Should the Singapore Government pay for the 4 months maternity leave?

Here's what Marists think:

New Incentives to Boost Birth Rate

I thank all for their patience (esp Jun Xiang) in waiting for my reponse on this topic as I was very busy with Common Test marking. Now that that is out of the way, it is time for me to give my 2 cent's worth again...

4 months maternity leave is a great idea if you ask me. I think leaving your baby and going back to work is a tough thing for new mothers, especially if you do not have strong support from family (like your parents to help look after). It gives the mum more time to spend with the newborn and afterall, if you have a baby, you don't solely want to leave the parenting to someone else right? Other measures introduced have been lauded by the mums and mums to be but let me share what I think can be further improved:

1. More subsidy should be given for IVF treatments.
Let's face it - no couple, if they had a choice, would want to go through IVF to conceive a child. The injections, multiple visits to the doctor and hefty cost is really no fun. Worst of all, there is no guarantee you'll succeed. With the new measures introduced, the government is only subidising 30% of the first 2 treatments which I think is too little. 50% should be better, in my opinion as this could really encourage more couples to go for IVF.

2. Incentives for stay home / single mums
In case you're not aware, single and stay home mums do not get any of the incentives the government is introducing. My heart goes out most to the single mums who still work and contribute to the economy but get nothing. The government's rhetoric is that they want to encourage a pro family environment but I quote a single mum who said, "If i could marry my baby's dad, I would have done so a long time ago." There are also others who get a divorce due to adultery and other personal reasons then render them in their current situation. Being single parents, are they not the ones who deserve the most help? And I also do not think that if we give them these incentives, it will encourage more women to be single parents. Stay home mums also deserve something at least - for sacrificing their careers to nurture and bring up their children. The government obviously wants to reward mums who contribute to the economy but maybe we can give these hero mummys a share of the pie too?

3. I'm still fighting for more paternity leave. At least 2 weeks, Mr Wong Kan Seng..This will send a signal that we want more dads to be involved in parenting!

4I Jun Xiang - 4 Months Maternity is TOO Long!

Well, I've personally always found "maternity leave" to be an iffy incentive. I mean, perhaps it's because I'm not a woman, but is it really THAT necessary to take 3-4 months of maternity leave just because I gave birth to a child?

I understand the need for confinement, but in such an era, I wonder if confinement is still needed. After all, confinement is more or less an old wives' tale, right? Unless, of course, there's some scientific proof for this. But still, women from America/Europe don't seem to be doing confinement ala Maternity Leave as intensely and enthusiastically as we Singaporeans do.

What purpose does maternity leave serve? I would like to ask all women who have taken maternity leave in the past, what do you guys do during that few months? If it's just time spent watching TV and looking after the baby, then I suppose... it's a waste of time?

I DON'T regard taking care of the baby as an unimportant matter. It's just that, really, there's no necessity to stare at your baby 24/7. Besides, you can always ask your parents/in-laws for help, and in this way, it bonds the three generations together.

Anyway, if it were to be up to me, I would let Maternity Leave be a maximum of 2 months. Why? Isn't 4 months an OVERKILL? I fully empathize with the SMEs for wanting to sack women who take too much maternity leave and all that jazz, not forgetting that there are other types of leave too.

Ultimately, the one thing that I'm most afraid of is that if the 4-month maternity leave is to be implemented, then what would be the purpose of giving birth? For the sake of the leave, or because you really want a (or more) child? I feel that the basis for wanting to give birth should be because you want it, and not because for the maternity leave.

PM Lee was right, that it's kind of sad and disappointing to see a dismal birth rate in Singapore (and also hilarious when he highlighted the years that have higher birth rates), but what should be the solution? Dangling a carrot in front of women to get pregnant seems kind of low, in my humble opinion.

In conclusion, I would just like to say that the 4-month maternity leave is a big no-no, and it's a waste of time, manpower and resources. One thing that I foresee is that if the 4-month maternity leave is implemented, the birth rate would momentarily increase. Next year, when it drops again, what's the government going to do? Increase it to 6 months? I don't think increasing the length of the maternity leave is the solution; but rather it makes things worse in the long run. The basis of giving birth should be love and want, and not because of the incentives. It's like I'm going to study hard because the school will treat me to lollipops if I score straight As... it's just wrong morally, in my opinion. I'm sure all mothers would want to look back 10-20 years later and remember, 'I gave birth to my sons/daughters because I wanted a family." and not because "Because I want the super duper long maternity leave!"

Therefore, I think that for mothers like Mrs Tan, Ms Yvonne Chin, Mrs Mandy Tan, etc, gave birth to their kids because they want to have one, right? ;) I would passionately wait for Ms Joanna Lee's reply to this topic! =D

P.S: Mrs Tan, that's REALLY sadistic!

A 3rd Child for Mrs Tan Chin?

Was very intrigued when I read Mrs Tan's post today about a possible third child (YEAH!). I guess she is in a better position than me to comment about incentives that will entice more parents like her to have more children. But what I gather from her (and other mums in the news) is that having more children is hard because it's tough to balance work and family. I think that's the bottom line and the root of the problem that the government should look into.

If you've read the newspapers on Sunday, you would have seen the 'plight' of working mums in SME where some lose their jobs once they get pregnant as employees are unwilling to pay their maternity leave, in addition to hiring a temp to cover their duties. I think that's really sad...and would like to suggest that the government should bear the cost of maternity leave so that private companies will not discriminate against mums to be.

Let's stay tuned for the National Day Rally later this month. The Prime Minister will reveal his whole new bag of goodies and incentives for working mums like Mrs Tan Chin. Maybe for a start, 4 months paid maternity leave...but 6 months will be even better!

So, Mrs Tan-Chin, do we hear a 3rd child on the way? WE WILL PRAY FOR A GIRL!!!!! DEFINITELY A GIRL FOR U!

Will I have a 3rd kid?

In response to Ms Lee's post on "Increasing Birth Rates", here is my personal take.

I have been well brought up with the notion of "Stop At Two" since young. I was an accidental 3rd child - my parents never planned for me and life was perfect for them with a son and a daughter, that was until I was created. And then all hell broke loose. Firstly, my mom had to return to work immediately after she gave birth to me (no maternity leave for the 3rd child) unless she underwent immediate sterilisation. Secondly, they had problems getting me into the same Primary school as my siblings because of my status as a 3rd child. And then a whole hosts of other disincentives to follow.

Whether its the government's influence or my own personal belief system, having two children seemed a perfect formula. One child for each parent. And so I had two children - perfect? Hmmm... not quite. The perfect formula would have been one boy and one girl. But as all of you can see for yourself, I ended up having two boys! Its retribution for all the evil things I did to all the Marists in class - that I get replicas of them in my family. Arghhh.

So now the question is, should I have a third child and fulfill the government's desire? Do I want a girl? Yes, definitely! Can anyone guarantee me a girl? No, definitely not. By the way, Marists out there who are part of a consecutive chain of 3 brothers, I am pretty sure your parents wanted a girl! So am I prepared to take a gamble to try for a third child, hoping it will be a girl?

Yes: If the current work life arrangements can be more balanced with less stress at work and more time with the family. This means changing working cultures with less competitiveness and shorter working hours. For a start, the immediate carrot or catalyst that will make me take the plunge the third time is "6 months maternity leave". When I had my two kids, I was only entitled to 2 months. And I have always felt I had shortchanged them by going back to work so early and hence the bonding was never strong. Especially these days when my duty upon reaching home after work is to discipline* them for misbehaviour. (*leading to some of you threatening to report me for child abuse)

So, does this mean that I will have a third child? Inference, my dear Watson, inference. (erm, this is adapted from Sherlock Holmes and has nothing to do with Watson Tan from 4F!)

Should bribery be endorsed?

We have approached many Marists to contribute to our blog by emailing us with their postings. Being the ever pragmatic Singaporean, they asked me whether there was anything to benefit them should they post. Based on one of our principles of governance, "Reward for Work and Work for Reward", I have promised Marists that if they contribute good postings, they stand to win prizes.

But I did question myself: Is this principle endorsing bribery? Hmmm... bribery is not acceptable as it goes against incorruptibility.
So should we still continue to reward Marists for contributing to our blog?

Give me your comments.

But as of this point, YES, we will award prizes for those who contribute GOOD postings to this blog!

Every Road Pay

Taken from My Sketchbook

Buses and Bikes

In the mad rush to construct ERPs, and reduce congestion on the roads, I feel that there has been insufficient provision for alternative transport. It is strange that with plans to reduce the number of cars on the roads, (for example: increasing ERP to get 10,000 commuters to park their cars at home and take the trains & buses) the frequency of the buses and train networks has not improved. So, solving a problem leads to another problem - crowded public transport. And they have been getting very packed recently.

A possible solution would be to encourage bicycles. It is environmentally friendly, cheap, and will get the typical Char Kway Teow-loving Singaporean to exercise. But perhaps more infrastructure needs to be created first, such as a dedicated bicycle lane. After all, we are a small island state. An ecologically friendly approach is highly feasible and implementable.

Response to post on ERP

Image Courtesy of Vinyarb

Study this source. Is it pro-ERP or anti-ERP? Explain your answer. :P

Of ERPs and COEs

As all of us know and can see, there are more and more ERP gantries put up throughout the country. For those of us who read the Straits Times, it was reported on July 6, 2008 that 5 S'pore River ERP gantries kicked in on Monday. The new gantries, which will bring the total number of gantries in Singapore to 65, will charge $2 from 6pm to 7.30pm and $1 from 7.30pm to 8pm.

Being dutiful Social Studies students ;) you are supposed to be objective about the whole issue. In other words, we must see the good and the bad behind ERPs.

The Good:
ERP aims to solve traffic congestion in the city areas as well as important roads. By making motorists pay to use certain roads at certain timings, the government is reducing congestion during these timings as those who are not willing to pay will not use these roads during the peak hours. This will then solve the traffic congestion problem which could affect our economic efficiency.

The Bad:
If you read ST's Forum on 7 July, there was an article by a Tan Wee Liang... "What happened to the original purpose of the certificate of entitlement (COE)? Isn't it supposed to be the ultimate tool to limit the number of cars on the road? If the COE is doing its job well, why are the roads so choked that the authorities have 'no choice' but to set up ERP gantries everywhere to control traffic?"

Should traffic congestion be solved by limiting the number of cars for sale (through COE) and fewer ERP gantries or through allowing more cars for sale and increasing the number of ERP gantries? Both solutions have their own problems. When you allow more cars, more people can own their cars but they will be frustrated with the extra road use charges which makes it difficult to use their cars anytime they want. But if you make it difficult for people to own a car, they will also be unhappy. Either way, people will complain.

What is my take on this? With the rising inflation, I too am feeling the pinch. I have sworn to save money by taking public transport to and from school.



Need to ensure I have substantial savings in my bank account in the event I am sacked for all the relative untruths I tell my students in class :P