Should the Parents Maintenance Act be abolished? Personally, I do not have extreme views on this topic. Its existence does not make much of a difference to me, at least for now. I would elaborate further in my following paragraphs.
The Parents Maintenance Act is a law passed by the government for children to provide for their parents over 60 years of age who are unable to provide for themselves. Parents can bring their children to court if they fail to do so. I feel that the main reason for the government’s decision is because Singapore is facing an aging population and the government would not provide for the many elderly in Singapore, thus giving the responsibility to the family members.
The Parents Maintenance Act should not be abolished for very simple reasons. Singaporeans nowadays only do things if there are certain benefits or if there are any demerits for not doing that certain thing. We can prove this by observing past examples. For instance, the government had a hard time solving the issue of chewing gums in the past. Although many posters were put up and there was a lot of publicity, people still persisted. Chewing gums were still observed in lifts, under seats in cinemas, on rubbish bins (not in), and many other areas where they do not belong. It was only until the government stepped in and imposed fines did Singaporeans stop their inconsiderate act. Another example is on littering and spitting. The problem was only alleviated when the government imposed fines and corrective work order for litter bugs.
However, looking from another perspective, this act does not really have much significance. I feel financial support is not enough. The family should not just stop at financial support. The elderly in Singapore need more than just sums of cash. They need emotional support as well. For this, the government cannot possibly set up another law to force Singaporeans to spend quality time with their parents or grandparents. Therefore, those who are truly filial will provide both financial and emotional support, thus making the act lose its significance.
Looking from the point of view of low-income group parents, I feel that this act would just add to the immense pressure they are already facing. Other than just providing for their own family, they have to provide financial support for their aged parents. This would add to their economic burden, thus making life even harder for them.
Taking the perspective of an elderly parent, I feel that they would not like this act as well. Having to force their children to provide for them through legal means would not usually be their preferred choice. All parents are the same. No one would want to see their own children in court. Therefore, no one would even want to bring their own children to court. I strongly believe the parents would rather suffer than see their children suffer having to provide for them, or having to be brought to court.
Therefore, I feel that this act has rather little significance, if any, and thus can be abolished. However, it can also stay for those Singaporean parents who really harden their hearts and sue their unfilial children.
(Adapted from my AAT Journal Entry)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Kee Xuan,
ReplyDeleteI think you took a holistic approach to answer this topic and I feel it is well done! :)
However, I think if you were to add what I have listed here, it can be further improved.
Firstly, you considored the P.O.V of the parents. Maybe you could considor from the child as well? Here is the main points of what you could have wrote.
- home prices are rising and medical costs as well as the general cost of living going up all the time
- many are already struggling to cope with this.
Besides that, you could also have another point saying that it is the government's role to help the elderly. Here are some pointers.
- the elderly have worked hard towards building the Singapore we have today.
- The government should share a large part of the burden for elderly care.
- Singapore is one of the richest countries in the world.
- The government has the resources to take care of the elderly.
But on the overall, I think your post is quite good already.
Regards,
Nicholas
Hi Kee Xuan,
ReplyDeleteI think you put forth your ideas really well, and it covers both sides of the Parents Maintenance act very well. However, I think you could provide some concrete evidences to support most of your claims.
Firstly, you talked about low- income children that find it hard to support their parents. Perhaps you could add in the point of the rising cost of living, and throw in some statistics as well. For example, it could be the housing prices or the medical services. Next, you talked about the number of parents who wanted to sue their own children were limited. I think you could find such cases being reported in the newspapers. I cannot remember where I have read it but I am sure I have came across it in the newspapers some time ago.
Besides all these, I guess you could also cover the other hot topic of: Why can't the government support the elderly themselves? Now, you could throw in more statistics on how rich Singapore is by their GDP and you could comment on how the elderly deserved the government to support them since they worked hard to build up a Singapore that we have today. Looking at it from a different side, you could also say that there are too many elderly whose medical expenditure is too high for the government to support.
Hope that you take my comment into consideration.
Regards,
Nicholas
Hi Kee Xuan,
ReplyDeleteI generally agree with your points, but perhaps you could have provided an alternative solution to this problem.
Personally, I think the best way for people to support their parents is education. Education plays an integral role in nurturing and inculcating values of filial piety in people. I cite an example in Japan. In Japan, most of the people are extremely polite and friendly, even to foreigners and tourists. Why is this? Do you think that there is a law that makes it compulsory for them to have good service standards? I think not. The most important thing here is to make supporting parents natural for Singaporeans. Using a law is definitely not the way to go, as like you mentioned, simply forcing people to do something will not help them in the long run, and they will more often than not be even unhappier and less willing to support their parents.
Therefore, in order to solve the problem in the long run, Singapore should implement education programs that help inculcate moral values like filial piety from young, so that Singaporeans will know of the importance and significance of these Confucianism values from young, and when they grow up, it will be natural for them to apply these values in life.
I really liked how you looked at the topic from different perspectives, and how you tried to consider the matter from different points of view. Yes, I agree that this law will not benefit the low-income groups and the parents themselves, as in the end, the former is forced to choose between their own families or their parents, and the latter is forced to choose between emotional ties and basic financial support and necessities. Nice work there, and it really opened up new ideas for us to consider! :)
All in all, good post there, and I really liked how you managed to use the critical thinking skills taught in the Arts and Acts of Thinking (AAT) module to analyse this issue. Good job! :D
Cheers,
Roystan