Editor's Note: The CBCP reacted to this story on August 6,
Monday, and published a piece on its CBCP for Life website. The piece is
entitled, "Akerlof contradicted what?"
(UPDATED) MANILA, Philippines - Nobel Prize-winning economist George
Akerlof contradicted the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines'
(CBCP) use of his research in a
public statement opposing the Reproductive Health (RH) Bill.
In the "Science Facts on the RH Bills in Plain Language" article on the
CBCP for Life
website, the CBCP states "Contraceptives bring about the downgrading of
marriage, more extramarital sex, more fatherless children, more single
mothers, according to the studies of Nobel laureate, George Akerlof."
In
a written response, Akerlof said, "In my opinion, giving women, whether
single or married, the right to choose can only increase the dignity of
marriage and its sanctity."
Akerlof's research concluded that America's legalized abortion, as
well as modern contraceptive technology, changed the American
socio-sexual paradigm, as out-of-wedlock childbearing was now perceived
as a woman's choice, which relieved men of any social obligation to
marry the women or support their children.
The research,
conducted within an American cultural framework, is not generalizable to
the culture of the Philippines, where abortion is still illegal and
single mothers are common.
Akerlof had not previously known that
his research, which was on American out-of-wedlock childbearing, was
cited in the Philippines by opponents of the RH Bill.
CBCP reaction
Reacting to comments by Akerlof that his research was taken out of
context in the CBCP for Life website, the CBCP denied claiming that
Akerlof was against the RH bill.
In an article entitled, “Akerlof contradicted what?” posted on its
website on August 6, the CBCP said a “cross-cultural study that could be
done here using his framework” has rich prospects which could go to
waste. And yet, the pro-RH lobby does not mind citing numerous foreign
studies, it pointed out.
Furthermore, “In the US, the societal effects of reproductive
technology shock are clear, as Akerlof himself had found. Yet, Akerlof –
throwing out his reference to cultural differences – turns his back and
thinks it’s good for the Philippines, because ‘contraceptives and
abortion…make family life richer and more rewarding,’” the CBCP said.
"Does Akerlof, who says he’s for the RH bill, mean it’s okay to have
reproductive technology shock in the Philippines?" the CBCP asked.
The rest of the CBCP piece can be accessed
here.
Support for the RH bill
When asked about his
stance on the RH bill, Akerlof wrote: "I support fully, and without
qualification, the bill in the Philippines to promote, without bias, all
effective natural and modern methods of family planning that are
medically safe and legal."
"Contraceptives and abortion, in my
opinion, make family life richer and more rewarding because they reduce
the number of unwanted children, which is bad for the family, and also
bad for the children as well," he added.
Akerlof is the Koshland Professor of Economics at the University of California-Berkeley, and a
2001 winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics.
Akerlof
was moved to comment on the issue after being contacted for comment by a
freelance journalist who noticed the CBCP's citation of his research on
their website.
- Rappler.com
