What the Parents Welfare Act is and isn’t
Like many of us Filipinos, I loved my parents dearly and unequivocally. I never left them in their old age, nor on their sickbed, and I supported them until they breathed their last.
I did everything I could to hold on to them in the waning years of their lives. Despite the bleak odds implied by their doctors, my siblings and I kept hoping and praying that they would recover and stay a little longer with us.
We would visit my mother at the hospital, then drive to my hometown in Imus, Cavite, to visit my father, also ailing after a prolonged hospital confinement.
In what would be my last visit to my mother, my heart sank as I saw her. Her body was frail, her eyes weary. In agony, she looked at me as if she were pleading to let her go.
I prayed and asked for God’s guidance, as I could not bear seeing her suffer any longer. “If there is absolutely no chance for her condition to improve, then, no matter how painful, I am already willing to let her go.”
As if God had indeed answered my prayer, she passed peacefully that night.
Never had I ever wept like a little boy until the day I first saw my mother in her coffin. At that moment, I knew my Nanay was gone. I can still vividly recall how, in spite of poverty, our parents were good, kindhearted human beings who instilled in me and my siblings the value of integrity. Even amid poverty, we never felt poor or lacking in love.
And for these reasons, I am sure that they are both in Heaven. They are, in fact, the reason why I affirm my faith and belief that there is God.
Having to witness elderly people at the twilight of their years, barely living and in their most fragile moments, is a reality no compassionate soul should neglect. Having to see parents alone, forgotten, and helpless—much more so in what would be their last days—should be a burden too heavy for any conscience to bear.
The proposed Parents Welfare Act, a bill I refiled in the 20th Congress, is not for children like me, nor is it for parents like mine.
It is for the less fortunate elderly parents neglected by their unreasonably ungrateful children, regardless of how much love and care they consistently and selflessly showered them with.
It is for the parents who sacrificed their own time, comfort, and even well-being just to see their children have a life better than theirs, only to be left old and dying.
It is for the parents who are sick and physically incapacitated, struggling to even have enough to eat, yet are heartlessly abandoned by their financially able children, for whom they sacrificed so much.
This bill stands in defense of those parents’ damaged honor: a once noble sacrifice, sense of pride, and unconditional love that were diminished and dishonored due to the neglect and abandonment by their children.
Verily, it is not for children who are abused, neglected, and abandoned, nor will it ever benefit parents who have abused, abandoned, or neglected their children.
It does not tolerate a “culture of dependency” where many fear that their undeserving and scheming parents will siphon their hard-earned money as a retirement fund.
It does not perpetrate the suffering of the “sandwich generation” torn between the burdens of supporting their aging parents and their children.
The bill has safeguards, including exempting provisions for those abused, neglected, and abandoned children, as well as those who are financially incapacitated. It will not facilitate manipulation or exploitation, whether by parents or their children, in any shape or form.
Unfortunately, the noise online—mostly from uninformed or misinformed netizens—has threatened to undermine the legislative intent of the bill. It reduces what should have been a healthy exchange of ideas over the merits of the proposal into absurd assertions, such as that the bill will jail children who do not remit money to their parents.
Be that as it may, I still do appreciate those who articulated their concerns in a constructive manner. Whether we admit it or not, the online discourse has shed light on the evolving nuances of family relationships, likely shaped by modern times. As lawmakers, our role is to study those concerns as we fine-tune the contents of our proposals.
Whatever happens, I am dedicating this piece of legislation, including my commitment to refine it in the committee and defend it in the plenary should it go that far, to all the helplessly struggling parents who have given their all for their children, yet are not as fortunate as they are.
I offer this as well to my dear parents, who taught us that what is right must be kept right, and what is wrong must be set right. This is for our dearly beloved Nanay Ymang and Tatay Tura, who left us for a better place just 16 days apart on Nov. 2 and 18, 2008.
I hope that this provides clarity to many and hits some chords of compassion, because the truth is, not all of us will become parents, but every one of us is someone’s child.
—————-
Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson is serving his fourth term in the Senate where he earned a reputation as a budget watchdog and anti-pork barrel crusader.
