Focus on Healthcare is a five-part series that provides a critical analysis of Singapore’s healthcare system, popularly known as the 3M system (MediShield, Medisave, Medifund). Through it, we hope to provide an understanding of how healthcare financing is currently being funded and used in Singapore, and explore the ways in which this can be further enhanced to cater for the needs of Singaporeans.

In this first part, we leap off from the Prime Minister’s slew of proposals announced at the National Day Rally 2013, and examine if the government’s current goal of providing “universal” healthcare might be off the mark.

 

By Roy Ngerng and Leong Sze Hian

At the National Day Rally 2013, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced that healthcare financing will be improved to “give all Singaporeans more peace of mind.” A number of tweaks to the 3M system (MediShield, Medisave, Medifund) were outlined, and more information provided for in the weeks that followed.

medishield

A number of important and useful tweaks were proposed. First, the age floor of 40-years for the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) will be removed so that “younger Singaporeans will also be able to join the CHAS scheme”. Second, subsidies for lower- and middle-income patients who visit Specialist Outpatient Clinics will be increased. Third, the government will be “studying carefully” how to extend Medisave to be used for outpatient treatments. A Pioneer Generation Package will also be introduced to help pay for the MediShield Life premiums of older Singaporeans who belong to the “pioneer generation”.

MediShield will also be revamped as MediShield Life, where the age ceiling of 90 years will be removed and “cover you for life”. PM Lee declared that MediShield Life “will be universal”, and will “cover everybody, every Singaporean, old ones, young ones, those newly-born”. He also said that MediShield will allow patients to “pay less out-of-pocket or out of their Medisave”.

But exactly how comprehensive is Singapore’s current healthcare coverage? Does it provide assistance to everyone, and is the assistance adequate? Exactly how “universal” is the 3M system?

According to the Ministry of Health (MOH), “Singapore offers universal healthcare coverage to our citizens, with a financing system anchored on the twin philosophies of individual responsibility and affordable healthcare for all.”

The MOH further elaborated that “the first tier of protection is provided by heavy Government subsidies of up to 80% of the total bill in acute public hospital wards”; the second tier by Medisave, where the average balance of S$16,900 is “sufficient to pay for about 9 to 10 subsidised acute hospitalization episodes”; the third tier is provided by MediShield, which “allows Singaporeans to effectively risk-pool the financial risk of major illnesses.”; the fourth tier is Medifund, which is “a medical endowment fund set up by the Government … for needy Singaporean patients who cannot afford to pay their medical bills despite heavy subsidies.”

However, following a parliamentary question raised by the Worker’s Party’s Gerald Giam in May 2013, we now have a deeper insight into the health expenditure of these funding sources over the last 10 years.

medicalexpenditure

 

According to these figures provided by MOH, it would appear that in 2011, government subsidies accounted for only 22.7% of total health expenditure. This is much lower than the more highly publicized “80%” figure.

22.7% is a better reflection of healthcare expenditure, as it accounts for inpatient and outpatient treatments, general practice visits, private specialist care as well as care in restructured hospitals.

In other words, the 80% subsidy is restricted to inpatient hospitalization and some outpatient treatments only for the small proportion of patients who meet the means testing criteria for highly subsidized medical care. The reality is that while inpatient hospitalizations are high profile expenses, the bulk of healthcare expenditure is often outside of acute care hospitals.

Also, the statistics further showed that Medisave had accounted for only 5.5% of total health spending, MediShield just 2.1% and Medifund at an even more minuscule amount of 0.7%.

Although PM Lee said the MediShield scheme is “universal”, it might be difficult to justify the “universality” of the scheme as being so, since it had only foot a marginal 2% of the total health spending. In PM Lee’s context, MediShield might be “universal” because “everyone” will now be required to pay into the scheme, but whether there is adequate coverage for each and every Singaporean is another matter. Everyone might be covered, but for some, perhaps inadequately.

While the 3Ms are considered to be the pillars of Singapore’s healthcare system, these “pillars” prop up only 8% of the total health expenditure. Together with the subsidies, they make up only 31% of total spending. Meanwhile, Singaporeans are made to pay for 69% of the spending either by themselves or through medical benefits provided by their employers.

One might find it ridiculous that such a small proportion of an average Singaporean’s healthcare is paid for by the 3Ms. Indeed, while policyholders are able to make claims to MediShield of up to $70,000 annually and lifetime claims of up to $300,000, only 92 policyholders had reached the annual claim limit and only 11 had reached the lifetime claim limit – which makes up less than 0.1% of the total number of MediShield policyholders.

Also, to apply for Medifund, applicants would need to undergo the tedious and cumbersome processes of submitting numerous forms and income statements of all their family members as well as their own personal documents. From anecdotal evidence, many applicants have been put off from the process and chose to give up accessing healthcare, rather than receive financial assistance.

Mr Giam had also asked the Health Minister “whether Government restructured hospitals are currently able to tap into patients’ CPF or IRAS records (with their consent) to process Medifund”. The minister replied in the affirmative and said that the hospitals use the information “for financial counselling, means-testing for subsidies, and applications for Medifund or other assistance.”

If this is the case, the Medifund system can be easily overhauled to allow for automatic payouts to patients who meet the Medifund requirements, rather than for them to have to go through lengthy processes and waiting times to receive Medifund assistance. Why has this not been done?

Clearly, the government’s low contribution to healthcare expenditure coupled with a highly onerous claim system that further inhibits this expenditure hardly makes the 3M system “universal healthcare”. Even as we look forward to the tweaks proposed by the Prime Minister, there are fundamental issues of government co-payment and claims processing that need to be addressed.

Stay tuned for part two, where we examine the proposal by the government to raise taxes to fund the tweaks to 3M – is it absolutely necessary?

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Vietnamese netizens demand apology for PM Lee’s “untrue and disrespectful” remarks

In his post on Facebook (31 May) expressing his condolences for the…

尚穆根“外国势力干预”论 正是人民行动党“屡试不爽的策略”

针对日前,内政部长兼律政部长尚穆根声称,新加坡在一定程度上已经面对外来势力的干预的言论,人权律师张素兰反讽,这正是人民行动党“屡试不爽的策略”。 今日(26日)人权律师张素兰于脸书专页功能八号氏族会发表一篇名为《外来干涉?》(FOREIGN INTERFERENCE?)的贴文,指出每当批评人民行动党言论的文章被刊登,都会将矛头指向外国人,以意图制造新加坡分裂而被指责。 此外,针对尚穆根日前点名本社与《新叙事》(NewNaratif)接受外国款项与聘雇外国人一事,张素兰形容,该行为就如同一场“政治迫害”(witch hunt),直指每当人民行动党在打压之前,总会拿出有“外来干涉”等理由。 “每当人民行动党在打压之前,总是会以“外来势力干涉新加坡事务”为由,这是屡试不爽的策略,过去在1963年大量使用与破坏对他们不利的指控。” 张素兰:这是人民行动党一贯的伎俩 张素兰在文内也提及当年的“冷藏行动”以及其他相关事件,直指这是人民行动党所采取的一贯伎俩。 她表示,当时汶莱左派领导人阿扎哈利(A.M. Azahari)在发动“汶莱武装事变”(1962年12月8日)之前,曾会见我国反对党领袖,社阵领导人林清祥。当天的两人会面,却给已故总理李光耀很好的借口,以遭“外来干涉”为由,发动“冷藏行动”。 “当天是在一个著名的马来菜饭的餐厅享用午餐,而且午餐聚会还被内部安全局所监视。据林福寿医生说法,我国反对党领袖只是发表声援声明,未曾提供任何财务与物质上的支持”。 张素兰续指,“那场午餐聚会成为李光耀的接口,得以发动那一直被推迟的“冷藏行动”。他声称汶莱武装事变是“上天赐予的好时机”,逾133名反对党领袖和批评人民行动党的人,在内安法令下遭拘捕和扣留。”…

犹如战场:香港中文大学爆发大规模冲突 多名学生受伤

香港示威活动不断升级,自上周五一名大学生周梓乐示威期间坠楼后身亡,示威者为悼念他,于11月11日发起“三罢行动”,最后还衍生出警民冲突,警方在清场过程中,更是开枪射伤两名示威者,其中一名示威者情况危及。 然而,示威活动并没有因此平息,反而加剧了冲突。 综合港媒消息指出,昨日(12日)各区爆发大规模示威行动,示威者堵路并焚烧示威者晚上多次堵路并焚烧离物,警方除了施放催泪弹驱散之外,亦出动炮车射水,有示威者投掷汽油弹。 入夜后,大批防暴警察闯入中文大学、城市大学、香港大学、理工大学等校园,其中以中大最为惨烈。 据《立场新闻》报道,防暴警察在闯入校园后,施放大量催泪弹与橡胶子弹,同时拘捕多名示威者,而学生则以投掷转头、汽油弹等激烈反抗。 《路透社》则形容,香港中文大学数百名示威者聚集在校园内,与防暴警察激烈抵抗,现场状况惨烈,犹如战场。 香港中文大学校长段崇智则曾在傍晚到场调停,学生要求警方撤出校园并释放被捕者,但由于防暴警察称校长无法控制身后学生,称并非谈判的时候,要求他立即离开,随后警方与学生再次爆发冲突,而段崇智则被催泪弹击中,也在催泪弹中离开现场。 暴力升级影响港民 由于示威活动的暴力情况升级,为避免再有人收到伤害,香港教育局宣布停课,并表示由于受到示威者的广泛破坏,亦有学校遭受不同程度的威胁,因此宣布暂时停课。 教育局强烈谴责此等故意危害学童安全、剥夺学生学习基本权利的行为。 香港新界交通金早上再次陷入严重瘫痪,东铁及荃湾线全线暂停,西铁线荃湾西至屯门亦无列车服务,巴士亦只能提供有限度服务。 许多市民已无法正常上班。…

Celebrating diversity rather than single Singapore identity: Ho Kwon Ping

By Howard Lee Noting that former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew has…