THE Committee on Ageing Issues presented its five-year master plan to make Singapore elder-friendly in housing, access, healthcare and eldercare services. The recommendations are aimed at helping our baby boomers grow old yet live fun and fulfilling lives.
This calls to mind my grandfather’s life after he retired as a civil service clerk in the 1960s. Not contented with living a sedentary life, he applied for a licence to be a pasar malam hawker selling textiles. On three weekdays and during the weekends, he would go to rural areas to set up his stall. During the day, he took up a course in Tamil studies. My childhood was filled with memories of watching him write beautiful Tamil characters in recycled exercise books. Each morning, he would wake up at 5am and walk from North Bridge Road near the Sultan Mosque to the National Stadium and back.
In 1978, when all street hawkers were relocated to hawker centres, he decided to open a stall, above the Golden Mile hawker centre, selling toiletries to army boys. Noticing that many Thai workers visited his shop, he began to learn Thai at the age of 80. Every year, he would join the New Nation Big Walk and he would be one of the oldest participants to finish the race.
Every month, he would join activities organised by the National Library. They would go on excursions to factories, the airport and other places of interest.
At 86, he announced that he was going to Haadyai. I asked him what he intended to do there, and he deadpanned that he was going there for a Thai massage.
My grandfather did not wait for any government recommendation, handout or programme to lead an active and fulfilling life. He took matters into his own hands and decided that he was not going to wait for death. Instead, he continued to live an active life for another 40 years after he retired at 55.
We, the baby boomers, should reflect on how we should prepare ourselves for the next stage in our journey of life. Although the Government can come up with the best facilities to make Singapore the ideal place to retire in, only by taking individual responsibility can we prepare adequately for our old age.
There are many ways to do so, but I recommend the following activities.
Firstly, we have to keep abreast of current affairs and be aware of what is happening around us. I felt sad to know that some senior citizens who had taken up a course on the Internet were cheated of their life savings in the Nigerian email scam, which is well-known among Internet users.
Secondly, we should not wait for the proverbial apple to fall from the sky before we do anything. Too often, I see senior citizens waiting patiently at home for their children to return before they would do anything. I know many others who seek out activities to join, courses to take and skills to master. Doing so will keep our minds alive, and might even prevent the onset of dementia and other old-age diseases.
Lastly, we should change our mindset towards old age and how we handle ourselves as we push beyond 60. With better nutrition and medical services, we can keep ourselves healthy, and with
proper medical advice we should be able to manage a wide range of activities not normally associated with the elderly.
For example, when my sixth child turns 21 and I hit 63, I plan to travel around the world with a backpack. I am also saving up for a Harley Davidson and hope that I will be able to use it for another 15 to 20 years after I retire.
I also plan to continue studying, and make sure that I remain attractive for my husband. (I have learnt from some older ladies that an active sex life is the best way to keep our bodies in prime condition.) We baby boomers must grow up and take responsibility for our lives. While welcoming the active role that the Government has taken in looking after the ageing population, we have to take some steps of our own to ensure that we do not revert to our infancy.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 13th March 2006.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
MAKING THE LAST LEG OF LIFE GOLDEN
RECENTLY, I met an octogenarian who was placed in a home by his children. He has lived a rich, varied life. He has an independent spirit and up until now, has managed to live alone and look after himself.
It must have been a painful decision for his children to place him in a home. It could be that none of them are free to care for him all the time as they have demanding careers. They could have judged that employing a maid was not an option as she would not be able to give the constant, professional medical care a nursing home provides.
I believed this must have been explained to him — but he still feels hurt and abandoned, especially when he feels his freedom has been taken from him. He shared with me that all his basic needs — food, laundry and lodging — are fulfilled. Yet, there was a tear in his eye when he told me how he could not go where he wants.
He shed another tear when he said he wished he were not a burden to his children and that he could die soon.
As Singapore’s population continues to age, we have to seek new ways to make senior citizens in our midst feel wanted, useful and functional.
I am not referring to the youthful grandmother of 65 who can do the cha-cha and line dancing seven days a week. Nor the grandfather who has travelled around the world for the fifth time in his 70s.
I am specifically referring to those who are unwell and need constant care. There are those who are bedridden and cannot perform basic daily activities such as eating, bathing, going to the bathroom and walking.
On the other hand, there are those who are in relatively good health and have a sound state of mind, but nonetheless need constant care.
In our society, we do not openly speak nor examine the issue of death. Many see it as a taboo or bad luck to even talk about it. Only when our parents or loved ones are stricken with a fatal disease is the issue thrust upon us.
There are those of us who fear death and would not face it squarely, even on our deathbed. We struggle against the inevitable and die an agonising death.
And then there are those who welcome death with open arms and are prepared for all eventualities. They usually encounter a peaceful death and it can be an inspiring and uplifting experience for the family members.
My friend shared with me this story that could shed some light on how we should handle life towards its end.
She has a friend who was stricken with cancer and was given six months to live. Her pastor encouraged her to recall all the people from her past whom she could not forgive, and he drove her around to make peace with them.
Towards the end of her journey, she experienced a serenity that only such a decision could bring about.
Perhaps, society as a whole should approach death in a more proactive way. Different religions have different ways of explaining what happens to us when we die. Some of us try to reassure ourselves with the belief that the afterlife is very similar to the present life.
Others focus on accountability in the afterlife, in order to maintain discipline and morality in this life. Yet, others see death as a journey returning to our eternal home.
Whichever approach we take, we must find the courage to bring up this subject in a gentle yet reassuring way with those on the last leg of their journey.
Instead of clinging to past glory and memory, they could be redirected to look forward to the afterlife. In this way, they would not be made to feel useless and a burden to a loved one.
I know this is easier said than done. I am encountering this quandary as my parents
are in their 70s. While in my eyes, they are forever my parents who are strong, healthy and
energetic, I have to face the difficult fact that they are now dependent on us, their children, to look after them. I will have to continue struggling to find ways to make this last leg of their life a meaningful one.
This article firwst appeared in TODAY on 18th May 2006.
It must have been a painful decision for his children to place him in a home. It could be that none of them are free to care for him all the time as they have demanding careers. They could have judged that employing a maid was not an option as she would not be able to give the constant, professional medical care a nursing home provides.
I believed this must have been explained to him — but he still feels hurt and abandoned, especially when he feels his freedom has been taken from him. He shared with me that all his basic needs — food, laundry and lodging — are fulfilled. Yet, there was a tear in his eye when he told me how he could not go where he wants.
He shed another tear when he said he wished he were not a burden to his children and that he could die soon.
As Singapore’s population continues to age, we have to seek new ways to make senior citizens in our midst feel wanted, useful and functional.
I am not referring to the youthful grandmother of 65 who can do the cha-cha and line dancing seven days a week. Nor the grandfather who has travelled around the world for the fifth time in his 70s.
I am specifically referring to those who are unwell and need constant care. There are those who are bedridden and cannot perform basic daily activities such as eating, bathing, going to the bathroom and walking.
On the other hand, there are those who are in relatively good health and have a sound state of mind, but nonetheless need constant care.
In our society, we do not openly speak nor examine the issue of death. Many see it as a taboo or bad luck to even talk about it. Only when our parents or loved ones are stricken with a fatal disease is the issue thrust upon us.
There are those of us who fear death and would not face it squarely, even on our deathbed. We struggle against the inevitable and die an agonising death.
And then there are those who welcome death with open arms and are prepared for all eventualities. They usually encounter a peaceful death and it can be an inspiring and uplifting experience for the family members.
My friend shared with me this story that could shed some light on how we should handle life towards its end.
She has a friend who was stricken with cancer and was given six months to live. Her pastor encouraged her to recall all the people from her past whom she could not forgive, and he drove her around to make peace with them.
Towards the end of her journey, she experienced a serenity that only such a decision could bring about.
Perhaps, society as a whole should approach death in a more proactive way. Different religions have different ways of explaining what happens to us when we die. Some of us try to reassure ourselves with the belief that the afterlife is very similar to the present life.
Others focus on accountability in the afterlife, in order to maintain discipline and morality in this life. Yet, others see death as a journey returning to our eternal home.
Whichever approach we take, we must find the courage to bring up this subject in a gentle yet reassuring way with those on the last leg of their journey.
Instead of clinging to past glory and memory, they could be redirected to look forward to the afterlife. In this way, they would not be made to feel useless and a burden to a loved one.
I know this is easier said than done. I am encountering this quandary as my parents
are in their 70s. While in my eyes, they are forever my parents who are strong, healthy and
energetic, I have to face the difficult fact that they are now dependent on us, their children, to look after them. I will have to continue struggling to find ways to make this last leg of their life a meaningful one.
This article firwst appeared in TODAY on 18th May 2006.
BRAVE, SICK OR JUST SLACK?
Last Tuesday, I had to prepare a lecture to be presented at 1.30pm. As usual, I had to skip lunch, after having just a cup of tea and some biscuits for breakfast. After the lecture, I had to attend a workshop and by the time I had my lunch, it was 4pm.
I felt my stomach cramping but I dismissed it as stress and continued to work till 6pm to meet a deadline. On Wednesday, the stomach cramp
continued but I pressed on to make a presentation to the parents at 5pm. This was not an exceptional day in school for me — it was a typical day.
Often, teachers who are sick will still turn up for work, either to teach or to print worksheets for the students. It was the same for me. I decided to
delay going to the doctor as I was hoping the pain would go away, as with previous occasions.
My husband was concerned when the pain did not go away. It cannot be mere food poisoning, he thought, as I did not have the usual symptoms of vomiting, nausea or diarrhoea.
A visit to the A&E department at 2am confirmed his worst suspicions — I had acute appendicitis. My appendix was removed by the evening. While recuperating in the hospital, I had time to reflect.
Many hardworking Singaporeans steer clear of taking medical certificates (MC), which give them a legitimate reason to stay at home to recuperate from an illness.
There are several reasons why we continue this common practice. Maybe we want to be team players and not add on to the workload of our colleagues. Maybe we are aiming for the Sports for Life award — in which you receive a monetary reward if you complete a walk or a jog within a stipulated time and have less than five days’ worth of MCs. Maybe our department head is aiming for a Healthy Lifestyle award and has set a target of reducing the number of MCs that each employee takes per year. Maybe our performance bonus is linked to the number of MCs we take. Maybe it is in our Asian culture not to visit the doctor just for minor ailments as we want to impress our boss with our hardworking attitude.
Whatever the reason, it is a good time for us to reflect on this issue. When is an appropriate time to take an MC?
Of course, most of us have colleagues who would take MCs at the drop of a hat. In fact, I am sure the number of MCs taken increases every four years in the month of June because of the World Cup.
Another popular time to take an MC is during school examinations, when parents need to give their children extra coaching. And don’t forget long weekends. With May Day falling on a Monday, many human resource departments will expect this Friday to be MC Day.
So on the one hand, we have hardworking Singaporeans who pride themselves in not taking MCs even when they are really ill. And on the other hand, we have a group of irresponsible workers who misuse and abuse the MC system.
As we progress towards a more developed society, I hope we learn to strike a balance. Hopefully, those of us who still turn up at work — even when we are entitled to rest — will realise the folly of sacrificing our health for the sake of being brave.
And others who are guilty of taking MC unnecessary will realise that if they don’t practice discipline, their workplace may counter their ways with more stringent schemes to minimise the number of MCs taken.
That would certainly affect the truly sick staff, and create an atmosphere of distrust in the workplace that we can ill afford to have.
I felt my stomach cramping but I dismissed it as stress and continued to work till 6pm to meet a deadline. On Wednesday, the stomach cramp
continued but I pressed on to make a presentation to the parents at 5pm. This was not an exceptional day in school for me — it was a typical day.
Often, teachers who are sick will still turn up for work, either to teach or to print worksheets for the students. It was the same for me. I decided to
delay going to the doctor as I was hoping the pain would go away, as with previous occasions.
My husband was concerned when the pain did not go away. It cannot be mere food poisoning, he thought, as I did not have the usual symptoms of vomiting, nausea or diarrhoea.
A visit to the A&E department at 2am confirmed his worst suspicions — I had acute appendicitis. My appendix was removed by the evening. While recuperating in the hospital, I had time to reflect.
Many hardworking Singaporeans steer clear of taking medical certificates (MC), which give them a legitimate reason to stay at home to recuperate from an illness.
There are several reasons why we continue this common practice. Maybe we want to be team players and not add on to the workload of our colleagues. Maybe we are aiming for the Sports for Life award — in which you receive a monetary reward if you complete a walk or a jog within a stipulated time and have less than five days’ worth of MCs. Maybe our department head is aiming for a Healthy Lifestyle award and has set a target of reducing the number of MCs that each employee takes per year. Maybe our performance bonus is linked to the number of MCs we take. Maybe it is in our Asian culture not to visit the doctor just for minor ailments as we want to impress our boss with our hardworking attitude.
Whatever the reason, it is a good time for us to reflect on this issue. When is an appropriate time to take an MC?
Of course, most of us have colleagues who would take MCs at the drop of a hat. In fact, I am sure the number of MCs taken increases every four years in the month of June because of the World Cup.
Another popular time to take an MC is during school examinations, when parents need to give their children extra coaching. And don’t forget long weekends. With May Day falling on a Monday, many human resource departments will expect this Friday to be MC Day.
So on the one hand, we have hardworking Singaporeans who pride themselves in not taking MCs even when they are really ill. And on the other hand, we have a group of irresponsible workers who misuse and abuse the MC system.
As we progress towards a more developed society, I hope we learn to strike a balance. Hopefully, those of us who still turn up at work — even when we are entitled to rest — will realise the folly of sacrificing our health for the sake of being brave.
And others who are guilty of taking MC unnecessary will realise that if they don’t practice discipline, their workplace may counter their ways with more stringent schemes to minimise the number of MCs taken.
That would certainly affect the truly sick staff, and create an atmosphere of distrust in the workplace that we can ill afford to have.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 25th April 2006.
WITHOUT GLIZT OR REWARDS, A CHANGE TO SAVE LIFE
My friend June has leukaemia. She is undergoing chemotherapy, which not only kills the cancerous cells but also the white blood cells (WBC), haemoglobin (HB) and platelets (PLT). When her WBC, HB and PLT counts drop below the normal range, she needs a blood transfusion.
Last weekend, however, she and others in her ward could not get transfusions because the stock in the blood bank was at a critical low.
Every year around Lunar New Year, the number of blood donations drop. This year, coupled with the bad weather, donations fell to a dangerously low level. At one point, there was only enough blood in the bank to last 24 hours — when the normal
stock is for 5 days.
An urgent mass media appeal for donations has reaped some results. On Monday, Jane and other cancer patients received their transfusions. But it is still not enough.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Health Sciences Authority said 500 units of blood were needed over the next five days to ensure there was enough stock in view of the long Lunar
New Year holiday.
Many people do not find blood donation easy or convenient. You do not get entertained with songs or death-defying acts before you donate. You do not get a chance to win a car or condominium.
In fact, you have to incur transport costs to get to the blood bank. You have to spend an hour waiting for the blood to drip into the bag. And you have to overcome the fear of having a needle poked into you.
I cannot come up with a convincing pitch about why we should all give blood. If you do, at most you will be given some refreshment afterward. I cannot even show you pictures of patients appealing for blood.
All I can do is to present you with an opportunity to do something purely for charitable reasons. Writing a cheque for charity is easy, as is dialling a 1900 number. Donating blood demands that you give your all, and then some.
There comes a time in everyone’s life when he is challenged to be more than he has been, an unsung hero. Let us show that the spirit of charity is not dead; that some are willing to suffer some inconvenience and discomfort so that others may live.
While we are rushing to stock up on New Year goodies, spring clean and prepare the reunion dinner, spare a thought for those who aren’t able to do so. What would happen if none of us cared enough to spare an hour to do something worthwhile?
Perhaps the blood bank should remain open during the Lunar New Year holiday so that we can donate blood — it would be the best hongbao anyone could give.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 27th January 2006
Last weekend, however, she and others in her ward could not get transfusions because the stock in the blood bank was at a critical low.
Every year around Lunar New Year, the number of blood donations drop. This year, coupled with the bad weather, donations fell to a dangerously low level. At one point, there was only enough blood in the bank to last 24 hours — when the normal
stock is for 5 days.
An urgent mass media appeal for donations has reaped some results. On Monday, Jane and other cancer patients received their transfusions. But it is still not enough.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Health Sciences Authority said 500 units of blood were needed over the next five days to ensure there was enough stock in view of the long Lunar
New Year holiday.
Many people do not find blood donation easy or convenient. You do not get entertained with songs or death-defying acts before you donate. You do not get a chance to win a car or condominium.
In fact, you have to incur transport costs to get to the blood bank. You have to spend an hour waiting for the blood to drip into the bag. And you have to overcome the fear of having a needle poked into you.
I cannot come up with a convincing pitch about why we should all give blood. If you do, at most you will be given some refreshment afterward. I cannot even show you pictures of patients appealing for blood.
All I can do is to present you with an opportunity to do something purely for charitable reasons. Writing a cheque for charity is easy, as is dialling a 1900 number. Donating blood demands that you give your all, and then some.
There comes a time in everyone’s life when he is challenged to be more than he has been, an unsung hero. Let us show that the spirit of charity is not dead; that some are willing to suffer some inconvenience and discomfort so that others may live.
While we are rushing to stock up on New Year goodies, spring clean and prepare the reunion dinner, spare a thought for those who aren’t able to do so. What would happen if none of us cared enough to spare an hour to do something worthwhile?
Perhaps the blood bank should remain open during the Lunar New Year holiday so that we can donate blood — it would be the best hongbao anyone could give.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 27th January 2006
STORIES THAT ARE WAITING TO BE TOLD
HERE is an interesting question you can ask someone to determine his or her age: Who is Goh Keng Swee? Is he:
a) Goh Chok Tong’s grandfather;
b) one of the founding fathers of Singapore;
c) once the Minister of Defence and Education;
d) the founder of the Singapore Symphony Orchestra?
Apart from option a, he was all of the above.
Here is another question. Who wrote the Singapore Pledge, recited by school children every morning?
Is it:
a) S Rajaratnam;
b) C V Devan Nair;
c) Ahmad Ibrahim;
d) Lee Khoon Choy?
With his death on Wednesday, former Second Deputy Prime Minister S Rajaratnam is seeing reams of newsprint devoted to his contributions, including his legacy of the National Pledge. But what of those other movers and shakers of our history? We probably know more about the life of pop idol Taufik Batisah, or the romance between Fann Wong and Christopher Lee, than of the painful struggles and sacrifices these people went through to help Singapore survive.
Only if you are a history undergraduate or buff would you spare a thought for these great and courageous men. Just as we appreciate our parents only after they are gone, we pour accolades on these historical figures only after they die. Perhaps Singapore’s history is too short for us to devote entire documentaries to our founding fathers. People who played active roles in the 1950s and 1960s are still alive and any attempt to put events into plays, dramas and books might open up a can of worms, or even a closet of skeletons.
And so, we wait patiently for every one of them to die before we take one or two days (a week if you happen to be that beloved by the people of Singapore) to recall their deeds.After a few months, will they once again fade from our collective memory?
I know more about former United States President Abraham Lincoln and his four-score-and-sevenyears speech than any of the speeches our founding fathers made. This is because I often catch glimpses of American children putting up plays about their founding fathers, dressed up as Lincoln, delivering the Gettysburg Address.
What can we do before all our founding fathers pass on to the great beyond? Instead of repeating ad infinitum the tired few textbook stories of the founding of Singapore, we should make a concerted effort to nurture a pool of storytellers to retell the story of Singapore. A well-trained storyteller will be able to bring the stories of our founding fathers alive. Remember the storyteller of old who use to set up his stall at the Singapore River? He could capture the attention of his listeners for 45 minutes each night. Some might argue that in this age of MTV and short attention spans, no one would take the risk of embarking on this type of project.
Well, in 2003, a little-known television series dispelled many of the assumptions that the public has about local history programmes. It did not take an entirely serious tone; it was nostalgic yet entertaining. It was called Site and Sound with Julian Davison. Taking a light-hearted look at the historical transformation of Singapore as seen through the eyes of Englishman Julian Davison, the DVD version provided hours of entertainment for my children.
My five and six-year-olds formed lasting impressions about Singapore’s development while the teenagers got to see how their parents and grandparents lived in the 1950s and 1960s. History need not be just about dates, details and people told in an uninteresting manner, or only in eulogy. It can be brought to life by an expert storyteller. Perhaps the Media Development Authority can commission a follow-up television series, this time focusing on our founding fathers Were this already done, I am sure my children would not have had to ask me who Mr Rajaratnam was when we heard about his death.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 24th February 2006
a) Goh Chok Tong’s grandfather;
b) one of the founding fathers of Singapore;
c) once the Minister of Defence and Education;
d) the founder of the Singapore Symphony Orchestra?
Apart from option a, he was all of the above.
Here is another question. Who wrote the Singapore Pledge, recited by school children every morning?
Is it:
a) S Rajaratnam;
b) C V Devan Nair;
c) Ahmad Ibrahim;
d) Lee Khoon Choy?
With his death on Wednesday, former Second Deputy Prime Minister S Rajaratnam is seeing reams of newsprint devoted to his contributions, including his legacy of the National Pledge. But what of those other movers and shakers of our history? We probably know more about the life of pop idol Taufik Batisah, or the romance between Fann Wong and Christopher Lee, than of the painful struggles and sacrifices these people went through to help Singapore survive.
Only if you are a history undergraduate or buff would you spare a thought for these great and courageous men. Just as we appreciate our parents only after they are gone, we pour accolades on these historical figures only after they die. Perhaps Singapore’s history is too short for us to devote entire documentaries to our founding fathers. People who played active roles in the 1950s and 1960s are still alive and any attempt to put events into plays, dramas and books might open up a can of worms, or even a closet of skeletons.
And so, we wait patiently for every one of them to die before we take one or two days (a week if you happen to be that beloved by the people of Singapore) to recall their deeds.After a few months, will they once again fade from our collective memory?
I know more about former United States President Abraham Lincoln and his four-score-and-sevenyears speech than any of the speeches our founding fathers made. This is because I often catch glimpses of American children putting up plays about their founding fathers, dressed up as Lincoln, delivering the Gettysburg Address.
What can we do before all our founding fathers pass on to the great beyond? Instead of repeating ad infinitum the tired few textbook stories of the founding of Singapore, we should make a concerted effort to nurture a pool of storytellers to retell the story of Singapore. A well-trained storyteller will be able to bring the stories of our founding fathers alive. Remember the storyteller of old who use to set up his stall at the Singapore River? He could capture the attention of his listeners for 45 minutes each night. Some might argue that in this age of MTV and short attention spans, no one would take the risk of embarking on this type of project.
Well, in 2003, a little-known television series dispelled many of the assumptions that the public has about local history programmes. It did not take an entirely serious tone; it was nostalgic yet entertaining. It was called Site and Sound with Julian Davison. Taking a light-hearted look at the historical transformation of Singapore as seen through the eyes of Englishman Julian Davison, the DVD version provided hours of entertainment for my children.
My five and six-year-olds formed lasting impressions about Singapore’s development while the teenagers got to see how their parents and grandparents lived in the 1950s and 1960s. History need not be just about dates, details and people told in an uninteresting manner, or only in eulogy. It can be brought to life by an expert storyteller. Perhaps the Media Development Authority can commission a follow-up television series, this time focusing on our founding fathers Were this already done, I am sure my children would not have had to ask me who Mr Rajaratnam was when we heard about his death.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 24th February 2006
Monday, June 26, 2006
OBSOLETE ADVICE AND TODAY'S CHILDREN
RECENTLY my husband and I attended a sharing session for parents at Republic Polytechnic (RP).
Like many of the parents there, we were eager to know how our child was doing, having enrolled at RP for a three-year course.
It was an enlightening session as many parents were shocked initially when they discovered that no homework was given, no lectures and tutorials were conducted and students were not required to buy any textbooks.
The most outrageous news was that students do not have to take any three-hour examination at the end of the year to assess whether they have acquired the required knowledge.
In fact, one parent was arguing passionately that RP should bring back the examination, give homework to the students and provide a textbook list.
He argued that he was from the old school and would feel more reassured if students are educated and assessed in the old manner.
While listening to that parent, a thought came to my mind. Many parents provide advice on education to their children based on the ideas, prejudices and opinions they have acquired or formed when they were students. As such, when they encounter new and more progressive ways, they find it hard to accept it although these may benefit their children.
For example, many parents still view the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) as a successor of the Vocational and Industrial Training Board (VITB), without realising that the ITE has been upgraded and restructured to become a post-secondary institution.
They still feel that ITE is a dumping ground, not realising that ITE graduates are much sought after by employers.
(In fact, 88 per cent of ITE graduates found employment within three months last year when Singapore was in a recession. And the average monthly salary for fresh ITE graduate ranged from $1,100 to $1,400 a month.)
While the ITE has worked hard to brand itself as a world class institution, many parents do not seem to celebrate when their children are streamed into the ITE.
As an educator in a secondary school, I have to take my Secondary 4 students to various post-secondary institutions to help them make an informed choice for their post-secondary education. The institutions I have visited range from ITEs to polytechnics and junior colleges.
As a parent, I am glad my child has the opportunity to study in RP. I like the Problem Based Learning (PBL) system where students are given one problem a day to solve, with five other students.
It allows the students to research a topic in-depth. It promotes critical and creative thinking as they have to sieve through information from various sources.
Moreover, in this knowledge-based economy, PBL trains students to use the knowledge instead of regurgitating it in an examination. My son has to do a reflective journey every night, thinking back on what he has learnt in the day and examining additional issues that he might have missed.
Most important of all, he is assessed every day and a series of tests is given regularly to keep him on his toes.
I believe that PBL will train my son to be a lifelong learner and the skills he acquires will help him do well in the knowledge-based economy.
Instead of having lectures where students dream, SMS or sleep, he has to work with his team-mates to source for answers to problems posed. The process of discovery ensures the knowledge gained will stay with him.
As a parent, I often advise my son based on my own experience when young. While this has its merits, I am also aware that society has changed so much that there is a pressing need for me to keep up with these changes. If not, I may well end up giving him obsolete advice, and this would be a great disservice to him.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 1st January 2006.
Like many of the parents there, we were eager to know how our child was doing, having enrolled at RP for a three-year course.
It was an enlightening session as many parents were shocked initially when they discovered that no homework was given, no lectures and tutorials were conducted and students were not required to buy any textbooks.
The most outrageous news was that students do not have to take any three-hour examination at the end of the year to assess whether they have acquired the required knowledge.
In fact, one parent was arguing passionately that RP should bring back the examination, give homework to the students and provide a textbook list.
He argued that he was from the old school and would feel more reassured if students are educated and assessed in the old manner.
While listening to that parent, a thought came to my mind. Many parents provide advice on education to their children based on the ideas, prejudices and opinions they have acquired or formed when they were students. As such, when they encounter new and more progressive ways, they find it hard to accept it although these may benefit their children.
For example, many parents still view the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) as a successor of the Vocational and Industrial Training Board (VITB), without realising that the ITE has been upgraded and restructured to become a post-secondary institution.
They still feel that ITE is a dumping ground, not realising that ITE graduates are much sought after by employers.
(In fact, 88 per cent of ITE graduates found employment within three months last year when Singapore was in a recession. And the average monthly salary for fresh ITE graduate ranged from $1,100 to $1,400 a month.)
While the ITE has worked hard to brand itself as a world class institution, many parents do not seem to celebrate when their children are streamed into the ITE.
As an educator in a secondary school, I have to take my Secondary 4 students to various post-secondary institutions to help them make an informed choice for their post-secondary education. The institutions I have visited range from ITEs to polytechnics and junior colleges.
As a parent, I am glad my child has the opportunity to study in RP. I like the Problem Based Learning (PBL) system where students are given one problem a day to solve, with five other students.
It allows the students to research a topic in-depth. It promotes critical and creative thinking as they have to sieve through information from various sources.
Moreover, in this knowledge-based economy, PBL trains students to use the knowledge instead of regurgitating it in an examination. My son has to do a reflective journey every night, thinking back on what he has learnt in the day and examining additional issues that he might have missed.
Most important of all, he is assessed every day and a series of tests is given regularly to keep him on his toes.
I believe that PBL will train my son to be a lifelong learner and the skills he acquires will help him do well in the knowledge-based economy.
Instead of having lectures where students dream, SMS or sleep, he has to work with his team-mates to source for answers to problems posed. The process of discovery ensures the knowledge gained will stay with him.
As a parent, I often advise my son based on my own experience when young. While this has its merits, I am also aware that society has changed so much that there is a pressing need for me to keep up with these changes. If not, I may well end up giving him obsolete advice, and this would be a great disservice to him.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 1st January 2006.
THAT DA VINCI EFFECT
My three teenagers all wanted to see the movie Da Vinci Code. It seems as if because so much controversy has been stirred up with this movie that it arouse the curiosity of my teenagers. My husband and I discussed the pro and con of allowing them to see the movie and reading the book. Fortunately or unfortunately because of the NC 16 classification only my eldest son is given the opportunity to watch this movie. My two daughters would have to settle with reading the book.
Yes as parents we were worried about the effect this wok of fiction would have on our teenagers’ faith. We wanted to put a blanket ban on the issue and pontificate that the movie and the book should not be touched with a ten foot pole.
But knowing the psychological of teenagers, the minute something is proclaimed as forbidden fruit, it would be seen as the most desirable item in their radar.
We decided to engage them with philosophical, metaphysical and sociological discussion of the Da Vinci Code. For example, we have a great time discussing the following issues:
What is the difference between fact, fiction and faith? Has religion become entertainment for the masses? What are the possible effects that they would have after they have read the book or view the movie?
Of great interest are the different responses that people all over the world for the movie. Some demand that the movie be ban while others view it as just entertainment.
But why is there this great concern for this movie or the book?
Maybe there is a unconsciousness acknowledgement that the movie, the book or any other form of entertainment from Hollywood or America has a greater power over people any preacher or pastor can have over their flock.
Perhaps there is a concern that the book or the movie would have the power to derail those whose faith is not strong.
Conceivably some felt insulted because of the preposterous suggestion that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and produced a child as this attacked the fundamental axiom that we have about Jesus Christ.
Of course we are afraid of the Da Vinci effect. We are worried that by being entertained subconsciously their belief and faith would be affected. But this Da Vinci effect is not confined to just the movie Da Vinci Code. Every movie, book, computer games, songs and concert that we encountered have the possibility to affect our belief, our attitude and our value system. It just so that this particular movie happens to touch on an issue that illustrates this effect clearly.
Perhaps now is a good time for us parents to examine closely the types of entertainment that is being offered for our children and teenagers to enjoy. For example in the mini series Six Feet Under, the theme on homosexuality is openly discussed. In Sex and the City, four women openly and happily discuss their sex life. In Desperate Housewife, the secrete and truth of four housewives are unfolded weekly for us to gawk at.
In the world of computer games where hero are made based on the number of people one can kill or in the world of music where pre-marital sex are promoted in the same stanza with love and honour, how do we protect our children from influence and values that we do not believe or subscribe to?
Do we try our best to ban all entertainment that we find offensive and do not support our value system? Or do we equip our children with the skills and ability to sieve the truth from the half-truth and the plain outright lie? Can we then trust our children to make the correct choice on the type of entertainment that they should engage in?
I believe that in order for our children to grow up to become functional adults, they must be given freedom to make informed choice. We must provide our children with as much information about an issue as possible. Based on the information given and if our children have been trained rigorously in logical thinking, I believe that they will be able to make the appropriate choice.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 23rd May 2006.
Yes as parents we were worried about the effect this wok of fiction would have on our teenagers’ faith. We wanted to put a blanket ban on the issue and pontificate that the movie and the book should not be touched with a ten foot pole.
But knowing the psychological of teenagers, the minute something is proclaimed as forbidden fruit, it would be seen as the most desirable item in their radar.
We decided to engage them with philosophical, metaphysical and sociological discussion of the Da Vinci Code. For example, we have a great time discussing the following issues:
What is the difference between fact, fiction and faith? Has religion become entertainment for the masses? What are the possible effects that they would have after they have read the book or view the movie?
Of great interest are the different responses that people all over the world for the movie. Some demand that the movie be ban while others view it as just entertainment.
But why is there this great concern for this movie or the book?
Maybe there is a unconsciousness acknowledgement that the movie, the book or any other form of entertainment from Hollywood or America has a greater power over people any preacher or pastor can have over their flock.
Perhaps there is a concern that the book or the movie would have the power to derail those whose faith is not strong.
Conceivably some felt insulted because of the preposterous suggestion that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and produced a child as this attacked the fundamental axiom that we have about Jesus Christ.
Of course we are afraid of the Da Vinci effect. We are worried that by being entertained subconsciously their belief and faith would be affected. But this Da Vinci effect is not confined to just the movie Da Vinci Code. Every movie, book, computer games, songs and concert that we encountered have the possibility to affect our belief, our attitude and our value system. It just so that this particular movie happens to touch on an issue that illustrates this effect clearly.
Perhaps now is a good time for us parents to examine closely the types of entertainment that is being offered for our children and teenagers to enjoy. For example in the mini series Six Feet Under, the theme on homosexuality is openly discussed. In Sex and the City, four women openly and happily discuss their sex life. In Desperate Housewife, the secrete and truth of four housewives are unfolded weekly for us to gawk at.
In the world of computer games where hero are made based on the number of people one can kill or in the world of music where pre-marital sex are promoted in the same stanza with love and honour, how do we protect our children from influence and values that we do not believe or subscribe to?
Do we try our best to ban all entertainment that we find offensive and do not support our value system? Or do we equip our children with the skills and ability to sieve the truth from the half-truth and the plain outright lie? Can we then trust our children to make the correct choice on the type of entertainment that they should engage in?
I believe that in order for our children to grow up to become functional adults, they must be given freedom to make informed choice. We must provide our children with as much information about an issue as possible. Based on the information given and if our children have been trained rigorously in logical thinking, I believe that they will be able to make the appropriate choice.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 23rd May 2006.
TAKE THAT HALF STEP TOWARDS OPENESS
AUTHOR Catherine Lim and political scientist Ho Khai Leong said at the Singapore Perspectives Conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies that the Government has taken only "half steps" towards a more open society.
I would like to suggest that the other "half steps" be taken by Singaporeans, so that we need not debate yet again whether we really are an open society. As Ms Lim observes, authentic expression is too important a need to be intimidated into permanent silence.
But before we begin to engage in "authentic expression", I suggest we consider the following code of conduct:
First, let's develop the habit of being impeccable with our words. Words are a powerful double-edged sword: They can cut a person down to size or inflate a person's ego. The wrong choice of words spoken in the heat of the moment can cause personal embarrassment or bring about momentous changes.
If we choose our words with care when expressing opinions or engaging in discussion or debate, the chances of being misunderstood or sued for defamation would be minimised.
Second, don't take anything personally. When someone challenges our views or opinions, we must not feel they are attacking us.
Conversely, when we challenge others on issues, we must not engage in name-calling or character assassination.
Last year, a blogger was charged in court for attacking a specific ethnic group because of its view on dogs. He would not have found himself in the soup if he had confined his discussion to how to handle dogs in public.
Third, never make assumptions. Often, when we are engaged in heated debate, we do not have the time to reflect on our underlying assumptions about an issue.
We must have the courage to inquire each time we encounter doubt. We must develop the culture of asking tough, uncomfortable questions.
I believe this process has begun with the NKF saga. Already, we are engaging in active debate about stunts performed by artistes to raise funds for charity. We are beginning to examine if this is the proper and effective way.
I attended a course conducted by a philosopher, Mr Lau Kwong Fook, who came up with the acronym SEX to sum up the above code of conduct. "X" stands for the unknown answer we are searching for, or the conclusion to the argument we are constructing. "S" reminds us to Separate the argument from the person, and "E" reminds us to Examine all angles of an argument.
At the unique Philosophy Cafe conducted by Mr Lau, people from all walks of life like myself meet every third Wednesday of the month and engage in philosophical discussion according to this code of conduct.
According to him, a philosopher is anyone who wants to rationally and rigorously pursue the truth.
He hosts this cafe because he has made it his life's purpose to "create gardens of rational thought in the jungle of irrationality that surrounds us".
With more Singaporeans taking this half step, perhaps Singapore could make a long stride towards being considered an open society.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 14th January 2006.
I would like to suggest that the other "half steps" be taken by Singaporeans, so that we need not debate yet again whether we really are an open society. As Ms Lim observes, authentic expression is too important a need to be intimidated into permanent silence.
But before we begin to engage in "authentic expression", I suggest we consider the following code of conduct:
First, let's develop the habit of being impeccable with our words. Words are a powerful double-edged sword: They can cut a person down to size or inflate a person's ego. The wrong choice of words spoken in the heat of the moment can cause personal embarrassment or bring about momentous changes.
If we choose our words with care when expressing opinions or engaging in discussion or debate, the chances of being misunderstood or sued for defamation would be minimised.
Second, don't take anything personally. When someone challenges our views or opinions, we must not feel they are attacking us.
Conversely, when we challenge others on issues, we must not engage in name-calling or character assassination.
Last year, a blogger was charged in court for attacking a specific ethnic group because of its view on dogs. He would not have found himself in the soup if he had confined his discussion to how to handle dogs in public.
Third, never make assumptions. Often, when we are engaged in heated debate, we do not have the time to reflect on our underlying assumptions about an issue.
We must have the courage to inquire each time we encounter doubt. We must develop the culture of asking tough, uncomfortable questions.
I believe this process has begun with the NKF saga. Already, we are engaging in active debate about stunts performed by artistes to raise funds for charity. We are beginning to examine if this is the proper and effective way.
I attended a course conducted by a philosopher, Mr Lau Kwong Fook, who came up with the acronym SEX to sum up the above code of conduct. "X" stands for the unknown answer we are searching for, or the conclusion to the argument we are constructing. "S" reminds us to Separate the argument from the person, and "E" reminds us to Examine all angles of an argument.
At the unique Philosophy Cafe conducted by Mr Lau, people from all walks of life like myself meet every third Wednesday of the month and engage in philosophical discussion according to this code of conduct.
According to him, a philosopher is anyone who wants to rationally and rigorously pursue the truth.
He hosts this cafe because he has made it his life's purpose to "create gardens of rational thought in the jungle of irrationality that surrounds us".
With more Singaporeans taking this half step, perhaps Singapore could make a long stride towards being considered an open society.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 14th January 2006.
A NATION SPEAKING OUT
Peaceful rallies seized almost every capital city in the world in February 2003, staged in protest of the approaching Iraqi war. Yet Singapore remained a sanctuary of silence.
We are not a nation used to holding rallies; we are not allowed to hold a public assembly without a permit. Because of this, we have been accused of becoming a nation with no political soul.
Has this image of Singapore altered, as the year 2005 draws to a close? I believe that this year was a watershed year for us as Singaporeans.
We have long been labelled as apolitical, our youth accused of being apathetic. Yet, three events this year illustrate otherwise. Although holding mass rallies and emotionally-charged demonstrations is not in our culture, we have our own unique ways of showing how we feel about
issues close to our hearts.
The first issue is the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) saga. Never in recent years did our collective voice shout louder for justice and
transparency. Yet not a single demonstration
was held. We voted by withdrawing support for
NKF. And in the end, overwhelming public
sentiment led to the resignation of the board.
The second issue was the case of pianist Melvyn Tan. The issue of National Service and draft-dodging was debated with unprecedented openness and in the end, Mr. Tan cancelled his performance because of the unexpected backlash.
All views on the casino debate were heard over a year, with Singaporeans divided for and against the opening it. When the decision was made to open not one but two casinos within the integrated resorts, those against the casinos were disappointed, but they accepted the decision with grace.
What implications can we draw about the maturity of Singaporeans, as we collectively reached the big 4-0? Did we stop being the child that requires a host of laws, campaigns and fines to regulate our conduct? Have we reached a stage where issues can be debated objectively and rationally? We have at least begun the process.
These three issues demonstrated that there are people out there who care enough to pen their views and thoughts, letting their opinions be publicly scrutinized and their views be challenged.
Even the potentially explosive racial issue was handled with a surprising amount of level-headedness. Yes, some bloggers made the erroneous assumption that blogging is a private affair and thus, were more careless with what they wrote.
But others took the effort to correct their flawed views about race, while many reassured Singaporeans that these views did not represent the general opinion.
All these arguments were reported in the newspapers rationally, so that prejudices and bigotry could be tackled. For too long, we have used other people’s yardstick to measure the level of openness in Singapore. I say it is time to
hold our heads up and show the world there can be more than one manner of free expression.
Freedom comes with responsibility and accountability. When we voice a viewpoint, we must be ready to stand by it and, to stand corrected.
What about the lack of support for the four protesters who stood in a row for almost an hour outside the CPF building in August? They were protesting for more transparency and accountability in the governance of Singapore — issues close to the heart of every Singaporean especially after the NKF saga.
But the days of union militancy, industrial action and sit-down protests are over. Singaporeans have grown to be rational and less willing to engage in politically- motivated action. I believe our society is beginning to evolve more like the
ancient Athenian city-state, where debates were held in the open arena.
There is hope for Singapore, judging by the quality of letters to the newspapers. We have begun to question and examine many issues — from the quality of education in “elite” schools, to transport services and maids’ rights.
As long as we continue to allow Singaporeans to explore, express and examine their views rationally through the written channel, there will be no need to hold emotionally-charged and potentially explosive rallies.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 20th December 2005.
We are not a nation used to holding rallies; we are not allowed to hold a public assembly without a permit. Because of this, we have been accused of becoming a nation with no political soul.
Has this image of Singapore altered, as the year 2005 draws to a close? I believe that this year was a watershed year for us as Singaporeans.
We have long been labelled as apolitical, our youth accused of being apathetic. Yet, three events this year illustrate otherwise. Although holding mass rallies and emotionally-charged demonstrations is not in our culture, we have our own unique ways of showing how we feel about
issues close to our hearts.
The first issue is the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) saga. Never in recent years did our collective voice shout louder for justice and
transparency. Yet not a single demonstration
was held. We voted by withdrawing support for
NKF. And in the end, overwhelming public
sentiment led to the resignation of the board.
The second issue was the case of pianist Melvyn Tan. The issue of National Service and draft-dodging was debated with unprecedented openness and in the end, Mr. Tan cancelled his performance because of the unexpected backlash.
All views on the casino debate were heard over a year, with Singaporeans divided for and against the opening it. When the decision was made to open not one but two casinos within the integrated resorts, those against the casinos were disappointed, but they accepted the decision with grace.
What implications can we draw about the maturity of Singaporeans, as we collectively reached the big 4-0? Did we stop being the child that requires a host of laws, campaigns and fines to regulate our conduct? Have we reached a stage where issues can be debated objectively and rationally? We have at least begun the process.
These three issues demonstrated that there are people out there who care enough to pen their views and thoughts, letting their opinions be publicly scrutinized and their views be challenged.
Even the potentially explosive racial issue was handled with a surprising amount of level-headedness. Yes, some bloggers made the erroneous assumption that blogging is a private affair and thus, were more careless with what they wrote.
But others took the effort to correct their flawed views about race, while many reassured Singaporeans that these views did not represent the general opinion.
All these arguments were reported in the newspapers rationally, so that prejudices and bigotry could be tackled. For too long, we have used other people’s yardstick to measure the level of openness in Singapore. I say it is time to
hold our heads up and show the world there can be more than one manner of free expression.
Freedom comes with responsibility and accountability. When we voice a viewpoint, we must be ready to stand by it and, to stand corrected.
What about the lack of support for the four protesters who stood in a row for almost an hour outside the CPF building in August? They were protesting for more transparency and accountability in the governance of Singapore — issues close to the heart of every Singaporean especially after the NKF saga.
But the days of union militancy, industrial action and sit-down protests are over. Singaporeans have grown to be rational and less willing to engage in politically- motivated action. I believe our society is beginning to evolve more like the
ancient Athenian city-state, where debates were held in the open arena.
There is hope for Singapore, judging by the quality of letters to the newspapers. We have begun to question and examine many issues — from the quality of education in “elite” schools, to transport services and maids’ rights.
As long as we continue to allow Singaporeans to explore, express and examine their views rationally through the written channel, there will be no need to hold emotionally-charged and potentially explosive rallies.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 20th December 2005.
DRAWING THE RIGHT LINE
The widespread protests across the Muslim world over the publication in Europe of the Prophet Mohammed’s cartoons provides us with an opportunity to examine closely the concept of freedom as practiced in various parts of the world.
How does one demarcate the boundaries between freedom of expression versus religious offence?
For example, while the Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik expressed the opinion that European Union leaders have a responsibility to “clearly condemn” insult to any religion, the French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy declared that he preferred “an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship.” A German daily argued that a “right to blasphemy” was anchored in democratic freedom.
The idea of freedom is a difficult one to understand because it has a broad range of application - from a total absence of restraint to merely a sense of not being unduly hampered or frustrated.
To some, freedom is seen as the right to do anything regardless of the consequence of the action taken.
To others, freedom comes with a sense of responsibility and accountability.
The 12 cartoons provoked strong reaction in the Muslim world because the representation of Allah and his prophet Muhammad is strictly prohibited.
This fact was known to the Jyllands-Posten, the largest newspaper in Denmark which approached 40 artists to depict the prophet for this project. Last September, a Danish author could not find any illustrator to illustrate a book on the prophet because the illustrators approached were aware that artistic representation of Prophet Mohammed and God were forbidden in Islam. The president for the Danish Writer Union perceived this as a threat to free speech and Jyllands-Posten responded by embarking on this project.
In this instance, not embarking on it would not be seen as censorship or curtailing democratic freedom but demonstrating a sense of responsibility and sensitivity to others.
However, by embarking on his project - knowing the stand of Islam on this issue - demonstrated a lack of accountability.
Perhaps this incident will allow the European press to reflect on how they should handle this freedom. They might even want to learn a lesson from Singapore.
The Mari Hertogh incident in 1950 is a case in point. Publishing the picture of a Muslim girl praying in front of the Blessed Virgin Mary sparked off a riot in Singapore. A picture is open to more interpretation than a newspaper report.
In a report, issues can be explained, ideas can be discussed while in a picture or a cartoon, the creator does not have much control of the viewer’s response.
Since the Maria Hertogh incident, the press in Singapore has played a more responsible role and there is a general consensus that freedom of speech must be accompanied by a sense of accountability.
Indeed, if being free includes the right to blasphemy, the right to hurl insults and the right to provoke, I would rather not have that right.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 6th February 2006
How does one demarcate the boundaries between freedom of expression versus religious offence?
For example, while the Austrian Foreign Minister Ursula Plassnik expressed the opinion that European Union leaders have a responsibility to “clearly condemn” insult to any religion, the French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy declared that he preferred “an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship.” A German daily argued that a “right to blasphemy” was anchored in democratic freedom.
The idea of freedom is a difficult one to understand because it has a broad range of application - from a total absence of restraint to merely a sense of not being unduly hampered or frustrated.
To some, freedom is seen as the right to do anything regardless of the consequence of the action taken.
To others, freedom comes with a sense of responsibility and accountability.
The 12 cartoons provoked strong reaction in the Muslim world because the representation of Allah and his prophet Muhammad is strictly prohibited.
This fact was known to the Jyllands-Posten, the largest newspaper in Denmark which approached 40 artists to depict the prophet for this project. Last September, a Danish author could not find any illustrator to illustrate a book on the prophet because the illustrators approached were aware that artistic representation of Prophet Mohammed and God were forbidden in Islam. The president for the Danish Writer Union perceived this as a threat to free speech and Jyllands-Posten responded by embarking on this project.
In this instance, not embarking on it would not be seen as censorship or curtailing democratic freedom but demonstrating a sense of responsibility and sensitivity to others.
However, by embarking on his project - knowing the stand of Islam on this issue - demonstrated a lack of accountability.
Perhaps this incident will allow the European press to reflect on how they should handle this freedom. They might even want to learn a lesson from Singapore.
The Mari Hertogh incident in 1950 is a case in point. Publishing the picture of a Muslim girl praying in front of the Blessed Virgin Mary sparked off a riot in Singapore. A picture is open to more interpretation than a newspaper report.
In a report, issues can be explained, ideas can be discussed while in a picture or a cartoon, the creator does not have much control of the viewer’s response.
Since the Maria Hertogh incident, the press in Singapore has played a more responsible role and there is a general consensus that freedom of speech must be accompanied by a sense of accountability.
Indeed, if being free includes the right to blasphemy, the right to hurl insults and the right to provoke, I would rather not have that right.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 6th February 2006
Sunday, June 25, 2006
SIX KIDS AND THEY ARE A REAL BONUS
Six days after I gave birth to my son, my husband asked me when we could start with conceiving No 2. I looked at him in disbelief. Was he out of his mind? But he explained that he did not want his child to grow up as an only child. Nine months later, we conceived again.
Often, when I tell people I have six children, they react in disbelief. Many must think we are crazy, as the norm in Singapore is to have just one or two. Now with the baby bonus, three or four children may become a standard in future. But six?
The typical objections to having so many children in Singapore are mainly economical. Rising costs is one. If you factor in tuition, enrichment, supplementary class, school buses, childcare, day care and maid, then there will be disincentives to have more than two children.
Also, it is often argued that it is difficult to find a good babysitter and the idea of ferrying a child from one end of Singapore to another can be discouraging.
It will take proper studies to determine the effectiveness of the baby bonus, but let me share, on a personal front, why we ended up having six children.
After having two, we thought our family was complete as we had a boy and a girl. We thought having a third would mean having to divide our time, resources and love, and each child would receive less in turn. But then my biological clock kicked in — and we decided to have a third.
Then, in the 1990s, women in the civil service were given only two months’ maternity leave for the first and second child. We also had to tighten our belts and find ways to cope with an additional mouth to feed.
As both of us were working, we put all three kids in a daycare centre and that took up half our income. We made sacrifices — we rarely had holidays overseas and we did not spend money on expensive toys or enrichment classes. But what joy our third child gave us.
Seven years later, my biological clock kicked in again — I wondered if, at 36, I could still be a mother.
Not only was I blessed with a son, I was doubly blessed with a daughter 11 months later. This time, it was tougher with two children coming so close one after another. In the late 1990s, we could not use our Medisave to pay for delivery charges and, again, I had to take no-pay leave.
Having so many children in our family requires us to make many adjustments. If we go out at all, we need two taxies. And during Chinese New Year, we sense that we are not welcome at some people’s places as the economics of hongbao exchanging do not add up in their favour!
But my older children know how to look after a newborn, from bathing to changing diapers. Not many women know such skills. Most importantly, our children learn to share.
I gave birth to No 6 last year, and some people thought I would get to enjoy the baby bonus. But the sixth child does not qualify for any baby bonus, and neither could I avail of the three months’ maternity leave.
What lessons can be drawn from my experience? Firstly, making a decision to have a child is a personal one between a husband and his wife. We have children because we like children, even if we do not get to enjoy a baby bonus. It would be sad if a couple had a child solely for the monetary rewards, as a child needs more than money to grow into adulthood.
Secondly, women need to rediscover who they are. Only we can bring life into the world, and since the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s, I feel we have actively suppressed this important role of procreation. Of course, in this era of equality, we can argue that the husband must also contribute to bringing up a child — but if a woman does not even allow herself to bear a child, how can the man get the chance?
Often, women in Singapore prefer a briefcase to a bottle, a notebook to a nappy. In this drive to actualise ourselves as career women and useful citizens, have we forgotten that we have the power and ability to bring life into the world?
This article first appeared in TODAY on 17th January 2006
Often, when I tell people I have six children, they react in disbelief. Many must think we are crazy, as the norm in Singapore is to have just one or two. Now with the baby bonus, three or four children may become a standard in future. But six?
The typical objections to having so many children in Singapore are mainly economical. Rising costs is one. If you factor in tuition, enrichment, supplementary class, school buses, childcare, day care and maid, then there will be disincentives to have more than two children.
Also, it is often argued that it is difficult to find a good babysitter and the idea of ferrying a child from one end of Singapore to another can be discouraging.
It will take proper studies to determine the effectiveness of the baby bonus, but let me share, on a personal front, why we ended up having six children.
After having two, we thought our family was complete as we had a boy and a girl. We thought having a third would mean having to divide our time, resources and love, and each child would receive less in turn. But then my biological clock kicked in — and we decided to have a third.
Then, in the 1990s, women in the civil service were given only two months’ maternity leave for the first and second child. We also had to tighten our belts and find ways to cope with an additional mouth to feed.
As both of us were working, we put all three kids in a daycare centre and that took up half our income. We made sacrifices — we rarely had holidays overseas and we did not spend money on expensive toys or enrichment classes. But what joy our third child gave us.
Seven years later, my biological clock kicked in again — I wondered if, at 36, I could still be a mother.
Not only was I blessed with a son, I was doubly blessed with a daughter 11 months later. This time, it was tougher with two children coming so close one after another. In the late 1990s, we could not use our Medisave to pay for delivery charges and, again, I had to take no-pay leave.
Having so many children in our family requires us to make many adjustments. If we go out at all, we need two taxies. And during Chinese New Year, we sense that we are not welcome at some people’s places as the economics of hongbao exchanging do not add up in their favour!
But my older children know how to look after a newborn, from bathing to changing diapers. Not many women know such skills. Most importantly, our children learn to share.
I gave birth to No 6 last year, and some people thought I would get to enjoy the baby bonus. But the sixth child does not qualify for any baby bonus, and neither could I avail of the three months’ maternity leave.
What lessons can be drawn from my experience? Firstly, making a decision to have a child is a personal one between a husband and his wife. We have children because we like children, even if we do not get to enjoy a baby bonus. It would be sad if a couple had a child solely for the monetary rewards, as a child needs more than money to grow into adulthood.
Secondly, women need to rediscover who they are. Only we can bring life into the world, and since the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s, I feel we have actively suppressed this important role of procreation. Of course, in this era of equality, we can argue that the husband must also contribute to bringing up a child — but if a woman does not even allow herself to bear a child, how can the man get the chance?
Often, women in Singapore prefer a briefcase to a bottle, a notebook to a nappy. In this drive to actualise ourselves as career women and useful citizens, have we forgotten that we have the power and ability to bring life into the world?
This article first appeared in TODAY on 17th January 2006
DON’T BUY INTO THE FAÇADE OF LOVE
My friend told me she had dropped many hints to her husband to buy flowers for her for Valentine’s Day. I suppose she believed it was the appropriate way for him to show her that he still loves her.
When I was a teenager, I used to dream about walking down Orchard Road with a big bunch of roses. But having once worked on Valentine’s Day delivering flowers to lovestruck young girls all over Singapore, I have come to the conclusion that there is more to love than roses.
There was a man who ordered two bouquets: One for his mistress, and a bigger one for his wife. I suppose he was hoping his wife would still believe that he loved her.
Then there was this girl in America who ordered a box of chocolates for her boyfriend in Singapore. My heart dropped when I delivered the chocolates to his house. The dinner table was set for two, complete with candles and flowers — but I knew that his dinner companion would not be the girl in America.
Each February, men are reminded to show how much they love their girlfriends or wives by buying flowers, chocolates, diamonds — and, of course, the mandatory candlelight dinner.
How much of this expectation is shaped by advertising firms and retail outlets?
Thirty years ago, Valentine’s Day was virtually unheard of in Singapore. Nonetheless, men and women still fell in love — and stayed in love.
Now, I sense that women in Singapore are dictating how men should love them. And more often than not, their demands for expressions of love are shaped by women’s magazines, which inundate them with suggestions on how to spend Valentine’s Day.
It has come to a point where some men expect payment in terms of sex after spending so much money on an attractive lady. Thus, it is no surprise that men often use words of love to get sex, while women use sex to get words of love.
This could be a factor that has contributed to the rise in divorce rates in Singapore. Women often define love as a feeling or as an attraction, and choose our life partners on this basis.
What happens when that feeling dies or changes, as all feelings will over time? Do we change partners the way we do in a social dance?
Do we consistently search for the elusive high that we get each time we fall in love with someone?
After being married for 18 years, I have come to the conclusion that love is not a feeling; it is a decision.
There are days when I do not feel any love towards my husband, when I want to tear his eyes out, and yes, sometimes I just want to walk out of this marriage.
A few years ago, I met someone who swept me off my feet. He was different from my husband in many ways, and I thought I had fallen in love again. I was attracted to the feeling of being wanted, of being at the centre of someone else’s life.
I felt young again and I was tempted to walk out of my marriage. A few of my friends supported my decision, as they felt that if there is no spark left in a marriage, it is all right to change one’s partner.
But on closer reflection, I realised I had only fallen in lust. I realised that the feeling I had would disappear with this new-found love over time — just as the similar feeling I experienced when I first fell in love with my husband had eventually faded.
What did I do with this emotion? I confessed to my husband. I knew that he had accepted me for better or for worse — and this was one of my worst moments.
I knew that only by coming clean would we be able to continue with this relationship. He accepted me as I am, knowing that as a woman I could feel for other men, yet he showed that he can trust me with my emotions.
Through this experience, both of us were reminded once again that love is not a feeling, but a constant decision that we make. Love demands that we choose each other constantly despite coming across alternatives.
This Valentine’s Day, I chose to buy a gift for my husband. I had not bought him a gift in a very long time as I could never find anything suitable.
I seldom feel guilty for not buying him a gift for Christmas or for Valentine’s Day; I would never buy a gift just because some article in a woman’s magazine told me to. Neither would I buy one because my girlfriends have bought one for their beloved.
I chose to do so because I knew the gift would bring a smile to his face and joy to his heart. More importantly, I do not expect a gift in return.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 16th February 2006 .
When I was a teenager, I used to dream about walking down Orchard Road with a big bunch of roses. But having once worked on Valentine’s Day delivering flowers to lovestruck young girls all over Singapore, I have come to the conclusion that there is more to love than roses.
There was a man who ordered two bouquets: One for his mistress, and a bigger one for his wife. I suppose he was hoping his wife would still believe that he loved her.
Then there was this girl in America who ordered a box of chocolates for her boyfriend in Singapore. My heart dropped when I delivered the chocolates to his house. The dinner table was set for two, complete with candles and flowers — but I knew that his dinner companion would not be the girl in America.
Each February, men are reminded to show how much they love their girlfriends or wives by buying flowers, chocolates, diamonds — and, of course, the mandatory candlelight dinner.
How much of this expectation is shaped by advertising firms and retail outlets?
Thirty years ago, Valentine’s Day was virtually unheard of in Singapore. Nonetheless, men and women still fell in love — and stayed in love.
Now, I sense that women in Singapore are dictating how men should love them. And more often than not, their demands for expressions of love are shaped by women’s magazines, which inundate them with suggestions on how to spend Valentine’s Day.
It has come to a point where some men expect payment in terms of sex after spending so much money on an attractive lady. Thus, it is no surprise that men often use words of love to get sex, while women use sex to get words of love.
This could be a factor that has contributed to the rise in divorce rates in Singapore. Women often define love as a feeling or as an attraction, and choose our life partners on this basis.
What happens when that feeling dies or changes, as all feelings will over time? Do we change partners the way we do in a social dance?
Do we consistently search for the elusive high that we get each time we fall in love with someone?
After being married for 18 years, I have come to the conclusion that love is not a feeling; it is a decision.
There are days when I do not feel any love towards my husband, when I want to tear his eyes out, and yes, sometimes I just want to walk out of this marriage.
A few years ago, I met someone who swept me off my feet. He was different from my husband in many ways, and I thought I had fallen in love again. I was attracted to the feeling of being wanted, of being at the centre of someone else’s life.
I felt young again and I was tempted to walk out of my marriage. A few of my friends supported my decision, as they felt that if there is no spark left in a marriage, it is all right to change one’s partner.
But on closer reflection, I realised I had only fallen in lust. I realised that the feeling I had would disappear with this new-found love over time — just as the similar feeling I experienced when I first fell in love with my husband had eventually faded.
What did I do with this emotion? I confessed to my husband. I knew that he had accepted me for better or for worse — and this was one of my worst moments.
I knew that only by coming clean would we be able to continue with this relationship. He accepted me as I am, knowing that as a woman I could feel for other men, yet he showed that he can trust me with my emotions.
Through this experience, both of us were reminded once again that love is not a feeling, but a constant decision that we make. Love demands that we choose each other constantly despite coming across alternatives.
This Valentine’s Day, I chose to buy a gift for my husband. I had not bought him a gift in a very long time as I could never find anything suitable.
I seldom feel guilty for not buying him a gift for Christmas or for Valentine’s Day; I would never buy a gift just because some article in a woman’s magazine told me to. Neither would I buy one because my girlfriends have bought one for their beloved.
I chose to do so because I knew the gift would bring a smile to his face and joy to his heart. More importantly, I do not expect a gift in return.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 16th February 2006 .
ASK NOT WHAT MEN CAN DO FOR YOU.
Today is International Women's Day and women's groups around the world usually use it to draw attention to decades of struggle by women for equality, justice, peace and development.
While acknowledging that women still have a long way to go towards achieving this goal, perhaps it is time for them to reflect on the process used to achieve this.
In ancient Greece, Lysistrata started a sex strike against men in order to end a war. In 2001, the women of the Turkish village of Sirt followed Lysistrata's example, and went on a sex strike to demand a decent water supply.
Luckily for the men, most women's groups have taken Lysistrata's idea of the "women's strike" less literally.
For example, The International Women's Day movement, does sponsor a Global Women's Strike but in a different modus operandi.
Although women are encouraged to follow the Lysistrata model to gain attention, the strike includes time off from paid or unpaid work, accompanied by different kinds of activism. The goal of the strike was to highlight women's contributions to the world.
I have never felt at ease when women use any form of blackmail, extortion, coercion or strike to get what they want.
Especially vile is a woman's use of tears. It ends all discussions for most rational gentlemen. They give in as most of them have been trained not to make a woman cry. Even if we achieve our goal, it will leave a bitter aftertaste for the men concerned.
Maybe we should approach this year's International Women's Day from another angle. We could reflect on the way we have been treating our male colleagues, husbands, brothers and sons.
Did we enrich their lives? Or did we treat them like a cash cow? Did we treat them as a partner and co-worker or did we treat them as a competitor? Did we show them respect or did we demand respect from them?
We could also reflect on their needs as they try their best to work in this new and challenging environment where women have their careers and are not afraid to articulate their needs, wants and desires clearly to men. We could give them a pat on the back when they make the effort to look after the baby or when they do the housework after a hard day's work in the office.
We could reassure them that even as we climb higher up the career ladder, we still need them, at times, to hold the ladder steady for us. We need to learn to appreciate man, for living with a woman in the 21st century is not easy. Should they open the door for women? Should they be strong yet offer a shoulder for women to cry on? Should they be a Sensitive New Age Gentlemen or a metrosexual?
In this age of in-vitro fertilisation do women need men? Are they just sperm banks or do they have rights as a biological father? Maybe as a sign of maturity, we could start an International Man's Day where we can take the initiative to create activities to improve men's health, promote fathers' active participation in the family or to prevent men abusing women.
For a start we could stop asking what we can get from men and begin to reflect on what we can give them. Only then could we finally say that we have been liberated from the shackles of inequality and injustice and truly celebrate International Women's Day as women ought and should.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 8th March 2006
While acknowledging that women still have a long way to go towards achieving this goal, perhaps it is time for them to reflect on the process used to achieve this.
In ancient Greece, Lysistrata started a sex strike against men in order to end a war. In 2001, the women of the Turkish village of Sirt followed Lysistrata's example, and went on a sex strike to demand a decent water supply.
Luckily for the men, most women's groups have taken Lysistrata's idea of the "women's strike" less literally.
For example, The International Women's Day movement, does sponsor a Global Women's Strike but in a different modus operandi.
Although women are encouraged to follow the Lysistrata model to gain attention, the strike includes time off from paid or unpaid work, accompanied by different kinds of activism. The goal of the strike was to highlight women's contributions to the world.
I have never felt at ease when women use any form of blackmail, extortion, coercion or strike to get what they want.
Especially vile is a woman's use of tears. It ends all discussions for most rational gentlemen. They give in as most of them have been trained not to make a woman cry. Even if we achieve our goal, it will leave a bitter aftertaste for the men concerned.
Maybe we should approach this year's International Women's Day from another angle. We could reflect on the way we have been treating our male colleagues, husbands, brothers and sons.
Did we enrich their lives? Or did we treat them like a cash cow? Did we treat them as a partner and co-worker or did we treat them as a competitor? Did we show them respect or did we demand respect from them?
We could also reflect on their needs as they try their best to work in this new and challenging environment where women have their careers and are not afraid to articulate their needs, wants and desires clearly to men. We could give them a pat on the back when they make the effort to look after the baby or when they do the housework after a hard day's work in the office.
We could reassure them that even as we climb higher up the career ladder, we still need them, at times, to hold the ladder steady for us. We need to learn to appreciate man, for living with a woman in the 21st century is not easy. Should they open the door for women? Should they be strong yet offer a shoulder for women to cry on? Should they be a Sensitive New Age Gentlemen or a metrosexual?
In this age of in-vitro fertilisation do women need men? Are they just sperm banks or do they have rights as a biological father? Maybe as a sign of maturity, we could start an International Man's Day where we can take the initiative to create activities to improve men's health, promote fathers' active participation in the family or to prevent men abusing women.
For a start we could stop asking what we can get from men and begin to reflect on what we can give them. Only then could we finally say that we have been liberated from the shackles of inequality and injustice and truly celebrate International Women's Day as women ought and should.
This article first appeared in TODAY on 8th March 2006
WHEN SHOULD A MOTHER LET GO?
IDA and David wanted their son, Dwight, to graduate from college. Dwight, however, wanted to go to West Point. Both Ida and David were flabbergasted by their son ’s decision. Yet, all she ever said to him was: “It is your choice, son.”
Both parents wisely held their tongues— but they were so proud of their son on the day he, General Dwight Eisenhower, became President of the United States.
Now that Mother ’s Day is round the corner, it is a good time for us mothers to reflect on this question: What age should our children be, when we can stop being their mother?
I ask this because I have a grown-up friend who is very afraid of his mother. He would never smoke in front of her and if he has a couple of drinks, he would ensure that he is sober before he heads on home. His mother controls the type of friends he has and would express her opinion strongly if he does not tow the line.
Of course, in Singapore — where respect for the elder is paramount — we could argue that her son was only showing filial piety. Yet, I sense that he is not, as he is constantly complaining about his mother behind her back. He wishes that his mother would respect him as an adult as, after all, he is now in his mid-50s!
But he does not have the courage to tell her his feelings, for fear that she will use more emotional blackmail on him.
Yes, during this commercial season of Mother ’s Day where we are goaded by guilt into buying unusable presents for our mothers, we should explore this issue seriously.
How often do we mothers use this argument – that we carried our child for nine months and suffered stretch marks and the pains of childbirth, and so on, and thus our children are obliged to obey our whims fancies? When was the last time we used our tears to get our children to do as
we wished, and, in the process, suppressed their desires?
As I have six children whose ages range from 9 months to 17 years, I have learnt that my style of mothering has to change according to the child, too.
With the baby, I have to be firm as he needs to know the boundaries he can operate within. The first word he learnt was “No” rather than “Yes ”, as I do not intend to spoil him. With my two pre-schoolers, the priority would be to establish routine, rules and regulation. This is the best time to do.
For example, now is the time to teach them the concept of needs and wants. We would buy any item that they need right away. But for items that they want — such as a tape of Harry Potter — they would have to learn to save for it. As for my three teenagers, we have begun to respect them as young, thinking adults. Yes, there were many times when my husband and I wanted to step in and make the decisions for them in the name of doing it for their own good. We have had to resist this temptation and, instead, guide them gently along the way.
I have discovered that my parenting style has evolved from being autocratic to authoritative, and finally, accommodating. Now, as my oldest is reaching adulthood, I am looking forward to spending time with him as two friends would.
I believe that we should stop mothering our children when they reach the age of 21.We should only offer our opinions when asked for them and let our progeny have the freedom to make mistakes as we did when we were their age.
Yes ,like most mothers, I know it would be hard to let go especially since I have seen to their needs for so long, and I feel wonderful and powerful when my children obey me.
Who would not like to be the matriarch, lording over her brood of children and grandchildren?
Yet, I am consciously taking steps to cut the apron strings, as I want all my children to develop into mature adults.
To all mothers who are reading this article: This Mother ’s Day, instead of wondering what kind of surprise gift our children will spring on us or where they will take us for lunch, let us give our children their independence, their wings, so that they can soar like the eagles that they are.
I would rather do that then have them bitch behind my back about how draconian a mother I am becoming as I grow older.
Mothers, the choice is yours. Happy Mother ’s Day.
This article first appeared in Today on 11th May 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
