Believe the following grassroot opinion on ST forum speaks volumes about our healthcare infrastructure (funding support) against niche group, i.e., single mothers.
Taken from the Straits Times. Forum. Monday, 14 September 09. Pg A25
I refer to Dr Ng Liang Wei's letter, "Set up pregnancy fund to curb abortions" (Aug 22).
I am an unwed mother. At one point, when I was struggling to decide whether to keep my baby or abort it, I realised I was not entitled to Baby Bonus, four-month maternity leave, six days of childcare leave and other benefits. In the end, however, I decided to keep the baby and managed to borrow money from friends and relatives.
Last month, I delivered my baby boy and I am so delighted I made the right choice to keep him. But I know my problems will not end here. Indeed, I will need to work doubly hard to support myself and my baby.
I contacted the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports for aid, but its reply was that help is given only to couples with a child, not single parents. Will such a stand not push single mothers-to-be towards abortion?
Surely, single parents need more help than couples. Unwed mothers have to be brave to face single parenthood and shoulder the financial burden alone. I hope the Baby Bonus, leave and other benefits can be based on the child, rather than whether the baby was born to a couple or not.
It would also be helpful if hospital charges for unwed mothers can be 100 per cent deductible under Medisave so they do not have to fork out cash.
Peck Chai Hong (Ms)
Friday, October 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
In response to the letter, I reckoned that no doubt mothers need additional help in terms of finances, it should not be seen as a privilege for single mothers lest the society as a whole see accepts the norm of single parent family.
Perhaps aid could come in through non main-stream sources, i.e. through various public donations so it will not be seen as a government-supported idea of single family
I concur with Ms Peck.
Ms Peck Chai Hong’s Straits Times forum letter “Don’t deny single mothers Baby Bonus and other benefits” (14 Sept) made for a very sobering read.
This unwed mother wrote that she decided to keep her unborn child rather than go for an abortion despite knowing that as a single parent, she would not be eligible for Baby Bonuses, four-month maternity leave, six days of childcare leave, and other benefits. To raise her new baby, she had to resort to borrowing from others.
This is yet another example of our Government leaving citizens in the lurch just when they need help most.
It is unconsciable for our Government to claim to encourage procreation and yet deny single mothers benefits enjoyed by married couples simply because they are not part of a traditional family unit comprising both husband and wife.
Single mothers have taken responsibility for their decisions and actions by choosing to bringing their child into the world and raise it rather than go for an abortion.
Furthermore, they have made monumental sacrifices by attempting to raise their baby on their own without a husband beside them.
The last thing they need is an overly conservative and moralistic Government deciding that only traditional, complete heterosexual family units shall be tolerated, and all other parents are to be denied the right to raise their children free from discrimination.
Single mothers are tax payers as well. It is only right for them to enjoy the same benefits and privileges accorded to all other mothers.
It is high time to stop treating single parents as second class citizens and start recognizing that they are also doing their part for our nation by helping to raise the next generation.
http://sgblogs.com/entry/single-mothers-should-given-baby-bonuses-other-benefits/361385
For help on unwed mom or single parents, you shd channel your efforts towards social welfare or charity organisation.
http://comment.straitstimes.com/showthread.php?t=24568&page=9
I stress again that baby bonus serve as incentive to generate more birth rather than social welfare.
http://comment.straitstimes.com/showthread.php?t=24568&page=9
My point is all yr unfortunes dont warrant for granting baby bonus to unwed mom as it will open floodgate for abuse and at the expense of tax payer.
http://comment.straitstimes.com/showthread.php?t=24568&page=9
Our govt policies have always been pro-family as they seek to encourage procreation to sustain the economy. I feel sorry for Ms. Peck though.. it seems like she's being discriminated. She pay her taxes too just like any citizens. Maybe NGOs like AWARE can provide more help for unwed mums like her?
Perhaps the authorities can consider doing a qualitative study on problems faced by single mothers and access if they are liable for such benefits before deciding should they be allowed of disallowed to such schemes
I have personally seen sinlge parents with genuine need and was not allowed access to such benefits and have to go to other NGOs for help.
Some even have difficulties paying for their own or their child's medical bills and some resorted to theft and other vices.
Like what Jessica said, perhaps we should really ask ourselves if this is the way to go for single mothers or can the authorities so more than these?
To Ruth and Jessica, perhaps taking things into perspective, mayb the government's point is not to encourage single families since there are unspecified social impact overall?
Perhaps it is also a way the authorities allow the market to be regulated through self-help initiatives?
I reckon that baby bonus is one important element in today's society. The children and families need this... So pls don't deny anybody from this benefit!
It seems like most of us commenters are against denying mothers of Baby Bonus and FOR their welfare.
Way to go!
Hi everyone, thank you really for spending time to contribute to our CoP. Just our take: the government only recognises a "father, mother & child" combination as a wholesome family unit, anything less is deviant. And all along, the family unit has been part of our national rhetoric from the years of 'Stop at 2' to current policies. Hence, in this socio-political context, related medical benefits can only and strictly be dished out to families that fit this criterion. We're essentially still conservative.
In a society fraught with rising divorce rates, trends of unmarital sex, cohabitation, 'lifelong partners'... this imposition of the national perception of a 'whole' family unit falls through these gaps (mind you, these are deep gaps) and MND's approach fail to address the issues pertaining to and account for single mums and dads. Call it unfair, unjust and discriminatory, but it's tough to change brainwash a panel of policy makers.
We're beginning to think there are outright shortcomings to the idea and implementation of workfarism in sofar the even distribution of public medical benefits is concerned. Simply, the needy don't get what they need.
Dear bloggers, wd like to add that YOUR SOOOO RIGHT on the definition of family and the beneficiaries of baby bonus.
A certain top man's family is not as "whole" as it is. After all, rumour has it that his wife committed suicide but it stays as a "rumour" in public grapevine
Li Yang, that's quite a sensitive topic but we know what you're talking about.
I emphatise with Ms Peck. It is truly a difficult event of adjustment, filled with uncertainty and fear, an event all of us would not want any parent to face. I can understand the amount pressure, in terms of financial requirements and long term commitments that Ms Peck has chosen in the long run, which is a behavior is highly commendable. It is truly a mother's love which empowers and gives her hope.
Ms Peck, do channel your efforts towards social welfare as what Josh had recommended. While your plight is definitely pain wrought, yet, let's get focussed. Ms Peck, your situation will be classified more as social welfare rather than being dismissed from Baby Bonus. I think you may even need more that what Baby Bonus may offer you, so perhaps, do consider looking through social welfare and charity organisations.
On a bigger scheme of events, allowing Baby Bonus to be utilised as a Blanket Coverage to ALL parents, regardless single or not, may not be as wise as it may seem, though it may seem nice and human. In actual fact, it may foster perceptions that single parenthood is widely accepted (although I know that not all things are within our human control), and causing abuse and misuse, not only of the present, but of a graver event which is if it influences the generations of tomorrow.
Ms Peck, there are social welfare organisations which are created specifically to aid people like yourself. Do hold on strong, and don't give up.
Post a Comment