SC admits it can’t settle ‘conception’ issue
More News from Tetch Torres-Tupas
MANILA, Philippines—Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio cited the high court’s lack of capacity to determine when does conception start which is important in deciding whether Republic Act (RA) No. 10354, also known as the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (RH Law), is constitutional.
Carpio, in questioning lawyer Maria Conception Noche, said that if conception means fertilized ovum, then the law is unconstitutional but if conception means implantation, then the law is constitutional.
“So before conception, you do not have any problem with the use of condom, vasectomy etc.?” Carpio asked to which Noche said yes.
“It is now a question of when does conception occur—from time of union of egg and sperm or upon implantation on the wall of the uterus. So, you are asking member of this court, none of whom are doctors to determine when this [conception] happens,” Carpio said.
Carpio pointed that even medical authorities are not sure when conception happens.
“They (medical experts) are divided. So how can you expect us to settle this,” he asked.
Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.
Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:
c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94