Estimating abortion rates from contraceptive failure rates via risk compensation: a mathematical model

Please check out our paper entitled in Ateneo Physics News:

Estimating abortion rates from contraceptive failure rates via risk compensation: a mathematical model

Or in Google Plus:

Estimating abortion rates from contraceptive failure rates via risk compensation: a mathematical model

This paper should have been finished last January.  But because of my other writing projects, I postponed the revision to two or three weeks ago.  (So my readers may notice that I don’t reply much to comments or post anything new). I hope this paper would help foster a more sober dialogue on the RH Bill, because both pro- and anti-RH bill groups can use its theoretical framework to prove their statements that the more effective contraceptives would result to less abortions (pro-RH Bill) or more abortions (anti-RH Bill).  Happy Feast of the Annunciation to all.

Here’s the abstract:


In this paper, we propose a set of hypotheses for deriving the abortion rate as a function of the intercourse interval in weeks, the number of weeks since the start of rst intercourse, the number weeks of pregnancy, the number of weeks of breastfeeding, and the contraceptive failure rate. We also propose risk compensation as feedback: the intercourse interval is proportional to the mth power of the contraceptive failure rate. We show that for di erent values of m, the abortion rate may become smaller, bigger, or remain the same compared to the case when no contraceptives are used. Thus, one way to settle the RH Bill debate is to determine the correct value of m derived from accurate data on the reproductive health
parameters of a large sample of the female population. If this data is not available, it is better not to take risk in approving the bill, because there is a possibility of increasing our national abortion rate through the promotion of contraceptives. Instead, it may be better to use alternative methods to manage our population and reduce our abortion rate to zero by promoting chastity before marriage, late marriages, and breastfeeding|and accepting each child conceived as a gift and not as a burden.



Can we craft a reproductive health bill that is truly for reproductive health and faithful to Catholic principles?

I am just thinking that we are being reactionary: we wait for Cong. Lagman to file the Reproductive Health Bill and then we comment on it and gather all arguments against it.  This is like playing black pieces in chess: you wait for white piece to make the first move before deciding to make our own moves.

We are not proactive.  We do not propose our own version of Reproductive Health Bill that truly promotes reproductive health and the Filipino Family while remaining faithful to Catholic principles.  There are many things we can include in our own version of Reproductive health bill:

  1. research funds for the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and treatment of infertility
  2. promotion of natural family planning
  3. banning artificial contraceptives that have side effects to the woman’s health
  4. provide private breastfeeding sections in offices and malls
  5. make divorce difficult

These are some things that pop in my head right now.  If you have other ideas, that would be great.  We can reorganize our statements into different headings and use the original reproductive health bill as template.   Writing house bills is not rocket science.  I think we can do better than some movie stars and sports superstars in the senate and congress.

I shall volunteer to write the draft of the bill if there is no one else, but I would need inputs.  One way to go about this is to go through the original reproductive health bill line by line and write an opposite but positive statement instead of just saying “not” or “don’t”.  For example, instead of sex education in elementary and high school, what do you propose? home making skills like carpentry and tailoring?  We have to replace something by something and not by nothing, for nature abhors the vacuum.

I would be more free at the end of October and write the draft bill for your further comments.  Or we can have a brainstorming session where we can all meet together.  After we have ironed the kinks of the bill, we can send a copy to CBCP to hear the side of the bishops.  Then we approach our lawmakers and look for a sponsor and lobby for the bill.

“Our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens” (Eph 6:12)