Rejected by ST Forum
Tilt Balance Towards Family
The PM stated in his usual kind manner his observation of a problem -- the 'tilt away from the family' reported Sunday Times May 28, 2000. May I offer another interpretation : It is 'Code Red' for the Singapore family.
However which way one sees it, the situation at hand is clear : the family is weakening. But should this come as a surprise to the top brains accumulated at Parliament Lane.?
The fate of the family today was decided a decade ago when we faced a shortage of labour. We consciously and wholeheartedly urged women to enter the workforce. To help those who were undecided , we engineered a real estate boom that left no doubt as to which choice they have had to make . With it came everything else -- rentals, COE, medical costs, etc. Throughout the last ten years, we eventually structured an economy based on a two income family, didn't we?
The PM has said, the effects of neglect of the family, this seldom urgent but very important component of life will not be felt till years later .May I submit to you that the same applies to a country.
You have got everyone working till no one wants to do the family part. In fact, many,(and I mean MANY), are heavily conditioned by the environment created to cherish work as a primary source of gratification and security, both men and women, young and not-so-young. Family is seen to be an inconvenient, obtrusive stumbling block towards achieving such fulfillment and security.
Today, to adjust to a single income in order to raise a family would be regarded by the average chap to be a sign of wealth or an act of bravery. Some might even consider it irrational. However, the fact that something so fundamental in raising children successfully for centuries has been altered within one decade leaves me very unsatisfied with the detached exhortations given by people that contributed in part to the problem in the first place. May they be reminded that the success or failure of raising children is not strictly a private matter. It has tremendous implications on society at large. The social costs are growing greater by the day and they are just beginning to penetrate our consciousness.
It was mentioned that the introduction of a five day work week may cause 'an irrevocable mistake'. Can the death of families through divorces and other related malaise be revocable? I am not sure. The economy can bounce back quickly and the memory of bad times forgotten, but a fracture on the family ? I do not think it can rebound within two quarters. Sometimes not at all.
It is ironical while the family issue is being taken up, another corner of the government is talking about 'removing (social ) safety nets' . Let me be plain on this : this will work against the family. Cut it out if you are serious about the family. No sensible responsible person will want to start a family if he or she is always insecure about the future and the ability to impart his or her best to the child.
If it is difficult for some to hear these, could there perhaps be an underlying difference between us in our philosophy ? The current official one apparently seems to be one that believes that the family and its members exist for the economy. But should it not be the other way around ? The reason the economy and for that matter the state exist is that it could serve and enhance the family and in the wider context the community. With respect, that is something I would like to suggest the esteemed officers of the state to sit back periodically and think about what they are doing.
Huang Xun Xian