5. In relation to Section 23(a)(l), how will the State be able to locate the programs and services on which the health care service provider has the duty to give information? If the terminology of ' health care service provider ' includes ' private health care service provider', which includes private hospitals and private doctors, is the State duty-bound to consequently provide these providers with information on the programs and services that these providers should give information on? 6. As regards programs, is there a duty on the part of the State to provide a way by which private health care service providers can have access to information on reproductive health care programs as defined in Section 4, paragraph (r)? What is the implication of the fact that the law requires even private parties with the duty to provide information on government programs on the criminal liability of private health care service providers? 7. As regards services, what is the distinction between 'information' and 'services' considering that 'services' in different portions of the statute include providing of information? 8. What are the specific elements of every sub-group of crime in Section 23 and what are the legal bases for the determination of each element? 9. Are there existing provisions in other statutes relevant to the legal definitions found in R.A. No. 10354? 10. Why is there an exemption for the religious or conscientious objector in paragraph (3) of Section 23 and not in paragraphs ( 1) and (2)? What is the distinction between paragraph (3) and paragraphs ( 1) and (2)? 11 . Section 23(a)(3) penalizes refusal to extend quality health care services and information 'on account of the person's marital status, gender, age, religious convictions, personal circumstances, or nature of work.' What if the refusal is not on account of one's marital status, gender, age, religious convictions, personal circumstances, or nature of work, or what if the refuser simply does not state the reason for the refusal? Will there still be a criminal liability under Section 23(a)(3)? 12. Still on Section (23 )(a)(3) on referring a person to another facility or provider, is this the same or analogous to referral of a person to seek second opinion? What is the medical standard for the provision of a second opinion? In referring to another professional or service provider for a second opinion, is it the patient who is not comfortable with the opinion given by the first doctor that triggers the duty or option to refer? How is it different with the situation in Section 23(a)(3) when it is the doctor who is not comfortable about giving an opinion? Is the difference legally material?