While our neighbors progress, the Philippines’ progressive laws sit in limbo.
The country remains a global outlier where 94 percent of countries allow abortion in some form, over 35 countries recognize same-sex marriage, and nearly every country has legalized divorce. While other nations have successfully introduced Comprehensive Sexuality Education and progressive policies that uphold human dignity and individual rights.
Remaining as one of the few countries still debating these reforms, the Philippines faces stiff resistance and a cluttered legislative process. Yet, a more pressing concern is whether the country is prepared to implement these laws fairly and effectively.
Using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, we can see why this matters: laws protecting higher-level rights often lose their impact if many people are struggling to meet basic needs. When these legislations are unstable and progressive, they can feel distant from daily life despite being essential protections for vulnerable groups.
Recent data illustrate these challenges. In September 2025, Social Weather Stations reported that half of Filipino families considered themselves poor—a stark contrast to the Philippine Statistics Authority’s 15.3 percent rate in 2023. The 2026 SWS Involuntary Hunger Report found that 20.1 percent of families experienced hunger due to food insecurity. Job security also took a hit; the unemployment rate climbed to 4.4 percent in January 2026, up from 3.1 percent the year before.
For families worried about food and employment, dealing with legal processes or government services can be difficult. Even if new laws are passed, accessibility often requires financial means. These laws have historically favored the wealthy. For instance, annulment already costs a lot. When the time comes to deliberate on legalizing divorce, the government must provide affordable services so it does not only benefit those with resources.
However, solving this alone does not guarantee transformation. Progressive laws also depend on systems capable of delivering them. If institutions are weak and access is unequal, reforms may exist on paper but not in people’s everyday lives.
On a related note, the Philippines continues to face severe shortages in essential public services. The education sector alone lacks 165,443 classrooms and over 56,000 teachers. Healthcare is under a similar strain. As of January 2026, the country had only 0.5 hospital beds per 1,000 people, a shortage of at least 127,000 nurses, and an average of just five doctors per 10,000 people.
Laws that depend on this fragile structure will only succeed if the systems are well-supported. Without sufficient personnel or infrastructure, access favors those with geographic or structural advantages. For example, the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act remains a “paper promise” for many, as funding gaps prevent its services from reaching isolated communities. It may be progressive on paper, but like many laws, it fails in practice when the supporting systems are missing.
Progressive laws remain essential for protecting dignity and expanding rights, but passing legislation alone is not enough. While enacting these laws is a commendable first step and a recognition of what justice demands; then, it is only the beginning. The government now bears the responsibility of moving beyond enactment to guarantee that laws are implemented fairly and effectively.
In the end, if the government truly wants these laws to reach underdeveloped communities and those living in poverty, the path forward is clear: real progress requires strengthening the basic needs of the people and the institutions responsible for delivering these laws. Only then can progressive legislation fulfill its promise for all.
This article was published in The LaSallian’s March 2026 issue. To read more, visit bit.ly/TLSMar2026.
