Living with grandma’s groans

‘I never want to grow old,’ one of my friends confessed to me recently. ‘I want to die by the time I’m 50.’

I pondered this as she put the final brushstrokes on her bleak portrait of ageing, which included Alzheimer’s and dementia. Not a pretty painting, but I told her I was willing to risk it.

Perhaps it is presumptuous of a 20something like myself to comment on something that will happen to me in four or five decades. But some Singaporeans seem to have developed a curious allergy to the state of being elderly.

Three weeks ago, The Straits Times reported on a nursing home for the elderly that will be going up in Bishan, tucked into a cluster of HDB blocks. It is one of many more that will soon be dotting the island as the population ages.

I did a double take when I read one of the disgruntled responses from a resident in those HDB blocks: ‘The old folk will be groaning right into my home.’

I had to remind my riled-up self that the gripe of a single resident is hardly representative of an entire community; I am aware that many do not feel the same way. I have friends and family who volunteer at old folks’ homes to make life a little easier for those who cannot take care of themselves.

But a society that is forgetting how to care for its own – for its ill and infirm, and for those living at the fringes – is one that is forgetting how to be human. Even if these ‘forgetters’ are in the minority.

For millennia, humans have formed communities for protection and survival. And this means caring for those who might be immensely difficult to care for, whether at home or in a nursing facility.

My grandmother turns 94 this year. She was diagnosed with two debilitating diseases, dementia and Parkinson’s, more than 10 years ago. They are degenerative conditions which have left her a wisp of her former feisty self.

Just over a year ago, she could still sing us snatches of her favourite Teochew songs. Now, she can no longer recognise us. She has to be fed through a tube inserted through her nose that extends into her stomach. Her soiled diapers have to be changed several times a day and she has to be bathed by someone else. She drools uncontrollably into a bib.

She also lives with my family. We have had to hire a full-time domestic helper to help to look after her.

I hear her groans of discomfort the moment I leave my room, and the minute I come home from work. When I say, ‘Ah ma, kia’ (‘Grandma, goodbye’ in my minimal Teochew), or pat her wrinkled hands, she no longer responds.

I wish I had mined my grandma’s trove of personal histories before she turned that key in the lock of her mind and tossed it into the crevasses of her memory. I’ll never be able to find it again.

She’s your grandmother, you might say, so of course you can tolerate her ‘groaning right into (your) home’.

I think this transcends tolerance and family. It is also about love and human dignity. Regardless of age, we are someone’s son, daughter, brother, sister, mother or father. Selfishness begets selfishness, and if we keep thinking ‘not in my backyard’, our backyard will become a small, lonely and dangerous one.

Today, 9.3 per cent of the Singapore population is above the age of 65. The number of older folk here is set to double to 600,000 in under a decade and triple to nearly a million by 2030. We should not claw back at the inevitable.

I’ve always loved working with the elderly. I look forward to interviews with them because I love listening to their stories and coaxing them into talking about a Singapore – or a world – that I have never known and will never really know.

I recently interviewed several members of the Young@Heart chorus, an American musical group whose members range in age from 73 to 90. They have given uplifting performances around the world, singing everything from the Bee Gees to the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

One of them, a 77-year-old retired educator, told me: ‘We know we’re all going to die at some point. It’s how you live before you get there.’

I don’t think that statement applies solely to those in their golden years. We could take a leaf or two from their book.

If I should, one day, realise that my speech has left me – I hope that my children and grandchildren will be more than happy to let me groan right into their homes and love me the more for it.

Corrie Tan
June 17, 2012, The Straits Times

The price of a maid’s life

THE series of fatal plunges of domestic workers from high-rise apartments is so disturbing one would expect a strong response on the part of Singapore employers. Of their own accord, they should have taken the strictest of measures to protect their charges.

Sadly, 24 maids fell to their deaths over the last five years, while another 45 survived the ordeal. If work safety had not been at the top of their minds before, the grim statistics should have spurred precautionary measures, like locking all window grilles.

The tragic news should have also created buzz in the community as safety tips are exchanged. This can help to shape social norms governing the welfare of employees, especially those from disadvantaged rural communities.

Regrettably, not enough was voluntarily done earlier by employers, even though the authorities had issued advisories on work safety practices.

Now, the Manpower Ministry has ruled that window cleaning has to be done under the supervision of the employer or an adult representative. Further, window grilles must be installed and they must be locked when windows are being cleaned. All these sound so basic that one might ask why it has to be the subject of legislation.

If there was more empathy towards submissive low-wage workers with poor education, a protective stance would be the norm here. Anyone who blindly steps on a hazardous ledge just to do a good job for her employer clearly needs a guardian of some sort. Then, there need be no debate over a ban on such window cleaning as employers would have already done the right thing.

The maturity of a society is reflected in the way it regulates itself based on regard for human life and the safety of all. Indeed, this is a more efficient alternative to social legislation, as informal regulating mechanisms involve no arduous processes and little or no cost.

Improving social behaviour and attitudes is often the first recourse, even though change might be slow in coming. When educational efforts are exhausted, the authorities might raise legal sanctions to deter undesirable social acts. The need for compulsion is a moment for self-reflection as it says much about the efficacy of prevailing social norms.

This question has to be asked now as the Manpower Ministry considers ramping up penalties under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Regulations for employers who fail to provide a safe environment for their maids.

Those who complain that stiffer fines and jail sentences would be too harsh are missing the point. People should voluntarily be tougher on themselves when actions or omissions lead to the loss of lives, especially of those under their care.

Then, whatever rules are proposed need never be invoked.

Editorial, The Straits Times
June 11, 2012

My ‘ungifted’ children are happy and capable

My three children sat the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) test but none made it (‘My child is Gifted’; last Sunday).

Instead, they went their merry ways in the ordinary school system and had a heavy dose of character-building and sports, besides the usual academic pursuits.

We had our moments of parental anxiety when all three decided to stop private tuition and, instead, relied on their schoolteachers and self-study during the crucial years. However, they blossomed when we took a back seat and let them do things their own way.

All three were school prefects. The eldest went on to be head prefect and school valedictorian. She has a law degree from the National University of Singapore (NUS) and is now studying for a degree in medicine.

Both my second and third children – a son and daughter – enrolled in the International Baccalaureate programme.

My son entered officer cadet school, finished national service and is now studying for a degree in medicine.

The youngest is deciding whether to read law at NUS or go to the London School of Economics

By official definition, my children are not gifted. But as products of the ordinary school system, they are happy young people who can look back with fondness on their 12 years of pre-tertiary schooling.

Gordon Tan
June 10, 2012, 2012, Straits Times Forum

A parent, a teacher or both?

I refer to the letters “MOE has role in ‘arms race'” and “Parental involvement in schools must go beyond studies” (June 7). I was one of those kiasu parents who attended a lesson in “Heuristics (Models, etc) In Your Child’s Maths”. I felt like I was taking tuition myself, and it made me laugh.

There I was, doing sums for two hours to understand how to teach my son mathematics when he had teachers to do so. Now, when I receive a flyer about such lessons from my second son’s school, I throw it away.

The Education Ministry’s role is to ensure academic excellence. But to the point where lesson time is insufficient and my son stays back thrice a week for two to three hours to finish the lesson plan? These are not remedial lessons; the whole class stays back.

My role as a parent is clear: To inculcate my children with the right values and life skills to survive the world, to teach them about graciousness, respect, responsibility and, most of all, resilience. It is important to be healthy and have a balanced life where relationships are what matter. I want to raise confident children, who feel valuable to the community.

There is no point if our children are high achievers but abandon us in our old age, treat people badly, lie or get suicidal when they feel like failures. I cannot predict how my children will turn out; I only know that time spent with them is to give them memories of a happy childhood, not of me slaving over school texts, cracking my head over why heuristic models are more important than the maths I learnt.

I do not want to “learn new ways to teach (my) children”. What my grandparents taught us is still the right track. I am my children’s teacher, but only to raise them to be good people and citizens. If they bring home straight As, that is a bonus.

Maybe the Government can now understand better why our birth rates are falling. Apart from the rising cost of living, whereby a single income is no longer viable, with the rat race of education and asking parents to now teach their children how to do their homework, our greatly expanded roles are just too demanding.

Jo-Anne Lee Fei Ming

Jun 8, 2012, TODAY

Xenophobia, or is it more?

I am not a xenophobe. Let’s get that out of the way. In recent months, the word “xenophobia” has been used to describe Singaporeans on the issue of immigration.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines xenophobia as “an intense, or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries”. Dictionary.com adds that this extends to “an unreasonable fear or hatred of strangers, or of that which is foreign or strange”.

I used to live in Bahrain, where Indian immigrants like me lived in our communities and interacted with Arab neighbours and colleagues only when necessary. I was eight when we moved to London.

There, I regularly got shoved off the pavement after school by 16-year-old female bullies who told me, “Smelly Paki, go home!”

As an innocent child, I told my mum, “They think I’m Pakistani. But I’m Indian. They’re stupid. They can’t tell the difference.”

It did not end there. In Singapore, neighbourhood secondary school students insulted and ostracised me because I spoke with a different accent and because they thought I acted superior to them.

Years later in Canada, I met racists who told me the Chinese and Indians should be kicked out of Canada because they were taking over the world. I mastered the Canadian accent and tried to pass for something other than Indian, to stay safe when I travelled.

Everywhere I went as an immigrant, I understood that I was different: An outsider who had not yet won the trust of the locals. I understood that “difference” is often perceived as a threat.

But I have come to appreciate another important detail: One or even 10 racist encounters do not represent a nation as a whole. I have loved living in each of these countries. I am fairly certain Canadians and Britons would not want to be described as xenophobes.

There are 3 other issues

Let’s first dilute the explosive nature of this debate on immigration and integration in Singapore by establishing that not all Singaporeans are xenophobic, small-minded people. I do not think the vast majority are. So what is this debate about?

Housing, transport, National Service and employment, commentators have said. But there are also a few other issues.

First, it is also about class differences. People are aggrieved by how the rich perceive and treat poorer people.

In the article “It’s time for China’s newly rich to reflect” (China Daily/Asia News Network, May 30), Mr Gao Zhuyuan made a case for the nouveau riche mainland Chinese to behave with more humility and grace because money cannot buy everything.

But there are both poor and rich Singaporeans and foreigners residing here. We know of many cases of Singaporeans treating migrant and domestic workers as chattel. We also now see instances of wealthy foreigners treating Singaporeans like second-class citizens.

Second, it is about access to information and the space available for reasonable debate.

In the countries I lived in, despite the problems associated with ethnic enclaves, racism and hate crimes, or maybe because of that, avenues existed for foreigners and citizens alike to discuss these issues.

There were town hall meetings, public forums and civil society groups who dealt with racism and culture shock and even academic curriculum that focused on this.

While I applaud the creation of the National Integration Council and the many studies published to better understand the need for immigration and integration, I feel that non-partisan and independent grassroots-initiated forums are missing from the big picture.

We need this. If we were cautious of this before, we cannot afford to wait any more. Otherwise, the racist, anonymous vitriol written online would only worsen.

Third, is it time for Singaporeans, both new and old, to rethink the effectiveness of our efforts towards multiculturalism, given our current circumstances?

I have met Chinese-Singaporeans who never had Indian-Singaporean friends before me. The last time most of my educated Indian- and Chinese-Singaporean friends had a Malay friend was in primary school. Where is our vision of multicultural harmony and integration?

Integration of new waves of immigrants presumes that we are already free of prejudice and that multiculturalism works. But like everything, it must be reviewed and rewritten as circumstances change.

Harmony among different people is possible only if we have the space to first look at ourselves and understand our prejudices, anxieties and needs. Otherwise, we will forever remain fearful of what is “foreign or strange”.

The writer is co-founder of non-profit organisation Access to Justice Asia. She migrated here in 1990, became a citizen in 1999 and now calls Singapore her home.

Vinita Ramani

Jun 6, 2012, TODAY

Road users not serious about safety

WHILE it is commendable that the Traffic Police are stepping up enforcement efforts against errant motorists, it does not solve the root of the problem (‘Traffic Police to ramp up enforcement, review drink-driving laws’; last Friday).

The real issue is the attitude of motorists. Despite the heavy emphasis on safety in driving or riding lessons, many motorists and motorcyclists are caught flouting the rules each year, with possibly many more not getting caught.

This can mean only that our motorists are not taking the safety lessons seriously and are only going through the motions, with the lessons forgotten after they get the licence to drive or ride.

This reflects badly on us as a society as it shows that personal desires, such as that of attaining an adrenaline rush or showing off, are more important than the safety of others.

Rules are there for a reason and are not meant to be broken. What is sorely needed is a change in mindset and attitudes towards safety. Only then will our roads be truly safe for all road users.

Gregory Lou
June 4, 2012, Straits Times Forum

Campaign to spread courtesy never went away, replies Singapore Kindness Movement

I THANK Mr Peter Girling (‘Bring back courtesy campaign, says visitor’; May 18) and Mrs Marietta Koh Ai-meng (‘The link between congestion and courtesy’; Tuesday) for their concerns.

The ‘courtesy campaign’ never completely went away.

The Singapore Kindness Movement has been organising activities and championing the values of kindness, such as consideration, courtesy and gratitude. Last year’s theme was Say Thanks, Make Someone’s Day.

The Kindness Movement is more than a campaign as we are engaged in several ongoing educational programmes, including school outreach, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education. We also work closely with transport operators and several national agencies to address issues of courtesy and consideration in public spaces.

Public education in trains and MRT stations has been carried out through various initiatives such as posters that encourage commuters to be considerate.

SMRT has also been carrying out its own initiatives which remind commuters to be courteous.

We are also working with the National Environment Agency and other partners through a public consultation panel which strives to make new hawker centres more conducive for people to be courteous and considerate in public spaces.

The panel has recommended that new hawker centres should be designed with centrally accessible tray-return facilities, making it more conducive for patrons to return their trays.

Rather than taking the old campaign route, we have been creating engaging and inclusive approaches that mobilise Singaporeans to take ownership in spreading courtesy and consideration in our effort to inspire a more gracious society.

The results of the recent Graciousness Index survey we conducted has shown that Singaporeans are generally kinder, and that the younger generation is more sensitive towards graciousness.

Nonetheless, there is room for improvement because our society is constantly evolving. I am confident that we will continue to improve and move towards a more gracious society, one kind act at a time, as more like-minded people act accordingly.

Dr William Wan
General Secretary
Singapore Kindness Movement
June 1, 2012, Straits Times Forum

Foreign workers help to strengthen the S’pore team

Those who believe in reducing the number of foreign workers here, to help locals keep their jobs or have an easier life, should have a rethink.

When factories move overseas or banks centralise their back office support in other countries, jobs are lost to foreign workers, who do not have to come here at all.Low costs and advances in technology also create higher “job mobility” internationally. When your office computer is not working, someone from somewhere in the world could remotely log in to solve your problem.Which other jobs will be moved out or eliminated, and when, is anybody’s guess. Undoubtedly, jobs will move to places where the value of output over cost, within the same period, is higher.

So what can we do? Always be more productive than others.

Salaries may be higher, but if output is better and we are quicker to adapt to changes in working conditions and technology, or are willing to work at odd hours and so on, our “output cost ratio” would be higher. Then, we may win.

The whole country, not just individuals, has to be more competitive. Foreign investors look at Singapore as a whole when evaluating whether to set up a unit here. The size of a talented workforce is one of the key factors.

No matter how talented we are, there is no way we can take up two or three jobs concurrently. Owing to our low birth rate, we need foreign workers to strengthen our team.

Competition is not new to us; it exists in all industries. Locals have done well and will do well; restrictions have not been introduced due to competition. We should have the confidence to compete with foreign workers.

Bringing in foreign talent heightens competition within Singapore. This provides more opportunity for us to sharpen our competitive skills and understand more of our competitors.

This would give us an edge when we have to compete with them sometime, somewhere. It is important for us to have the skills to win when competing for investments with other countries. If we lose, jobs would disappear and would be difficult to get back.

Nonetheless, we need to monitor the number of incoming foreign workers, as it takes time for society and the newcomers to know each other.

Chan Wing Kin

Jun 01, 2012, TODAY

Be wary of well-intentioned ‘keyboard warriors’

IN THE article (‘Chinese-Singaporean divide a ‘mindset issue”; May 19), Mr Wang Quan Cheng, president of the Hua Yuan Association, the largest group in Singapore representing immigrants from China, highlighted that the widening gap between native-born Singaporeans and new citizens can be bridged only when both make the effort to get to know each other’s cultures better.

We cannot and should not hold on to judgments and opinions based on stereotypes of specific nationalities.

The online furore over the recent Ferrari accident escalated quickly as the story unfolded, and with it, the volume of xenophobic sentiment. Some netizens have turned their outrage into yet another opportunity to attack new citizens and foreigners.

We should have the good sense to dissociate ourselves from these xenophobic voices. This behaviour is not something to be proud of. It is not the mark of a gracious society – one based on justice and equality, regardless of race, language or religion.

However, it is encouraging to see a growing number of individuals coming forward to oppose xenophobia. Like Mr Wang, they call for calm and reason, approaching the issues by understanding that we should try to build bridges instead of burning them. These are the voices we need more of.

Since news of the accident broke, many people have come forward with an outpouring of support and help for the family of taxi driver Cheng Teck Hock, who died in the accident. More importantly, these offers came from locals and foreigners alike.

This is a clear demonstration that, whether local or foreign, we all have the capacity to be reasonable, understanding and compassionate. We are, at core, a kind people and we must not allow those who hold unreasonable or extreme points of views to falsely represent us.

In responding to xenophobic abuses on the Internet, we should be wary of the well-intentioned ‘keyboard warriors’ who lash out at something or someone just because others are doing it. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

We must speak against all ungracious conduct, by all means, but let us do so calmly, with grace and reason. It will be heard better than when we speak in haste and anger.

Dr William Wan
General Secretary
Singapore Kindness Movement
May 29, 2012, Straits Times Forum