural differences may factor in more significantly, rather than the gun policies. The Japanese were educated that “no one shall possess firearms or swords” that even the police, at one point, did not carry those. With the rigorous checks the police conducts on each one applying for gun ownership, plus the numerous tests (drug tests, mental fitness exam, and shooting range tests) that need to be administered into and passed by applications, there were less and less gun owners as time passed. Crime rates in Japan associated with gun violence are relatively low.

These are two different countries compared to the United States of America, in many different aspects. But now is the time to try and study their cases and learn from them. More and more people are clamoring for revisions in the present gun ownership policies of the country. It would be insane to tell these people not to speak of such deliberate measures in times of mourning. In fact, all the more that we should talk, discuss, and debate about it now, whether one is arguing for or against gun control. To ignore a clear threat by looking away may be a toddler’s way of coping with any source of stress. But this should not be the case with rational adults. After all, how many more shooting incidents are we going to wait to happen before we take a look at policies that needed changing? We must realize there are just too many people out there unfit to even live responsible lives, let alone handle guns, and yet they have full access to it.

Gun control may not be the sole answer to the increasing gun-related violence in America. But it is a part of the solution.

There’s this curious little project of Atheist Alliance International called Atheist Census. The project aims to give us an idea or picture of the atheists around the world: how old are most atheists? what countries do they come from? what educational background?

It is still in its beta phase, though, and there are only about 153 participants as of the time I took part in the survey and grabbed screenshots of the statistics the site already has.

And curiously, the Philippines is second in the most number of atheist participants:

I know how some people are sensitive about brands or labels. But according to the survey, so far, most people wanted to be called atheist, followed by humanist, and then freethinker.

Most atheists came from a catholic background (why am I not surprised?), followed by christianity. There is also a significant portion of the participants who claim to have not been religious in the past.

I’m also glad to know that most of the atheists have good educational background and belong to the youth. After all, according to that old saying, the youth is the future of a nation. Are the statistics a good prediction of the future of the country on secularism?

One can also filter the data to render country-specific report. The sample size is not yet enough to give conclusive information, but I would encourage others to also participate. Perhaps, in time, we can have that picture of the world’s atheists. I’m quite excited at the outcome of this project.

A display of mindset like that shown by Mr. Teddy Boy Locsin above tell me that I need to be really, really cautious about the kind of people I put vote into government office. The religious arrogance is glaring, but it may seem to be as natural as the sea to most religious Filipinos, unfortunately. Most Filipinos were brought up thinking their religion has the monopoly of beliefs in the country.

I kind of lose “faith” in Filipinos whenever people find that damning people into hell is all right and moral but doubting their beliefs is offensive.

For more pearls of wisdom from Mr. Locsin, just follow his twitter: https://twitter.com/teddyboylocsin

With the canonization of Pedro Calungsod (much enthusiasm from the catholics in the country and to the chagrin of many nonbelievers and some believers who think that spending taxpayer’s money to send the vice-president and perhaps his other companions to Rome for a catholic celebration is bullocks, when the government is supposedly religion-neutral) , he now becomes the new Filipino saint for Roman Catholics to “emulate”. And in more recent news, Kateri Tekakwitha, a North American Aboriginal woman, became a saint.

This whole brouhaha on calling dead people saints got me piqued: why pray to saints? Can saints grant answers to prayers? Can dead people-who-are-not-saints-yet-but-soon-to-be grant answers to prayers and thus, be instrumental to the miracles that supposedly were made through their intercession? Why can’t just people pray directly to God? Why the need to go through saints? Can they really hear the prayers in heaven?

I was, for some time, a catholic (don’t blame me for that; I was only a few months old when I got baptized so I don’t really have any say on the matter, isn’t?) but I have already forgotten the teachings behind prayers to the saints. I am an atheist now and these questions arise from the mind of an atheist who look for some rational answers to questions. So I tried looking for answers.

In my short search (I will not claim to have done thorough research on this subject but after indulging me a bit and continue reading this, you’ll see that maybe, perhaps, it would already be futile to be searching for some more), this is a sample of what I found:

Can They Hear Us?

One charge made against it is that the saints in heaven cannot even hear our prayers, making it useless to ask for their intercession. However, this is not true. As Scripture indicates, those in heaven are aware of the prayers of those on earth. This can be seen, for example, in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of “golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.” But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers. They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us.

Some might try to argue that in this passage the prayers being offered were not addressed to the saints in heaven, but directly to God. Yet this argument would only strengthen the fact that those in heaven can hear our prayers, for then the saints would be aware of our prayers even when they are not directed to them!

In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. We are explicitly told by John that the incense they offer to God are the prayers of the saints. Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding… (from Catholic Answers: Praying To Saints)

Okay, let’s start teasing each statement, bit by bit.

“As Scripture indicates, those in heaven are aware of the prayers of those on earth. This can be seen, for example, in Revelation 5:8, where John depicts the saints in heaven offering our prayers to God under the form of “golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”"

Checking this against the King James version of the bible, you can see the whole passage here, with the other verses in the chapter. What irks me is how the article automatically assumed that, since the saints were said to be offering their prayers to god, those prayers were those already from the faithful who have been praying on earth. I have searched further in the said chapter but nothing was even alluded to the prayers of the faithful, only prayers of the saints. And everything else was about four beasts, a slained lamb, and a man who cannot look at a book.

“But if the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God, then they must be aware of our prayers. They are aware of our petitions and present them to God by interceding for us…In any event, it is clear from Revelation 5:8 that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us.”

This is the kind of “but if, then must be” statement that can really get one scratch his own head in frustration. How can anyone know that they’re interceding? What if they’re just collecting all these prayers and presenting it to god, who seemed to have grown quite a bit of confusion already because of the number of prayers he have been receiving as of late? Does presentation of these supposed prayers mean that the saints are already endorsing these prayers as worthy of god’s time? If they’re picking prayers that they’re supposed to present or intercede for, what happens to the other prayers? What would be the requirements for one’s prayer to qualify for intercession of a saint? Does one have to pray for it a certain number of times for a certain period of time? Or will the saint only listen to those who have purchased his/her lovely statues? Will he/she be more favorable towards his family members? Aren’t they supposed to forget about their earthly relations when they are already in heaven?

Actually, one may just ignore all those questions I’ve raised. Just look back at Revelation 5:8. Where was the statement that said prayers of the faithful were offered to god by saints?

“Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally.”

Well, I’ll answer this statement with a verse that has already been discussed: Revelation 5:8.

“8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.”

Golden vials full of odours…odours? Odours?! I thought the prayers aren’t physical things? How can there be odour?

Maybe there are other verses to quote; some other chapters that may allude to such. But one thing is already clear to me, this article is full of contradictions in itself and it sucks. I haven’t quite reached the end of the first half of it. Well, after reading the entire thing, I’m all the more convinced that it does suck. If catholics can’t even make logical-sounding statements, what’s the use of trying to explain the why? But then, maybe I’m forgetting…a lot of catholics aren’t used to having to ask the why. Just give the “what” and they’ll gobble it up happily, as long as it came from the long-robbed leaders of their church.

Feel free to comment, theists and atheists alike. I have toned down the invectives, as there are some catholics I have encountered who get offended by such, for reasons I do not understand. I have been accused as know-it-all. But then, let me say, if I knew it all, why do I ask so much questions? And those who supposedly humbly claim that they acknowledge they cannot know everything, why are they not asking questions?

It’s been a long while since my last entry…again. I guess the excuse, “busy work schedule”, can get tiring, right? But it is what it is…and also, drained creative juices. Stress, emotions, and frustrations can do that, at times. But I’m more determined now to turn these negativities into something more productive, at least, for me.

I’m sure most of you, bloggers, out there do have these episodes. I’m not sure what to call it, though.

It’s time, however, to get a little more organized and seek the direction this blog must go. I’m looking forward to a clearer blog future.

No, this is not a sequel to the Bourne trilogy by Robert Ludlum. It’s more of an offshoot, a side story to the epic saga that he wrote. But do not take this the wrong way; being a side story does not mean it was less good. It may not be comparable to the intensity of the first Bourne films, but it takes some great writing skills on the part of the screenwriters to be able to create another dimension to the story of Jason Bourne, without him being in the spotlight this time.

This film now focuses on Aaron Cross, an agent who’s like Jason Bourne who was able to escape the “purging” happening to those involved in the program. But to survive, he’d need the help of Dr. Shearing (Rachel Weisz) to keep him alive with medications he needed. CIA, however, is intent to bury all evidences, including the scientists like Dr. Shearing who did the research and along the way, discovered the process by which to make permanent the enhancements in Aaron Cross permanent.

Of course, many of the Filipinos, by this time, are quite excited to see this film because parts of it were shot here (if I remember right, in Makati, Marikina, and Palawan). Admittedly, this is also one of the reasons why I went to see this film, though not the primary reason. Filipinos would be interested to know how the film would portray their beloved Manila (and Palawan). Most of the shots filmed in the country are those in Manila. MRT Taft, Jones Bridge, the divisoria jeepneys, and seaports were clearly seen in this film. It’s that gritty side of Manila that was shown, actually. And one should not look down on it. It is what it is, with the traditional wood-paneled houses that are built close to one another, with the sliding capiz windows and bentilador. The motorcycle chase in congested EDSA is one of the adrenaline-pumping scenes and one just have to give credit to the one who choreographed this. Props also to the motorcycle maneuvering skills of Jeremy Renner, whom I heard did most of the stunts in the movie. I wonder how many jeepneys they destroyed in this movie…

As for those interested to know if they need to watch the previous Bourne films to be able to appreciate this movie, well, the answer is a partial yes. To fully appreciate the new story, one have to have a basic understanding of what happened to Jason Bourne (his photo had a cameo in this movie, by the way; also, some of the scenes from Bourne Ultimatum are in this movie). But an acute observer can surmise these missing parts and still be able to understand the movie. To those familiar with the Bourne series, The Bourne Legacy has a simpler plot; forget the grandiosity and seeming complexity of the first Bourne films. This is a one-track story and I’m sure most of the movie goers would be able to follow it. But for full appreciation, I’d recommend seeing the first Bourne films. Reading the Bourne novels would further enrich your enjoyment.

I’m just a bit disappointed at the anti-climactic ending to the film. Palawan is a great end-scene but there’s just much to the end-dialogue that’s missing. I almost looked around in disbelief when the lights turned on, thinking, “‘yun na ‘yung ending???”. Also, why less of Ed Norton? I was kind of expecting more scenes with him on it. In the film, he never even set foot in Manila (oooooppppsss!)!.

But still, I’d recommend this film to everyone who loves some good action film, not to mention a good-looking, buffed Jeremy Renner.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

I hug my teddy,
To him, I whisper how I love thee
Wishing, somewhat, you’d hear.

Teddy gives me warmth,
It gives me love, when there’s none from you.
Perhaps, in the years to come,
someone, some people
shall find a way for me
to go to a parallel universe,
where mornings are made of bed, soft kisses, and laughter,
where contentment smells of coffee and pile of cigarettes on a tray,
where I love you,
and you love me back,
Where you hug me back.
To leave all comfort
for a promise of one hug.

For now, it’s just all in me,
in my mind, and in the storm in my heart.

Photos posted here are those I have seen on my facebook timeline. If these are yours, please do leave a comment so I could give proper credit. I’m posting these pics not for my own recognition, but to give warning and information to those who need it.

Taft Avenue, in front of Rizal Park

Quiapo Underpass

Believe it or not, this is part of North Luzon Expressway

FEU

NLEX Malinta

I’ll post more photos once I find them. If you do want to share yours, for the benefit of everyone, please just email it to me at tesstermulo@gmail(dot)com.

Thanks. I hope everyone will stay safe.

By the way, here are some useful emergency hotlines

And go to Rappler.com for list of evacuation centers and relief operations in Metro Manila.

Photo taken from Los Angeles Times article: Philippines birth control: Filipinos want it, priests don’t

Any medical student in Metro Manila who has rotated at the Dr. Jose Fabella Memorial hospital can tell you that their rotation in that hospital is one of the memorable experiences during medical clerkship. And perhaps, one of the most eye-opening three weeks of life one could ever have.

See the photo above? That is how it really is in Dr. Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital. It’s a maternal and newborn hospital found at Sta. Cruz, Manila, and has the reputation of being a “baby factory” since almost 20 percent of babies in Metro Manila are born here. The hospital averages 60 births everyday but can record as high as 100 births in 24 hours. It is said to be the busiest maternal ward in the whole world. This is also one maternal ward in the whole country that can cram up to 300 mothers: 3 mothers and their babies in a bed. So in one huge ward, that’s already a mixture of lochia, blood, sweat, urine, feces, and body odor from up to 600 humans (mothers and their babies). For a neophyte medical clerk (and even the experienced ones), this can be truly overwhelming.

What I can tell you though is that most of the mothers consulting at Fabella are quite aware that there is a need to plan their families. They know this too well: the rumbling stomachs of their kids who keep asking them for more food and of which they cannot fully give, even if heart is more than willing; the often-encountered problematic situation of asking the husband for money to buy food but he’s either got empty pockets or he’s emptied it out for boozefest with friends. Women often complain that they cannot keep their husbands from having sex with them, even if they didn’t want to, out of fear of dissatisfying their husbands and looking for physical love elsewhere, and praying to their god it will not lead to another pregnancy, another hungry mouth to feed.

Of course, there were mothers that just don’t fully understand the need for prenatal care. How many times have we encountered women who saw Fabella only when they’re just about to give birth? What happened to the tetanus prophylaxis, hepatitis B, and Gestational Diabetes screening? What kind of preparation was done for the babies that are about to be born? And they did not even have to worry about the payment for consultation or even the other medications, like the vitamin and folic acid supplements, because these are given for free. Either they just don’t know or they’re past caring. Or they were raised that way.

This lack of understanding or recognition can be, at times, frustrating on the part of the healthcare provider. How many times have I heard some of the resident physicians say in exasperation that they have seen particular patients come in year after year. And no matter how much you discuss the merits of good prenatal care again and again, even to the point of scolding, they’ll always be back a year after, pregnant again with no prenatal care whatsoever. Sometimes, I get this feeling that they just want to get it over with, something that is as much as a regular occurrence that it merits neither attention or recognition. Or perhaps, those blank stares that I often encounter when I rotated in the “assembly line” of OB clinics at Fabella are those of knowing helplessness.

Perhaps one of the most memorable patients I had at Fabella was a 12-year old girl who was brought in for vaginal delivery of her firstborn. At first, I thought she had a mental disability because she was restless and wouldn’t listen to the instructions being given to her as she is in active labor. As she was wheeled into the delivery room, an attendant and a medical clerk had to help her get up from the wheelchair and into the delivery table. She’s almost thrashing about, and would yell, “ayoko na! ayoko na!”. She wouldn’t even lie on her back and put her feet up on the stirrups of the table. She’d just remain sitting on the table and crying that she wanted to defecate. Then her mother told me that she was only 12 years old and was a victim of rape (of course, she didn’t disclose anything more than that). The girl never had any prenatal consultations nor counselling. She was never prepared for this. How can one expect a 12-year old deliver a baby? She who most probably just had started with her menstrual periods when she was raped? How can one expect her to understand what’s happening to her…the cause of her agony and pain? And there we were, her doctors are almost afraid of what the condition of the baby will be when it comes out…we have no idea. How much more for her who’s in pain? Hers was already a high-risk pregnancy. Fortunately (in a way), she delivered a small-for-gestational-age baby. It was fortunate because we did not have to resort to doing a cesarean section, as she has a small pelvis. Unfortunately, though, for the baby, it meant that there really was no preparation for this pregnancy, nutrition-wise.

This girl is just one of the 60-100 mothers that give birth at Fabella everyday. On the average, the daily count would mount to only 60 births (both vaginally delivered and cesarean delivered). But on seasonal peaks like September and October, the numbers could rise to about 80-100 births per day. I had my rotation at Fabella on a September. I can still remember those duties when I must have spent the whole day in the operating room, with the mothers being wheeled in and out continuously all throughout and all I had to do is scrub, assist, and then scrub again…endlessly, at least, for the entire duty, until my shift to the delivery room came. And in the delivery room, 7 or 8 tables would always be filled up with patients, as well as the bassinets of the nursery, who took care of the newborns. Those were the times when it’s not uncommon to have edematous feet after a 24-hour duty, and then realizing that for that duration of time, one took almost no bathroom breaks. And perhaps, in a duty or two, it would be every medical clerk’s experience to find himself sleeping beside an oxygen tank, because that’s the only place where one can place the head for support during a quick snooze, and then waking up realizing, the bassinets were already filled again with babies that needed to be measured and wrapped…in a time as short as 10 minutes.

This is really how it is at Fabella hospital and perhaps, in every other busy maternal wards in the country. It surprises me that there are still many doctors who refuse to support the RH bill, including the nurses and midwives. They have seen it with their own eyes. They were there…they smelled the chlorox mixed with the scent of menstrual blood…the stickiness of the lochia. They have seen and talked to these patients. They have given them care. And they know what happened. They should know better and they should remember! And as for everyone, I wish they could take a day off and see how it really is in these places. Maybe, a 24-hours duty can convince them that this country needs to enforce laws on providing good reproductive health care for Filipinos.

Remember Fabella! Support the RH Bill!

References:
Los Angeles Times article: Philippines birth control: Filipinos want it, priests don’t
One born every minute: The maternity unit where mothers are THREE to a bed from Daily Mail Online
Dr. Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital, Busiest Maternity Wards (video)