The following article is published by blog Diary of A Singaporean Mind on 6 February 2011.

Source: foodpoisonjournal.com


Leong Sze Hian recently wrote a letter to the Straits Times forum asking about the large jump in the size of class “C” hospital bills [Link]. In my blog, I’ve highlight numerous cases of families (that are not rich) shouldering enormous healthcare burden due to either cracks or inadequecies in the system. In the past 4 years, class “C” bills have nearly doubled and this escalating cost hit the sick and their family really hard. The latest case being that of Olympic hero Tan Howe Liang’s wife who had breast cancer [see article below]- fortunately an anonymous donor came the family’s rescue.

The MOH’s reply to Leong Sze Hian generated by its PR (Corporate Communications) dept dismisses his concerns without addressing the real issue.
———–
Class C wards are highly affordable
[Affordable? In the same sense that HDB flats are affordable?]

MR LEONG Sze Hian seemed to disbelieve that C-class patients would know to ask for non- subsidised drugs and implants (‘Puzzled by spike in unsubsidised items for C-class patients’; last Wednesday).
[Mr. Leong wrote that he found it hard to believe the MOH explanation that the bill increase is caused by patients asking for unsubsidized medicine and implants]

There was a time when C-class patients were largely lowly educated and ignorant of treatment options. This has changed over the years.

Many subsidised patients are now well-read and often come with Internet printouts about alternative treatment options. We welcome this development as better informed patients can participate more actively in their treatment, especially where lifestyle changes can make a critical difference to their health outcome.

[This reply is really hard to believe. MOH is saying that doctors in class C ward do not offer patients the best treatment options and patients look it up themselves on the Internet? Even if what MOH said is true, why is so much of the better treatment unsubsidised? ]

With more than 42 per cent of all admissions to restructured hospitals opting for Class C wards, many are clearly not from low-income families.

To continue reading, click here.

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

《慈母舰》采访普杰立视频出现政党标志、宣传政策 本地导演质问资媒局:是否抵触《电影法》?

本地电影导演施忠明在脸书发文分享,他今早电邮致函资讯通信媒体发展局(IMDA),向后者询问本地英语网络媒体“慈母舰”制作的一段视频,因其内容呈现政党标志、有政治人物宣传政治课题,是否抵触了《电影法》禁止制作政党政治影片的条文? 新加坡英语网络媒体“慈母舰”(Mothership sg)日前录制视频,采访交通部高级政务部长普杰立医生,内容谈及陆路交通规划和2040年陆路交通发展总蓝图。 由于普杰立的父亲多米尼克(Dominic Puthucheary),曾是社阵政治人物,视频中的快问快答访谈,不免询问普杰立,行动党和社阵,会如何选择。后者则回答选行动党,不过他说很久以前两者过去曾在一起(指社阵领袖原一同创立行动党,惟后来因政见不同离开)。 针对这段视频,施忠明质疑,既然这是“慈母舰”拍摄、并非政府创作的视频,就不能在《电影法》下的第40条文被豁免(只有政府指示或发行的影片可豁免)。 而根据新加坡《电影法》第33条文,私自制作政党政治影片是被违法的。在该条文下,任何人进口、制作、发行或放映政党政治影片即属犯罪,可面对不超过10万元的罚款或监禁不超过两年。 施忠明认为,上述视频里又出现偏驳政治立场、政治人物推介政治课题、出现政党标志等等。 ”敢问有关视频是否已送交(资媒局)进行分级?在电影法第33条文下,会否被归类为政党政治影片?“他在电邮中如是质问资媒局。 2015年民主党拍《白衣牌洗衣粉》视频 此外,施忠明也在贴文中附上2015年的一个案例,那时资媒局指民主党制作的一段诙谐讽刺短片,根据《电影法》定义乃是政党政治影片。 对此民主党领导徐顺全批评资媒局选择性地诠释该法,因为政府也有以漫画的形式,借中国寓言和歌舞等来生动描绘建国一代配套和终身健保等重要政策。…

“Poorly defined” anti-“fake news” Bill “a disaster” for press freedom in Singapore, warn civil rights activists and media practitioners

Despite Law Minister K. Shanmugam’s assurance that the Protection From Online Falsehoods…

Middle Ground aiming for the middle-age spread?

By Howard Lee Earlier this week, former news website Breakfast Network, which…