What is NSSM 200 "Population Control" by Kissinger?

Posted: 2005/01/19 From: Mathaba In December of 1974, shortly after the first major international population conference was held under UN auspices at Bucharest, Romania, several of the major U.S. government agencies involved in foreign affairs submitted a detailed report on population control in developing countries. Contributions came from the Central Intelligence Agency, The Departments of States, Defense, and Agriculture, and the Agency for International Development. Their contributions were combined into one major report with the title, "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests." The final study, which is more than 200 pages in length, covered many topics from the viewpoint of each of the participating agencies. The following questions and answers cover just the most basic aspects of this crucial historical document. What does the term "NSSM 200" mean? "NSSM" stands for "National Security Study Memorandum," and the number 200 identifies the order in which it was produced. The original request for a review of overseas population policies is also called NSSM 200, and was written April 27, 1974 by Henry Kissinger. The actual study, which covered 229 pages of text, represents one stage of the NSSM 200 correspondence series, and was submitted on December 10, 1974. It became the official guide to foreign policy November 26, 1975, when a National Security Decision Memorandum (NSDM 314) was signed that endorsed the findings of the study. Who actually was responsible for the study? NSSM 200 was compiled by the National Security Council, which is the highest level of command in the U.S. government. The NSC is headed by the President of the United States and his designated Security Advisor, and its purpose is to coordinate the overseas operations of all executive branches the U.S. government. Is NSSM 200 still in force? Technically, the answer is yes. It remains the official strategy paper on population until it is replaced by another of equal importance. However, the implementation of the guidelines may differ from one administration to another. Jimmy Carter, for example, showed considerably less interest in curbing population growth than did his predecessors Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. And the Reagan administration took a somewhat different approach (i.e., the Mexico City Policy that banned direct U.S. financing for abortions). The facts that funds for population control increased rapidly and dramatically during the Reagan and Bush years does not necessarily indicate a newer NSC directive was issued. Why was NSSM only discovered in 1990? NSSM 200 was originally classified as a secret document, meaning that neither the public in the United States nor the people of the developing world who were the subject of the study were allowed to know of its existence. A schedule for declassification appearing on the cover authorized its release in mid-1989. However, the document was not actually made public until almost a year later, when it was given to the U.S. National Archives in response to a request from a journalist working for the Information Project For Africa. Why was the study kept confidential so long? It is difficult to promote birth control on a giant scope unless the recipients can be persuaded that it is intended for their benefit. NSSM 200, on the other hand, acknowledged that the purpose of population control was to serve the U.S. strategic, economic, and military interest at the expense of the developing countries. Such a revelation, particularly if it were to leak out prematurely, would seriously jeopardize program goals. In fact, the declassification date on the memorandum would not necessarily be mandatory, and NSC could still have kept it from public view. But by 1990, at least two very important changes had taken place. For one thing, many of the study's recommendations for pushing population reduction policies on aid-receiving countries had been accomplished. Second, the U.S. had elected George Bush, a former Director of Central Intelligence, to the White House in 1988, which may have signalled to classification review personnel that the American public had grown more tolerant of covert activities overseas. Whose population did the security advisers want controlled? The recommendations for reducing fertility applied only to the developing world -- and to all of it. However, NSSM 200 also states that 13 countries of "special U.S. political and strategic interest" would be primary targets. They are: India, Brazil, Egypt, Nigeria, Indonesia, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Mexico, Thailand, Turkey, Ethiopia and Colombia (page 15 of the introduction). What were the study's main concerns about population? NSSM 200 states that population growth in the developing world threatens U.S. security in four basic ways: First, certain large nations stand to gain significant political power and influence as a result of their growing populations. Second, the United States and its western allies have a vital interest in strategic materials which have to be imported from less-developed countries. Third, societies with high birthrates have large numbers of young people, who are more likely than older people to challenge global power structures. And last, population growth in relatively-disadvantaged countries jeopardizes U.S. investments. Which countries would benefit politically from population growth? The memorandum cites Brazil as one example. Brazil "clearly dominates the continent demographically," the report says, noting that Brazilians could outnumber U.S. residents by the end of the century. Thus it foresees a "growing power status for Brazil in Latin America and on the world scene over the next 25 years" if population programs were not successful at curbing fertility (page 22). Nigeria was also given as an example of a nation that can benefit from population increase. "Already the most populous country on the continent, with an estimated 55 million people in 1970, Nigeria's population by the end of this century is projected to number 135 million," says the formerly-classified report. "This suggests a growing political and strategic role for Nigeria, at least in Africa south of the Sahara" (page 21). How does population control help the west acquire minerals? The study explains, first of all, "The location of known reserves of higher-grade ores of most minerals favors increasing dependence of all industrialized regions on imports from less developed countries. The real problems of mineral supplies lie, not in basic physical sufficiency, but in the politico-economic issues of access, terms for exploration and exploitation, and division of the benefits among producers, consumers, and host country governments" (page 37). It then advises, "...the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. That fact gives the U.S. enhanced interest in the political, economic, and social stability of the supplying countries. Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States" (page 43). What have youthful populations got to do with it? Young people have historically been advocates for change, and are more prone to confront imperialism. NSSM 200 quotes a June 1974 State Department cable from Bangladesh to make this point: "Bangladesh is now a fairly solid supporter of third world positions, advocating better distribution of the world's wealth and extensive trade concessions to poor nations. As its problems grow and its ability to gain assistance fails to keep pace, Bangladesh's positions on international issues likely will become radicalized, inevitably in opposition to U.S. interests on major issues..." (page 80). How are U.S. commercial investments affected by birthrates overseas? The document points out that growing nations need to provide for their growing needs. Thus, it warns, they are likely to make increased demands of foreign investors. Under such circumstances, western corporate holdings "are likely to be expropriated or subjected to arbitrary inter- vention." The report adds that this could be a consequence of "government action, labor conflicts, sabotage, or civil disturbance," and concludes: "Although population pressure is obviously not the only factor involved, these types of frus- trations are much less likely under conditions of slow or zero population growth" (pages 37-38). Did the Americans really think they could get away it? NSSM 200 repeatedly acknowledges suspicions about U.S. motives on the part of "LDC" (less-developed country) leaders, and recommends a strategy to deal with these reactions. "It is vital that the effort to develop and strengthen a commitment on the part of the LDC leaders not be seen by them as an industrialized country policy to keep their strength down or to reserve resources for use by the `rich' countries," says the study. "Development of such a perception could create a serious backlash adverse to the cause of population stability..." (page 114). The next page adds: "The US can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with: (a) the right of the individual to determine freely and responsibly their number and spacing of children ... and (b) the fundamental social and economic development of poor countries...." (page 115). How were NSSM 200 s population goals to be pursued? In addition to disguising hostile intent by "repeatedly asserting" that birth control is useful to development, the writers demand that the United Nations and other multi-national institutions be used as fronts to conceal the extent of the U.S. involvement. They argue that the U.S. should "[a]rrange for familiarization programs at U.N. Headquarters in New York for ministers of governments, senior policy level offi- cials and comparably influential leaders from private life" (introduction, pages 20-21). In some countries, the memo reported, "U.S. assistance is limited by the nature of political or diplomatic relations ... or by the lack of strong government interest in population reduction programs (e.g. Nigeria, Ethiopia, Mexico, Brazil)." In these cases, it would be wise to channel population assistance should through "other donors and/or from private and international organizations (many of which receive contributions from AID)" (pages 127-128). Did NSSM 200 mention compulsory population policies? It clearly does. It recommends, for example, that the World Bank take the lead. "Involvement of the Bank in this area would open up new possibilities for collaboration," the document says (page 148). The study also advises that the U.S. government played "an important role in establishing the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) to spearhead a multilateral effort in population as a complement to the bilateral actions of AID and other donor countries" (page 121). And it says that, "with a greater commitment of Bank resources and improved consultation with AID and UNFPA, a much greater dent could be made on the overall problem" (page 149). Moreover, the report asserts that "mandatory programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now" (page 118). It also finds that there is already "some established precedent for taking account of family planning performance in appraisal of assistance requirements" and concludes that "allocation of scarce PL 480 resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control as well as food production. In these sensitive relationships, however, it is important in style as well as substance to avoid the appearance of coercion" (page 106- 107). What about propaganda? NSSM 200 concentrates mostly on efforts to get heads of government to adopt population policies against their own people. In this context, it says that U.S. diplomatic and embassy officials should "be alert to opportunities for expanding our assistance efforts and for demonstrating to their leaders the consequences of rapid population growth and the benefits of actions to reduce fertility" (page 128). It also notes: "There was general consternation [at the 1974 population conference in Bucharest when] the Plan was subjected to a slashing, five-pronged attack led by Algeria, with the backing of several African countries; Argentina, supported by Uruguay, Brazil, Peru, and, more limitedly, some other Latin American countries; the Eastern European group (less Romania); the PRC [Peoples Republic of China] and the Holy See" (page 86-87). Thus the study emphasizes the need to convince foreign leaders to drop their objections: "The beliefs, ideologies and misconceptions displayed by many nations at Bucharest indicate more forcefully than ever the need for extensive education of the leaders of many governments, especially in Africa and some in Latin America. Approaches [for] leaders of individual countries must be designed in the light of their current beliefs and to meet their special concerns" (page 96). How about the mass media? At the time NSSM 200 was written, U.S. policy makers gave only passing thought to wholesale propaganda operations, apparently concluding that this course of action would be too difficult and too controversial. "Beyond seeking to reach and influence national leaders, improved world-wide support for population-related efforts should be sought through increased emphasis on mass media and other popula- tion education and motivation programs by the UN, USIA and USAID," says the formerly-secret memorandum. "We should give higher priorities in our information programs world-wide for this area and consider expansion of collaborative arrangements with multilateral institutions in population education programs" (page 117). But it also makes reference to the risks involved: "First, there is widespread LDC sensitivity to satellite broadcast, expressed most vigorously in the Outer Space Committee of the UN. Many countries don't want broadcasts of neighboring countries over their own territory and fear unwanted propaganda and subversion by hostile broadcasters. NASA experience suggests that the US must treat very softly when discussing assistance in program content" (page 191). Is NSSM 200 the only important policy document on population trends? Certainly not. The Central Intelligence Agency had a population and manpower subcommittee at least as far back as the 1950s. Over the past 40 years, hundreds of reports have been prepared by the Defense Department, the Department of State, the CIA and others about population control and U.S. national security. Many of them remain partially or entirely classified. To give just one example, a February 1984 CIA report called "Middle East-South Asia: Population Problems and Political Stability" warns that "one-fourth to one-third of the populations of all Middle Eastern and South Asian countries is in the politically-volatile 15 to 24 age group, a consequence of high population growth rates during the 1950s and 1960s." These young people, the intelligence analysts continued, "will be ready recruits for opposition causes [such as] Islamic fundamentalism, which currently offers the principal ideological haven for Muslim youth." Similarly a study done in 1988 for the Pentagon calls upon high-level security planners to ensure that "population planning" is given the status of weapons development (see "Global Demographic Trends to the Year 2010: Implications for U.S. Security" in The Washington Quarterly, Spring 1989). And a 1991 report to the U.S. Army Conference on Long- Range Planning warns that current population trends -- extremely low fertility in developed countries and rapid growth in the southern hemisphere -- raise serious concerns about "the international political order and the balance of world power." The document -- reprinted in Foreign Affairs, Summer 1991 as "Population Change and National Security" -- says that these changes "could create an international environment even more menacing to the security prospects of the Western alliance than was the Cold War for the past generation." Military and intelligence assessments such as these do not change the importance of NSSM 200, however, but merely update its message to address current concerns. Web sites and blogs DO NOT link to this print page, the original article is at: http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=90207

WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THE TRAGEDY IN BASILAN?

19 soldiers slain in Basilan

MILF: Our forces had edge, went for the kill

By Julie Alipala
Inquirer Mindanao

12:18 am | Thursday, October 20th, 2011

 37share1027 986

‘THEY KEPT COMING’ A soldier carries a wounded comrade airlifted by helicopter from Al-Barka, Basilan, for treatment in Zamboanga City on Tuesday. At least 19 soldiers of the Special Action Forces were killed in a clash with Moro rebels. A survivor of the ambush said they were outnumbered and overwhelmed. AP

The soldiers were running out of magazines preloaded with bullets and yet Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) fighters kept on coming, said a member of the Army’s Special Forces who survived a nine-hour clash in Al-Barka, Basilan province.

The encounter on Tuesday left 19 soldiers dead.

Private First Class Arnel Balili said that while some 90 Moro rebels were advancing, he and 39 other members of the Special Forces had to spend time loading fresh bullets into empty magazines so they could return fire.

The soldiers were overwhelmed. “We were only 40. There were more of them,” Balili, who was among the 11 wounded soldiers, said from a hospital bed in Zamboanga City.

When the smoke cleared, ... read more at http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/78739/19-soldiers-slain-in-basilan#disqus_thread

Status of Our National Defense

This is already a decades old cycle of brother filipino soldiers of the government among us being clobbered by brother filipino soldiers of whatever region or ideology among us, and vice versa.  

Let us remember the rape cases the north americans committed against our filipinas as well as the deaths of our filipino brothers like Gregan Cardeño inside the facility of a U.S. organization- Liason Coordination Elements in the Philippines yet have not found closure until now due to blocks from the north americans.  Take note of the mysterious death of Captain Javier Ignacio of the Philippine Army who was the recruiter of Cardeño for the U.S. organization, who was gunned down while he was about to meet a filipino group investigating the Cardeño death.   This is also a decades old deficiency of filipino soldiers among us of being impotent in defending our brother filipinos against foreign aggression.⁽¹⁾⁽²⁾

How many decades have we been under what the U.S. term as, tutelage, protection, training, technological support, and guidance of the mighty protective north americans since the 1900s?  In all those years, our defense system could not proceed at any direction of development other than that under U.S. control, tutelage, protection, training, technological support, policies, guidance and dependence on. How many decades have we been at war against brother filipinos in what the the U.S term as insurgency? How many years have been our defense system been functioning as defense against brother filipinos the situation of which is equivalent to the autoimmune disease of the immune system of an individual human entity? In all those years, have we ever been able to develop a defense system capable of defense against foreign invaders?

In all those years that other nations like France, Germany, Israel, Japan, and Vietnam, developed their nation, how have been their status of economy and defense? Did they let their economy and defense be controlled by and dependent on the U.S.?

If we let the U.S. continue their tutelage, protection, training, technological support, guidance, and control of our nation as what they have always been doing, how many more years will it take before we will this time be able to end being at war with brother filipinos? How many more years will it take before we will finally be able to have the economic and defense status of nations mentioned who have never been controlled by nor dependent on the U.S.?

These are just symptoms of a pathological national defense development.  

The AFP is part of the defense system of our nation.  No matter how strong the defense system is, if for its major function, it destroys the people of its own nation and defends more the foreigners before a situation that is in conflict with its own people, it will remain dysfunctional.  Thus it is impotent or a mutant.

Our defense system has a deficiency.  It is supposed to follow like normal biological entities that when a defense system is owned by a certain entity, it defends that entity against foreign organic or non-organic entities.  Once it destroys part or the whole of the entity to which it belongs to, the defense system has become auto defense.  In a human being entity, this becomes an autoimmune disease.  Such deficiency or dysfunction is merely a symptom of the underlying cause.  There was an infection at some point of development of the entity.

Birth of Our Nation

  

Conception of the filipino nation developed in the 1700s to the 1800s as a result of a developmental intercourse of events in the 1500s to the 1600s involving the iberians under the Spanish Government and the natives and separate tribes of the islands on the Southeast Asia and Southwest Pacific.  This developed into a revolution that drove us to a separation from the womb of Madre España and be born as a Filipino Nation in 1898.  From tribes and petty kingdoms, to a colony, to a revolutionary social organism, we became a nation.

We inherited the organic national Determinant of National Actions from the founding fathers of our nation. This unwritten code was the factor inherent in us, in: producing a national character and identity that binds us, as a nation; driving the direction of our development; and providing cohesion and continiuity of development thru generations.

Carrying that unwritten code within us, as a nation, we developed a system of politics, defense, judiciary, economy, and education.  Being an infant nation, we struggled to be united, to adapt to the situation, and to control our resources and direction of our development. 

The estimated GDP per capita for the Philippines in 1900, the year Spain left, was of $1,033.oo.  That made it the second richest nation in all of Asia, next to Japan ($1,135.oo), and far ahead of China ($652.oo) or India ($625.oo).⁽³⁾

Development of Our Original National Defense System

At the birth of our nation in 1898, we had a still infant but normal and even a vibrant national defense system.  It was clear who our defense system belongs to, for it was clear who we were, not as individuals, not as tribes nor petty kingdoms, but as a nation.

At that stage, we through Gen Antonio Luna developed the Academia Militar.  He recruited quite a number of officers from the Spanish Army to form the core group of the academia.  He transformed the different and assorted standards of fighting volunteers for the revolutionary stage of our nation into a professional standard of regular soldiers for the newly born nation.

Our newly developed but infant defense system underwent the ultimate test of its class and potency when a foreign entity, the north americans, violated our newly born nation in 1898 by their invasion.  Without any aid from any nation, our defense forces engaged the aggressor forces of the most powerful nation in the world in 1899.   It was our first encounter with a foreign aggressor force as a filipno nation.  We lost in many battles but we also defeated them in a number of documented battles like Balangiga, Mabitac, Pulang Lupa, etc.  

Down south, the north americans tampered with the development of that area of our nation, with their Bates Agreement of 1899.  It established a kind of national development that mutated into one of disintegrating development of one part of the nation from the development of the other parts of the nation.  It was a masterful divide and rule stroke of the enemy forces to disintegrate the whole of our national defense system.  It has a profound consequence to our national development including national security, today.

Yet, so potent were our defenses that by 1903, the aggressor forces were not yet able to break our resistance.

Ellis G. Davis, Company A, 20th Kansas of the U.S. occupational forces in the Philippines, wrote about us in the 1900s: "They will never surrender until their whole race is exterminated. They are fighting for a good cause, and the Americans should be the last of all nations to transgress upon such rights. Their independence is dearer to them than life,…". 

The aggressor forces of the most powerful nation in the world had to resort to what terrorists today do- hostage-taking of civilians among us.  But at that time, it was on a massive scale which included extermination of the civilians among us.  According to just the documented reports, among the places where these form of terrorism took place were in Marinduque, Rizal, Bulacan, Batangas, Laguna, Albay, and  Samar.  Their demand: surrender of those of the defense forces among us.  It was because of such terroristic acts that the defense forces among us were compelled to give in to their demand.  It was because of such terroristic acts that 800,000 to 1,000,000 of us filipinos died.⁽⁴⁾

Developmental Heredity Injuring Virus

As a result of our having a weakened physical defense system, the north americans took over without resistance from us, control of our resources and development of our systems including our political, defense, economic and education.  These resulted to our organic Determinant of National Actions code within our systems, being cut off from us.  They replaced it with a developmental code they synthesized which directed our development towards functioning to sustain the growth of the north american of the United States.

At their initial penetration of our defense system, they took brother filipinos into the Philippine Constabulary, their auxilliary corps to engage brother filipinos of the filipino defense force.  Gradually, their auxilliary corps, Philippine Constabulary later transformed into the Armed Forces of the Philippines.  Later, more soldiers among us either died or surrendered that we were cut off from our organic filipino defense forces- our original defense system.

Developmental Defense System

Having lost our physical defenses, we still mounted a defense at the developmental level against another foreign invader at another front.  We engaged the chinese invasion and taking over of our economic bases in the 1900s, at the sociological level.  However, the north american government and the chinese government in their homeland, intervened and blocked all our moves to check the chinese overruning our economic bases.  Under U.S. protection, the chinese in our country have secured legal status over our economy and over our land.  After several years of maneuver, they have developed a strong sociological and economic clutch over us, impoverished filipinos including the new generation of materialistically molded political and military leaders.  The chinese have secured covert but strong influence over the direction of our economic, political, and defense system.  

This further weakened our economy enough to render us filipinos perpetually economically dependent. This resulted to our having become perpetually impotent in defending our nation against foreign occupation.

Foreign Invasion Spreads at the Developmental Level

Except for Carlos Garcia, we never had any president who could not be controlled by the United States of North America and stay long as president.  All these presidents are products of U.S. tampered development of our educational system.⁽⁵⁾

  

Today, we the mass of filipinos are loosing our legal status over our economy and our land.  The only legal status remaining for us, mass of filipinos are that of OFWs, squatters, employees, and laborers.  Today, our defense system only functions against law breakers who happen to be filipinos, but not anymore against foreign invaders.

  

Alienation Impotency Dependency Syndrome

This has become the characteristics of the soldiers among us: fierce and potent against brother filipinos who happen to be criminals, and even against brother filipinos resisting the puppets of the north americans; but impotent against foreign invasion and control. 

This was how our defense force, an external defense force was replaced by an auxilliary armed corps of the north americans in the Philippines.  It has been castrated to perpetually remain and not grow beyond counterinsurgency capability.  As a result, our nation has perpetually remained impotent in defending ourselves against foreign control.  For decades, we have never been able to be independent.

The Abu Sayyaf situation is just the result of the CIA creation of religious fighters from muslim regions including Mindanao to fight a proxy war against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s.  This is the cause of why many lives of filipino soldiers among us have been lost to fighting the Abu Sayyaf terrorists.

Recovery 

We can break this decades old chronic disease of our defense system.  We have identified the underlying cause and the process.  We are aware that a status of a vibrant, world class defense system, did exist for our nation during the time of our forefathers.  It is ours by inheritance from our forefathers.  Therefore, it is ours to recover.

_________________________________________

References:

  

1.  http://natoreyes.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/us-troops-in-mindanao-and-the-mysterious-deaths-of-gregan-cardeno-and-capt-javier-ignacio/

2.  http://bulatlat.com/main/2010/11/13/the-vfa-a-history-of-abuses/

3.  http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_gdp_per_cap_in_190-economy-gdp-per-capita-1900

4.  Francisco, L. 1973. The First Vietnam: The U. S. – Philippine War of 1899

5. http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2006/03/making-of-americanized-filipino-minds.html

Pangasinan family: 2+21 -5+5+48 and counting

By Marla Viray
Inquirer Northern Luzon
2:47 am | Tuesday, July 19th, 2011 

FULL HOUSE The Ceras kept growing, some of them crammed 
inside their house in Pangasinan. CONTRIBUTED PHOTO

MANGALDAN, Pangasinan—No regrets for Mensita Edano Cera, 56, who could be your poster girl for or against the controversial reproductive health (RH) bill depending on how you view her story.

Cera, who has given birth to 21 children, said she could have produced more “had I not gone into menopause.”

Only 16 of her 21 children have survived, but she adopted five more and her extended family now also includes 48 grandchildren.  Most of the Cera children have only reached high school.

Nana Mensi to her fellow villagers in Barangay Guilig here, Cera lives with husband Emilio, 59, and their two youngest children, aged 17 and 14, in a shanty near a private farm.

Married in 1969 at the age of 15, Cera said she and her husband were aware of family planning programs and contraceptives.  “We never tried any of those; we were not interested,” she said. “Although it is difficult to have many children, we do not regret having them.  God gave them to us, and we raised them properly.”

Their first child, Delia, was born in 1971 and is now 40. The youngest, Carl Edmund, was born in 1997 and is now 14. Cera also bore twins, Jesse and Mary Ann, in 1973.

Five children—Jun, born in 1972; Maribel, 1976; Pedrito, 1979; Marc Michael, 1983; and Emilio Jr., 1984—have died of either accidents or illnesses.

The rest of the brood include Nestor, born in 1975; Melanie, 1978; Marites, 1981; Ricky, 1982; Angelo, 1985; Michael, 1986; Randy, 1987; Gary, 1988; Mariz, 1989; Maricel, 1990; Dennis; 1991; and Jeffrey, 1994.

“Honestly, had I not gone into menopause, I would have probably had more children,” she said.

Cera gave birth to all her children at home, first aided by a traditional midwife (hilot) and later by a professional. Not once did she suffer complications.

Her surviving children and grandchildren, she claimed, had all grown up healthy. “They rarely get sick. Even though they look thin, they are healthy. They eat regularly and don’t go hungry,” she said.

A diabetic, Cera neither drinks nor smokes.

But to Dr. Ophelia Rivera, health officer of Mangaldan, a mother like Cera may be prone to gynecological problems and heart disease. She may also be susceptible to tooth loss and her bones could easily grow weak.

Birth spacing

“The Department of Health’s (DoH) mandate on family planning is on birth spacing, for the woman to regain her nutritional and physical status,” Rivera said.

According to Rivera, the DoH currently recommends spacing births by five to six years—longer than the previously suggested interval of two to three years—to ensure the health of both mother and child.

Told of Cera’s case, particularly her having no regrets about having that many children, the doctor said: “In this case, are (parents like her) really able to provide the basic needs like food, shelter, education? If they live in the slums, then I think not.”

At one point in the Inquirer interview, Cera likened one birth control method to tying a string around a finger and pulling it tight till it causes pain and swelling.

This kind of thinking, Rivera said, was just an example of the common misconceptions on the use of intrauterine devices, or IUDs.

These wrong notions persist because people tend to believe what friends or neighbors say rather than what doctors and health workers tell them, she added.

Hard sell

“Family planning is difficult to sell to those who have limited literacy or educational attainment because no matter how (often) we conduct an information campaign, somehow many still do not understand,” Rivera said.

A DoH survey had shown that many poor people did not avail themselves of family planning services even though these were readily accessible, she said.  The town doctor attributed this not to religious beliefs but to misconceptions on the physical effects of family planning methods as well as objections coming from husbands or male partners.

Cera’s eldest child, Delia, and fourth child, Nestor, have seven children each.  Her younger children each have five or less.

Cera said the first 10 years of their marriage was a struggle because of the growing brood. “I tried many ways to earn money, mostly by selling any food I can prepare, while my husband worked in the slaughterhouse and took care of farm animals,” she said.

Cera finished high school, while her husband only completed grade school.  Now retired, Emilio had worked as a partidor, or butcher—the same job now taken by his sons and sons-in-law.

“Being a partidor then, my husband was able to bring home pieces of meat enough for our growing family, and now that is also what our children do.  I think being a partidor is really in our blood,” Cera said.

While the men in the family work at the nearby abattoir, the women are mostly in the food business: tending a small canteen, catering, or preparing rice delicacies and processed meat.

Simple living

Cera used to own a canteen herself but decided to hand it over to one of her daughters. She also taught her girls how to make sweets and delicacies, engage in direct selling, or do manicure so they could augment their husbands’ incomes.

“I raised my children to live simple lives while being able to provide for themselves. I told them that even though they may not get rich, as long as they work hard and provide for their own families, a simple life is enough,” she said.

When family members gathered for a reunion in 2009, most of them stayed outside since not everyone could be accommodated inside the house.

“My husband and I had a pig slaughtered (for the celebration) but it wasn’t enough to feed everyone so we had to cook some more dishes,” Cera recalled

Most of her married children live near their parents’ house.  When they leave home for work, Cera and her husband take care of grandchildren.

Nothing for herself

Cera currently earns a living selling bananas, mangoes and santol—with the earnings almost always going to the care of her grandchildren.

“If you give a peso to one of them, the rest will ask for money, too … So at the end of the day, I barely have anything left for myself,” she said.

But Cera maintained that life was not that hard now.  “When I see (my grandchildren) play, I am happy. When they fight or cry all at the same time and I don’t know what to do, I end up laughing because they are so many,” she said.

With a soft spot for children, Cera had even earned an unofficial role as the village “consultant” when it came to parenting.

When Cera once served as barangay council member, a pregnant woman asked if she could shoulder the bills for her forthcoming childbirth.  In exchange, Cera could keep the baby.

“I’m really surprised why people think I could be easily convinced to adopt their children when I have so many already.  My children also ask me why I always accept them. You see, I am very fond of children,” she said.

Adopted sons

Aside from her 21 children, Cera adopted five more boys.  During the Inquirer interview, however, she could only remember the complete names of three: Nardy Estrada, Roger Ballesteros and Jeffrey de Guzman.

Asked why she agreed to take them all in, Cera said it was probably because of her past experience as a social worker under the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD).  “Those boys were only 6 or 7 years old when I took them in from the DSWD.  Some ran away from home, some were abandoned by their parents.  I got them circumcised, clothed and fed them, and they never left (my care) until they all got married,” she said.

“I only take care of them but I don’t give them [our] family name.  They keep their own surnames.  In fact, one of my daughters married one of my adopted children,” she said.

Cera admitted having difficulty remembering the names and birth years of all her children and grandchildren.

But then, she said, she had made a choice—and that was to raise a full, crowded house, with all its joys and struggles.

HOW THE NEW REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH BILL PROVIDES PROTECTION

WHO DOES SECTION 3 PARAGRAPH 13 OF THE CONSOLIDATED RH BILL PROTECT?

LIMITED RESOURCES

Sec 3 on Guiding Principles of “The Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health and Population and Development Act of 2011” stated at paragraph 13: The limited resources of the country cannot be suffered to, be spread so thinly to service a burgeoning multitude that makes the allocations grossly inadequate and effectively meaningless.

Is it because the rate of increase of number of lives to be sustained, is faster than the rate of increase of amount of resources that could provide sustenance?

I agree that our material resources are finite as all materials in this world are finite. 

Back to thousands of years earlier than 2000 years ago, did the people live in a situation of abundance of material resources for sustenance?  Sustenance for material resources was derived merely from gathering and hunting.  Was that abundance compared to today?  Even during the later period, when agriculture became the technology for material resources sustenance, there was no such mass movements to suppress population growth.  There were those who lived with enough.  But there were those like the rich and powerful kingdoms who conquered other territories of other kingdoms and slaughtered or enslaved the vanquished and looted their resources as a means to sustain the conqueror kingdom.  They lived then, as if resources for them were limited.  From those events, was there actually a shortage of material resources at that time?  Or was it more of fear due to greed?  Was the behavior of people then, towards the share of material resources any different from that of now?  The technology then, was mass murder of the living.

TOMORROW- WHAT YESTERDAY AND TODAY FEAR

Today, the same fear of limited resources is gripping us.  Yet, despite of all the supposedly more advanced technology for material resources sustenance of the world, why is it that not all families can have food available for them?  How is it that today, we can have one family who, aside from owning long chain of supermarkets and large tracks of lands, could very well afford to feed each member of that family of say 12, the quantity equivalent of more than one hundred meals at three times a day if they could accommodate that much in their stomach?  Is this amount, not more than the equivalent of three good meals a day for 70 families with 12 children each?  Is this amount of food not excess?  Yet how is it that today, there are families who could afford to eat that much quantity of food, while there are families of 3 children who could not eat three adequate meals a day?  Is this not greed causing hunger? 

WHAT DOES RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH AND POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2011 DEVELOP?

Some of those who belong to such families who could well afford to be fed more than a hundred meals in one mealtime if their stomach could accommodate that much, have blamed families who could not afford to have three meals a day to be lazy but high in offspring productivity.  Have they not seen family members with 3 children who had to labor 12 hours a day to be able to eat two times a day everyday because that is the only capability they have as a result of the business of this well-fed family members which: control markets; have contractual policies; have oppressive compensation policies; or which have been displacing small retailers from the areas they have established their own giant businesses?  Is this hunger the general result of laziness or too many mouths to feed?  Is not the RPRHPD Act of 2011, promoting greed for blaming high population growth as cause of hunger while ignoring greed as the cause?  Or is it sustaining lust by providing artificial technology to an imbalance of nature which can be corrected by a long and hard working natural behavioral developmental process?

Is the fear that drove the technology for material resources sustenance of many of the powerful people back in the period of more than 2000 years ago, any different from that of the fear that drives the guiding principles in the RPRHPD Act of 2011 today?  Is the technology being pushed not just that of a more subtle technology to block others from opportunities to life so that those who have the capacity to satisfy their greed can have all the opportunities of pursuing it without any hindrance?


CONDOMIZATION OF LIFE

Do we really think that this material world we live in, can be exempted from the universal material process of wear and tear, and from a finite existence?  If we believe in this, then if human population existence in it is extended to infinity, this world may be able to sustain it.

But if we think as we have seen from the universal process, that this material world we live in can not be exempted from a finite existence, then why do we attempt to extend human population existence to infinity?  Moreover, if we extend material world to infinity assuming we are able to, how are we again to take population management into our hands before a situation where there will be more elderly who by that time again have decreased capacity to carry the burden of the world but by them, increased the load to be carried by the young?  Such a burden definitely hampers our life of pleasure.

We are already laying the foundation for a culture of condomization of life reproductive parts or putting in our hands alone, when life of another human being should start.  This is based on our life of pleasure.  What should stop as now from developing towards condomization of life sustaining parts like the nose or mouth, or putting in our hands alone, when life of another human being should end?  This is based on our life of unhampered pleasure.

Is the culture of condomization, the culture of taking life from others so that we may live, the meaning of our life?

Based on scriptures, God our maker taught us to give our life so that others may live.  Based on scriptures, he sent his only Son Jesus Christ to pay with his own life here for the damage of our life which we, in our ignorance, indulged into here in this material world.  If we do not believe in God, this guide to the meaning of our life can only be validated thru experience.  I am not a good person.  But in a number of times in my own experiences, I have seen that having given a little of my life so that others may live have given me more than just a little joy seeing what amount of life, recipients around me have received.

José Miguel García