"x x x.
The following are the 8 provisions of the law struck down by the SC in full or partially:
1.) Section 7, only insofar as it: (a) requires private health facilities, non-maternity specialty hospitals, and hospitals owned by religious groups to refer patients not in an emergency or life-threatening situation to another health facility which is conveniently accessible (b) provides access to family planning and RH services to minors who have been pregnant or had a miscarriage without a parental consent
The rest of Section 7, however, which provides access to family planning, was upheld by the court, notably this line: "All accredited public health facilities shall provide a full range of modern family planning methods, which shall also include medical consultations, supplies and necessary and reasonable procedures for poor and marginalized couples having infertility issues who desire to have children." (READ: The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012)
2.) Section 23-A-1, which punishes RH providers, regardless of their religious belief, who fail or refuse to dissiminate information regarding RH services and programs
3.) Section 23-A-2-i, which allows a married individual not in a life-threatening case to access RH procedures without the consent of the spouse
4.) Section 23-A-3, insofar as it punishes an RH provider who fails to refer any non-life-threatening case to another RH provider
5.) Section 23-B, insofar as it punishes any public officer who refuses to support RH programs
6.) Section 17, which mandates a 40-hour pro bono service by private and nongovernment RH service providers, including gynecologists and obstetricians, as a prerequisite for PhilHealth accreditation.
7.) Section 3.01-A and J of the RH law Implementing Rules and Regulations, which defines abortifacients as "primarily" inducing abortion instead of simply inducing abortion.
8.) Section 23-A-2-ii, which prohibits RH service providers from refusing to perform legal and medically-safe reproductive health procedures on minors in non-life-threatening situations without parental consent.
These stuck-down provisions do not diminish the law, according to former and incumbent lawmakers who helped craft it. Former Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, the principal author of the RH bill in the 15th Congress, cited 6 "core" provisions that the SC left "untouched." (READ: Struck-down provisions do not diminish RH law)
x x x."
