The Election Department Replies On the Rejection of Tanjong Pagar Candidates - And Gives Clear Grounds. Please Circulate.
.by Karen Teoh on Monday, 02 May 2011 at 18:25.Edits made to painfully bloody obvious typos.
YOU HAVE MY PERMISSION TO REPOST THIS IS WHICHEVER FORUM OF YOUR CHOOSING.
Friends,
Please see the e-mail reply below from the elections department, the contents of which are self explanatory.
As a matter of further clarification, I personally called Mr Ng Teck Siong at 16:22 pm today and he picked up the phone.
I introduced myself as one of the assentors on nomination day and asked him about whether he had paid the elections deposit.
Mr Ng Teck Siong told me, with supreme conviction that “I don’t pay the election deposit because they never process the nomination form”, confirming the statements made by Mr Lee of the Elections Department.
Unfortunately, the explicit wording of the statute, as well as instructions to candidate issued by the elections department do not support his supreme conviction.
In fact, a contrary view is held as to the nomination process. The relevant sections and links to documents are here:
Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap. 218) (“The PE Act”)
Deposits by candidates
28. —(1) A candidate, or some person on his behalf, shall deposit or cause to be deposited with the Returning Officer or with some person authorised by the Returning Officer in that behalf, between the date of the issue of the writ referred to in section 24 and 12 noon of the day of nomination, a sum equal to 8% of the total allowances payable to a Member of Parliament in the preceding calendar year, rounded to the nearest $500.
(1A) In default of the sum being so deposited under subsection (1), the candidate shall be deemed to have withdrawn his candidature under section 32
http://www.elections.gov.sg/pdf/PEC_handbook.pdf#zoom=100 at page 6, item 2.2
It appears that Mr Ng, in addition to being unable to fill in a form, is also incapable of reading clear instructions, much less following them.
While he should be given credit for his bravery in coming forward as a candidate, it appears to be the only positive quality we can credit him with.
In the foregoing circumstances, it would not be meaningful to bring a petition before the courts in this matter, any lateness or dispute of the meaning in s 29(2) would not materially affect the result of the election given the deemed withdrawal of the candidates under s 28(1A). This is because the relief prayer for is unlikely to be granted.
Be that as it may, I note that the Elections Department now say that 12 noon sharp is acceptable, whilst being careful to state that the candidates only attempted to submit the papers after 12.01 pm. In the next election, I look forward to seeing either explicit wording of the PE Act changed – or the practice or the clocks to be changed.
While I disagree with the Election Departments statement of facts about the candidates submitting the forms after 12.01 pm, having been a personal witness to the event some 2-3 meters away, I was not at the table itself. The best clarification would be to request that the Elections Department adduce all the evidence at hand. This course of action would be in the interests of public fairness and maintain public confidence in the integrity of our institutions, of which the Elections Department is a main pillar. I will be writing a last letter requesting the Returning Officers report, as well as the video evidence made available, as is likely, given that a precedent has been set by the matter of James Gomez nomination in 2006 where the Elections Department, of their own accord, produced the evidence.
I wish to thank you all for your time and interest in this matter and hope that we will continue to remain in contact.
Please circulate this message to all friends who may be interested in this matter, however as a matter of consideration, remove the e-mails of people who have previously been addressed by this e-mail.
I hope that this chain of correspondence, together with explanations, will lay to rest the unfounded allegations that have been circulating about the Elections Department during this general election.
I believe sincerely in the integrity of our civil service and hope that you will, after considering this matter in its’ entirety, share the same belief too.
In Friendship,
Karen Teoh
From: Seng Lup LEE (ELD)
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 3:52 PM
To: Karen Lau
Cc:
Subject: RE: Legal Issue Regarding Returning Officers Time for Closing of Nomination and Rejection of Opposition Candidates
Message Classification: Unclassified
Dear Karen,
I refer to your email of 27 April 2011, 7.43pm.
2 Section 29 of the Parliamentary Elections Act ("Act") requires candidates seeking nomination as a group in a Group Representation Constituency (“GRC”) to personally deliver to the Returning Officer in duplicate their nomination paper, political donation certificates of each of the candidates in the group and the GRC certificate on minority candidature between 11 a.m. and 12 noon (both times inclusive). They must be accompanied by the candidates’ proposer, seconder and at least 4 assentors (hereafter collectively referred to as “subscribers”). The Act also says that if not so delivered, the paper shall be rejected.
3 Section 28 of the Act further requires each candidate in the group to deposit $16,000 with the Returning Officer by 12 noon of Nomination Day. The law does not permit the candidates to stand for election in the GRC if they fail to make the election deposits by 12 noon.
4 Ample notice of how and when nomination papers and supporting documents have to be delivered and election deposits have to be made was given to aspiring candidates through various channels, such as the Elections Department website, the candidates handbook published by the Elections Department and the press release issued by the Elections Department on 25 April 2011.
5 On Nomination Day, the group of aspiring candidates seeking election in the Tanjong Pagar electoral division turned up at the Nomination Centre at Singapore Chinese Girls’ School. They made 2 attempts to deliver their nomination paper but both attempts were not in accordance with the provisions of the Act.
6 The first attempt was made about 2 minutes before 12 noon by only one of the aspiring candidates. The person delivered a nomination paper, unaccompanied by the other 4 aspiring candidates in his group and the group’s subscribers. The person also did not deliver the supporting documents required under the Act. As the other 4 aspiring candidates in the group and the subscribers were not present and the supporting documents were not presented when the nomination paper was delivered, the nomination paper was rejected. The Elections Department’s inquiries have also revealed that at the time of the first attempt, the 5 aspiring candidates had also not made their statutory declarations in the nomination paper as required by the Act.
7 At 12.00 noon, the Group Assistant Returning Officer announced that nominations were closed. If any set of nomination papers had been delivered at 12.00 noon sharp, it would have been accepted. However, the second attempt to deliver the nomination papers was made by the aspiring candidates slightly after 12.01 p.m. As the second attempt was made after the time permitted under the Act, the aspiring candidates’ nomination paper was rejected.
8 The Elections Department’s inquiries also revealed that the aspiring candidates in that group did not pay the election deposit of $16,000 per candidate as required under the Act.
Regards,
LEE SENG LUP
Head
Elections Department
Prime Minister’s Office
Visit our website at http://www.elections.gov.sg/
WARNING : This email may contain privileged and confidential information. If you receive this email by mistake, you should immediately notify the sender and delete the email. Unauthorised communication and disclosure of any information in the email is an offence under the Official Secrets Act (Cap 213).
From: Karen Lau [mailto:mrsdustinlau@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 27 April, 2011 7:43 PM
To: ELD Elections (ELD)
Cc: Seng Lup LEE (ELD); Raymond ONG (ELD); vervoon@pacific.net.sg; Dustin Lau; dinosaur@pacific.net.sg; yasser.mohamed@gmail.com; zakirh@sph.gov.sg; joshuachiang@yahoo.com; huey.ko@gmail.com; ong.liuching@gmail.com
Subject: Legal Issue Regarding Returning Officers Time for Closing of Nomination and Rejection of Opposition Candidates
Dear Sir,
My name is Karen Teoh (NRIC 791xxx4Z) and I was present at the nomination hall of Singapore Chinese Girls School (“SCGS”) today to be an assentor for the potential candidates contesting Tanjong Pagar GRC.
I refer to the phone calls between myself and your officials today, 27 January 2011.
In particular, I refer to the phonecalls between myself and your Ms Doris (assistant to Mr Lee, Head, Elections Department) at 5.19 PM and 5.32 pm, as well as to your Mr David Tay of the General Enquiries hotline at 5.45 pm and 18.02 pm.
At Mr Tay’s suggestion, I have written this e-mail to place on record our conversations to enable the Elections Department to look into my complaint more effectively.
I was informed by Mr Tay at 6.18 pm that Mr Raymond Lim, Assistant Head (Policy and Programmes), Elections Department considers the standard procedure of the Elections Department and Returning Officer in concluding that nominations close at 12 noon sharp as correct practice. As this is hearsay, I would seek your indulgence in setting out in your written reply to me that this is in fact the case, or if not, the standard procedure of the Elections Department and its returning officers.
However, I must respectfully disagree with the Election Departments position. An accepted cannon of interpretation is that the phrase “both dates inclusive” is taken to mean to the last moment possible moment of the inclusive date. The time period thus expires on the start of the next date. For example, the phrase “the offer is good from 1 January 2011 to 7 January 2007 (both dates inclusive)” means that the offer is valid until the last moment of 7 January 2007. The offer for both dates inclusive therefore only truly expires on the first moment of 8 January 2007, being midnight, 8 January or 12.00am. A similar reasoning would therefore follow interpretations of time, which are but a smaller subset of dates.
In this respect, I refer you to s 29(2) of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap. 218), which states:
“s29...(2) Every such nomination paper and certificate shall be delivered to the Returning Officer, in duplicate and in person, by the person seeking nomination accompanied by his proposer, seconder and at least 4 assentors, at the place of nomination between 11 a.m. and 12 noon (both times inclusive) on the day of nomination, and if not so delivered, shall be rejected.
[18/2005]
At the same time, I noted that the Returning Officer announced at 12:00 sharp on the clock at the Nomination Hall that the nominations were closed. Thereafter, the independent candidates rushed over to submit their papers. The clock had not yet chimed 12:01. Myself, together with the other assentors and seconders stood some distance, maybe 3 to 4 rows of chairs away.
An argument went on for some time about the closing of the period for the submission of nomination forms between the potential candidates from the opposition and the returning officers, whom were all highly commendable for remaining calm, civil and pleasant in the circumstances.
However, I believe that closing the nominations at 12:00 noon sharp by the returning officer is in error, as the phrase referring to “between 11 a.m. and 12 noon (both times inclusive)” is quite explicit to the contrary. I apologise that I have only written to you at this late hour as I did not have access to the specific wording of the Parliamentary Elections Act (Cap 218) until I returned home.
The legal and correct answer to when nomination closes turns on what time 12 noon is over, as the statute is explicit about “(both times inclusive)”. This is, in turn based on the smallest unit of measurement on the clock used. The clock used at the SCGS measures time only in units of minutes and not seconds and it would therefore be 12:01 PM that noon is officially over. If it was meant to be 12 noon sharp, then the statute should be explicit about it. However, the clear wording of the statute is to the contrary, being “between 11 a.m. and 12 noon (both times inclusive)”.
I understand that this has likely never been the case since very few independent candidates have been this tardy and disorganized and it is a novel nexus of facts and law that has yet to be considered in Singapore.
However, in the circumstances, given that several interpretations are possible and there accepted rules of interpretation do not favour the Elections department construction of the rule, the best party to answer would be the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Singapore. I respectfully and strongly urge the Elections Department to undertaken this course of action as no present or future allegations of bias online against the Elections Departments good standing would therefore be possible.
Justice must be seen to be done and I hope that the Elections Department will continue to serve all Singaporeans as faithfully and effectively as it has done in previous elections.
Yours in Friendship,
Karen Teoh
************
You'd think with so much riding on his shoulders, and so much goodwill and money poured into his cause the man would have wanted to treat this like... an election... and not a used-car purchase, and put his - oh wait, no - other people's damn money down.
Aside from that, looks like 35 seconds now 1:35min too late.
I think that's called red shift...
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Normalizing the curves
cut and pasted from TODAYonline. Translated into EasySpeak (tm)
5 questions with: Tin Pei Ling and Nicole Seah
The full Q&A with the rookie PAP and NSP candidates for Marine Parade GRC
by Sheralyn Tay and Tan Weizhen 05:35 AM May 01, 2011
What is the single biggest concern you have about Singapore?
Ms Tin Pei Ling: The single biggest concern I have for Singapore is the long term sustainability of the development of Singapore. I think there are a few dimensions to it. First and foremost while we don't want to just focus on the economy, I think it is very important because without the overall success of the economy, we won't have jobs for our people. Without jobs, without income, it is very hard for Singaporeans to lead a good quality of life or to even survive. If you ask me what is the biggest concern, it is the survival of Singapore; not just domestically, but regionally and internationally. It is about ensuring there are jobs and a future for Singaporeans - for us, our children and our children's children
Easyspeak
Biggest Concern: Next Time Money No Enough.
we need to focus on other things aside from money too.
like next time money no enough. jobs no enough - children no work, no money!
(dunno what happened to the other things.)
Ms Nicole Seah: I think the single biggest concern I have about Singapore, and this is the same concern that propelled me to join the Opposition, is the fact that we are growing so fast economically as a nation and in the process we are leaving many Singaporeans behind. I think that the aim of a government is to look out for the welfare of the people. I'm not advocating a welfare state where people become overly dependent but I think the current approach to taking care of the disenfranchised in society is minimalist, and I think that a lot more can be done to at least ensure that their basic needs are being met.
EasySpeak
Biggest concern: Welfare no enough - right now. Basic needs not met.
Want more welfare - but not too much that people become lazy bastards.
How fix? A lot more can be done... (not specified how.)
At what point would you draw the line between useful online criticism and ranting you would ignore?
Easyspeak : What is useful Internet criticism and what is not?
Ms Tin: For online discussions, if it is for personal stuff, then I think these can be put aside. What is more important is the discussion of issues. There is a lot of space and potential to do that online. Many of the younger generation spend a lot of time online, and this is an avenue whereby it would be useful to engage the younger ones. Because online is anytime, anywhere you have connection - 3G for example, you can do it anywhere. I think it is an important area that we should not neglect. At the same time what is on the ground is very important. Physically we are here, the problems municipally are here. We see for ourselves, we hear for ourselves, we talk to residents. I think that is very important, so I would not say online is the sole important avenue.
Easyspeak
Where draw line? If too personal, /ignore.
Useful criticism: not answered.
But internet is good place, is has many young people to talk to. and you can do it anywhere. and we are on the ground with the problems, we see, we hear, we talk. other places is good too.
Ms Seah: I am very mindful of all the comments I receive online. I know that a lot of them are quite positive, but at the same time I do pay very strong attention to the neutral or the negative comments because I feel they have identified my gaps and that is how I can improve. However I draw the line at personal attacks; I draw the line at comments that doubt my capability based on very personal things such as the way I talk, the way I dress, the way I look. These are things that I do not entertain as constructive feedback.
I would not respond to such comments at all. I haven't had the time to respond to all the comments but I do take note of the constructive feedback, and I do work it into the way I present myself. For example, there have been quite a few comments saying, 'all of you have correctly identified the problems facing Singapore today as a result of the policies, but what are the proposals to counter this?'. This is something I have been trying to formulate - we already have a manifesto in place but I need to share more of our manifesto at the rally so as to let people know what our solutions are, and that alternative parties do have viable solutions to be presented.
Easyspeak
Where draw line? If personal attacks that are irrelevant. /ignore
Useful criticism: Everything that not personal attack can be useful.
Want to say how fix problems (next time.)
Should the voting age be lowered?
Ms Tin: It is a matter of calibration. Where do you draw the line? For now it has always been set at 21. Perhaps we can commission a study and see at which point - from a human development point of view - is a person mature enough to decide for the long term. As long as you are clear about what you want in the future, that is the right age. Twenty-one is probably an arbitrary criteria, in my view. If you ask me whether it should go up or go down, I can't say for sure until there is a study done.
Easyspeak
Is should have younger voters : Is not sure.
How old : now is 21. must commission study and see when peoples become smart enough to think. only after study then decide.
Ms Seah: I think it's a pity that even at the university level there are many who are still quite politically apathetic, or at least that was the feeling I got from my time at NUS. I think in other developed democracies there are a lot of kids who take an interest in politics at a younger age. But I think the tide is changing, I think this elections there are younger Singaporeans who are not eligible to vote but they are already concerned about the issues at hand. They are taking the time to read up and find out more. That's a very encouraging sign.
I feel that in junior college and polytechnic level, the kind of learning they go through is based on a lot of questioning, a lot of reasoning, a lot of critical thinking. I think by then they should be able to develop their political views already. It would be a pity if at age 18 they are mature enough to think critically about other things but yet politics is still off limits to them. I do think that the voting age should be lowered to 18.
Easyspeak
Is should have younger voters : Yes.
How old : 18
Why : They already learned how to think smart.
What do you think constituents above the age of 50 are most worried about?
Ms Tin: There are two things. One is in terms of the infrastrucure. The elderly are physically older, so the way they move is slower and they need a lot of care and attention. We need to make sure that their access to amenties and facilties is easy. In Macpherson we have done a lot of upgrading in the past years, and we have almost completed all the barrier-free access across Macperhson to help our elderly move around, interact with people and better use the facilities and services. The other thing is to help them cope with the cost of living. Many are retired or retiring. Especially those who are retired, they have no source of income. A lot of them come from lower income families so they are also struggling to make ends meet. So financially, it can be a challenge. I think these are the two areas of concern. It is not just in Macpherson, but nationally as well.
Easyspeak
what oldies worried about? 1) Cannot walk, cannot get around. 2) high cost of living
how fix: 1) make easier to get around. 2) it can be a challenge across whole country... (=not addressed)
Ms Seah: After doing our rounds the feedback we have gotten is that old people are very worried about falling ill. I think they are starting to recognise that healthcare costs are getting more and more exorbitant in Singapore. As a result they are very afraid to fall sick and be a burden to their families. On top of that the rising cost of living is another issue. This eats into their daily expenses for their very staple necessities, like the food they need to eat at the hawker centres, things like that. So I think that they do feel the pinch that has arisen from the recent inflation and tax increases.
Easyspeak
What oldies worried about : Falling sick. Rising costs of healthcare, burden on family. High cost of living.
How fix: (not addressed)
(To Ms Tin) What do you appreciate most about the Opposition today?
Ms Tin: I think they are definitely more more courageous today. I can see that out of the 87 seats, 82 are contested. I think that is a good sign. Having a contest is something we should encourage. At the end of the day it is a contest of ideas. We should definitely give the option to Singaporeans. It is also in a way a report card of the party as well, to see if we have done well in the past years. I think it is something that is valuable and important
Easyspeak
Why I like opposition : they are braver now. They give report card.
(To Ms Seah) What do you appreciate the most about the PAP today?
Ms Seah: I think one thing we cannot deny - they have developed Singapore from a small fishing village to a robust economy. And I think they have done a good job putting Singapore on the world map, so events such as F1 have drummed up a fair bit of interest overseas. I do feel the spillover effect as a result of this, where you have tourists coming in, making use of the amenities. I do still feel that more can be done for the local merchants during this time, as there are some people who still complain traffic to their shops remains slow during this period and it affects their business. So I think more measures can be put in place. But overall, events like F1 have done well to raise the visibility of Singapore as a country.
Easyspeak
Why I like PAP : They is doing good till now.
F1 is very important.
(The interviews were conducted separately and face to face.)
5 questions with: Tin Pei Ling and Nicole Seah
The full Q&A with the rookie PAP and NSP candidates for Marine Parade GRC
by Sheralyn Tay and Tan Weizhen 05:35 AM May 01, 2011
What is the single biggest concern you have about Singapore?
Ms Tin Pei Ling: The single biggest concern I have for Singapore is the long term sustainability of the development of Singapore. I think there are a few dimensions to it. First and foremost while we don't want to just focus on the economy, I think it is very important because without the overall success of the economy, we won't have jobs for our people. Without jobs, without income, it is very hard for Singaporeans to lead a good quality of life or to even survive. If you ask me what is the biggest concern, it is the survival of Singapore; not just domestically, but regionally and internationally. It is about ensuring there are jobs and a future for Singaporeans - for us, our children and our children's children
Easyspeak
Biggest Concern: Next Time Money No Enough.
we need to focus on other things aside from money too.
like next time money no enough. jobs no enough - children no work, no money!
(dunno what happened to the other things.)
Ms Nicole Seah: I think the single biggest concern I have about Singapore, and this is the same concern that propelled me to join the Opposition, is the fact that we are growing so fast economically as a nation and in the process we are leaving many Singaporeans behind. I think that the aim of a government is to look out for the welfare of the people. I'm not advocating a welfare state where people become overly dependent but I think the current approach to taking care of the disenfranchised in society is minimalist, and I think that a lot more can be done to at least ensure that their basic needs are being met.
EasySpeak
Biggest concern: Welfare no enough - right now. Basic needs not met.
Want more welfare - but not too much that people become lazy bastards.
How fix? A lot more can be done... (not specified how.)
At what point would you draw the line between useful online criticism and ranting you would ignore?
Easyspeak : What is useful Internet criticism and what is not?
Ms Tin: For online discussions, if it is for personal stuff, then I think these can be put aside. What is more important is the discussion of issues. There is a lot of space and potential to do that online. Many of the younger generation spend a lot of time online, and this is an avenue whereby it would be useful to engage the younger ones. Because online is anytime, anywhere you have connection - 3G for example, you can do it anywhere. I think it is an important area that we should not neglect. At the same time what is on the ground is very important. Physically we are here, the problems municipally are here. We see for ourselves, we hear for ourselves, we talk to residents. I think that is very important, so I would not say online is the sole important avenue.
Easyspeak
Where draw line? If too personal, /ignore.
Useful criticism: not answered.
But internet is good place, is has many young people to talk to. and you can do it anywhere. and we are on the ground with the problems, we see, we hear, we talk. other places is good too.
Ms Seah: I am very mindful of all the comments I receive online. I know that a lot of them are quite positive, but at the same time I do pay very strong attention to the neutral or the negative comments because I feel they have identified my gaps and that is how I can improve. However I draw the line at personal attacks; I draw the line at comments that doubt my capability based on very personal things such as the way I talk, the way I dress, the way I look. These are things that I do not entertain as constructive feedback.
I would not respond to such comments at all. I haven't had the time to respond to all the comments but I do take note of the constructive feedback, and I do work it into the way I present myself. For example, there have been quite a few comments saying, 'all of you have correctly identified the problems facing Singapore today as a result of the policies, but what are the proposals to counter this?'. This is something I have been trying to formulate - we already have a manifesto in place but I need to share more of our manifesto at the rally so as to let people know what our solutions are, and that alternative parties do have viable solutions to be presented.
Easyspeak
Where draw line? If personal attacks that are irrelevant. /ignore
Useful criticism: Everything that not personal attack can be useful.
Want to say how fix problems (next time.)
Should the voting age be lowered?
Ms Tin: It is a matter of calibration. Where do you draw the line? For now it has always been set at 21. Perhaps we can commission a study and see at which point - from a human development point of view - is a person mature enough to decide for the long term. As long as you are clear about what you want in the future, that is the right age. Twenty-one is probably an arbitrary criteria, in my view. If you ask me whether it should go up or go down, I can't say for sure until there is a study done.
Easyspeak
Is should have younger voters : Is not sure.
How old : now is 21. must commission study and see when peoples become smart enough to think. only after study then decide.
Ms Seah: I think it's a pity that even at the university level there are many who are still quite politically apathetic, or at least that was the feeling I got from my time at NUS. I think in other developed democracies there are a lot of kids who take an interest in politics at a younger age. But I think the tide is changing, I think this elections there are younger Singaporeans who are not eligible to vote but they are already concerned about the issues at hand. They are taking the time to read up and find out more. That's a very encouraging sign.
I feel that in junior college and polytechnic level, the kind of learning they go through is based on a lot of questioning, a lot of reasoning, a lot of critical thinking. I think by then they should be able to develop their political views already. It would be a pity if at age 18 they are mature enough to think critically about other things but yet politics is still off limits to them. I do think that the voting age should be lowered to 18.
Easyspeak
Is should have younger voters : Yes.
How old : 18
Why : They already learned how to think smart.
What do you think constituents above the age of 50 are most worried about?
Ms Tin: There are two things. One is in terms of the infrastrucure. The elderly are physically older, so the way they move is slower and they need a lot of care and attention. We need to make sure that their access to amenties and facilties is easy. In Macpherson we have done a lot of upgrading in the past years, and we have almost completed all the barrier-free access across Macperhson to help our elderly move around, interact with people and better use the facilities and services. The other thing is to help them cope with the cost of living. Many are retired or retiring. Especially those who are retired, they have no source of income. A lot of them come from lower income families so they are also struggling to make ends meet. So financially, it can be a challenge. I think these are the two areas of concern. It is not just in Macpherson, but nationally as well.
Easyspeak
what oldies worried about? 1) Cannot walk, cannot get around. 2) high cost of living
how fix: 1) make easier to get around. 2) it can be a challenge across whole country... (=not addressed)
Ms Seah: After doing our rounds the feedback we have gotten is that old people are very worried about falling ill. I think they are starting to recognise that healthcare costs are getting more and more exorbitant in Singapore. As a result they are very afraid to fall sick and be a burden to their families. On top of that the rising cost of living is another issue. This eats into their daily expenses for their very staple necessities, like the food they need to eat at the hawker centres, things like that. So I think that they do feel the pinch that has arisen from the recent inflation and tax increases.
Easyspeak
What oldies worried about : Falling sick. Rising costs of healthcare, burden on family. High cost of living.
How fix: (not addressed)
(To Ms Tin) What do you appreciate most about the Opposition today?
Ms Tin: I think they are definitely more more courageous today. I can see that out of the 87 seats, 82 are contested. I think that is a good sign. Having a contest is something we should encourage. At the end of the day it is a contest of ideas. We should definitely give the option to Singaporeans. It is also in a way a report card of the party as well, to see if we have done well in the past years. I think it is something that is valuable and important
Easyspeak
Why I like opposition : they are braver now. They give report card.
(To Ms Seah) What do you appreciate the most about the PAP today?
Ms Seah: I think one thing we cannot deny - they have developed Singapore from a small fishing village to a robust economy. And I think they have done a good job putting Singapore on the world map, so events such as F1 have drummed up a fair bit of interest overseas. I do feel the spillover effect as a result of this, where you have tourists coming in, making use of the amenities. I do still feel that more can be done for the local merchants during this time, as there are some people who still complain traffic to their shops remains slow during this period and it affects their business. So I think more measures can be put in place. But overall, events like F1 have done well to raise the visibility of Singapore as a country.
Easyspeak
Why I like PAP : They is doing good till now.
F1 is very important.
(The interviews were conducted separately and face to face.)
Short cuts
A long time ago...
thirty uniformed men stood stock still in rank and file.
a senior warrant officer paced before them, glaring at them one by one.
"Gentleman, welcum to **** camp. I, am your RSM. They call me The Tiger. Tiger T**."
(very slight sniggers)
"Most important here, is don't make me angry. Duuuuuun make the Tiger Bark at you!"
(choked back laughter)
he stops pacing.
"What? Why you laugh??"
"still laugh! You young people... the more I talking, the worse I get!"
(hysterical laughter)
thirty uniformed men stood stock still in rank and file.
a senior warrant officer paced before them, glaring at them one by one.
"Gentleman, welcum to **** camp. I, am your RSM. They call me The Tiger. Tiger T**."
(very slight sniggers)
"Most important here, is don't make me angry. Duuuuuun make the Tiger Bark at you!"
(choked back laughter)
he stops pacing.
"What? Why you laugh??"
"still laugh! You young people... the more I talking, the worse I get!"
(hysterical laughter)
Change
Everyone's saying it. Change, you can feel it. Change is around the corner.
You know what my greatest problem is with this elections?
We have gone from being politically apathetic to politically angry.
We - read the youth, the sub thirty-fives, and the not-so-youths, the greater than thirty fives.
We the people, one people, one nation...
We haven't gone from politically apathetic to politically aware; we've gone from politically apathetic to politically stupid.
I'm as much a fan of the underdog as everyone else; I have the same grouses as everyone else.
But I want to listen, and hear the words. I don't want to hear what I want to hear - I want to understand what the speakers are saying.
Loud, amazonian words that echo with resounding conviction sound very nice. They look nice too, like a scene from Braveheart. But if all that comes out is "we need an opposition, we need checks and balances so the government cannot run rampant over us" - Over, and over. and over again.
Well, that's not helping is it? Re-stating the perceived problem over and over again doesn't make you a leader in my eyes. It makes you repetitive. It makes your fiery words nothing more than propaganda, of a different form.
The office analogy.
I can see that the photocopier is on the fritz, and the coffee machine is bust.
If I keep saying it loudly enough, does that mean I get to be manager?
If I accuse the manager of slacking off enough, does that mean I can do his job?
Obviously not.
If I want CHANGE, I have to:
a) call a repairman in, get everything fixed up and pay for it out of my pocket - basically do his job, myself, because I am interested in the job getting done and fixing the problem. I can do his job, but I really just want the job done.
or
b) speak to HIS boss, tell him how he is slacking off, and propose a solution: I can call this repairman, this is the number, I've gotten quotes, this is the cheapest, I want reimbursement..... - basically offer to do his job so that someone will see I am better than he is, and give me his job. I can do his job, and I want his job.
If all I do is make the whole office aware of a problem that they're already aware of, does that make me managerial material?
Hopes are running high as the herds work themselves up, listening to inspirational drivel.
I'm feeling a little disappointed.
You know what my greatest problem is with this elections?
We have gone from being politically apathetic to politically angry.
We - read the youth, the sub thirty-fives, and the not-so-youths, the greater than thirty fives.
We the people, one people, one nation...
We haven't gone from politically apathetic to politically aware; we've gone from politically apathetic to politically stupid.
I'm as much a fan of the underdog as everyone else; I have the same grouses as everyone else.
But I want to listen, and hear the words. I don't want to hear what I want to hear - I want to understand what the speakers are saying.
Loud, amazonian words that echo with resounding conviction sound very nice. They look nice too, like a scene from Braveheart. But if all that comes out is "we need an opposition, we need checks and balances so the government cannot run rampant over us" - Over, and over. and over again.
Well, that's not helping is it? Re-stating the perceived problem over and over again doesn't make you a leader in my eyes. It makes you repetitive. It makes your fiery words nothing more than propaganda, of a different form.
The office analogy.
I can see that the photocopier is on the fritz, and the coffee machine is bust.
If I keep saying it loudly enough, does that mean I get to be manager?
If I accuse the manager of slacking off enough, does that mean I can do his job?
Obviously not.
If I want CHANGE, I have to:
a) call a repairman in, get everything fixed up and pay for it out of my pocket - basically do his job, myself, because I am interested in the job getting done and fixing the problem. I can do his job, but I really just want the job done.
or
b) speak to HIS boss, tell him how he is slacking off, and propose a solution: I can call this repairman, this is the number, I've gotten quotes, this is the cheapest, I want reimbursement..... - basically offer to do his job so that someone will see I am better than he is, and give me his job. I can do his job, and I want his job.
If all I do is make the whole office aware of a problem that they're already aware of, does that make me managerial material?
Hopes are running high as the herds work themselves up, listening to inspirational drivel.
I'm feeling a little disappointed.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Ground
Maybe they're just a vocal minority, a rare few who take arms and go online, and even go live.
Or maybe not.
Questions:
Are those voices of support? Perhaps rallying calls to others to listen?
And then... is that a silence of disinterest?
Hmm.
******
Personally, I have reservations about this one. Is the force strong in her? Really and truly?
Or is she just more self-aware and people-savvy than her MIW counterpart?
Listen to the words.
They're the words guaranteed to strike a chord in you.
They're the words to make you angry.
*****
"It's about You."
Yes. This is what Gen-Y wants to hear.
*****
I hear the words, and I hear nice thoughts. Idealistic thoughts. The big question for the opposition is - have you got what it takes? Really? Each and every one of you? To form a government, and run a country, the way you want to? Have you done all your homework? Have you done your contingency planning, your plan Bs if A doesn't work? Are you more proactive than reactive?
Are you different?
(Or are you just... angry?)
Winning the elections is only the first step...
Or maybe not.
Questions:
Are those voices of support? Perhaps rallying calls to others to listen?
And then... is that a silence of disinterest?
Hmm.
******
Personally, I have reservations about this one. Is the force strong in her? Really and truly?
Or is she just more self-aware and people-savvy than her MIW counterpart?
Listen to the words.
They're the words guaranteed to strike a chord in you.
They're the words to make you angry.
*****
"It's about You."
Yes. This is what Gen-Y wants to hear.
*****
I hear the words, and I hear nice thoughts. Idealistic thoughts. The big question for the opposition is - have you got what it takes? Really? Each and every one of you? To form a government, and run a country, the way you want to? Have you done all your homework? Have you done your contingency planning, your plan Bs if A doesn't work? Are you more proactive than reactive?
Are you different?
(Or are you just... angry?)
Winning the elections is only the first step...
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Tin Pei Ling is Not Young.
There's a lot to think about this elections. A lot that can be written, and too much that should not be said.
Other people are writing and saying these things. These are the Youth, the much hyped members of Generation Y who feel that they can write and speak with impunity; who were not born in the turbulent times of yesteryear, who do not remember because they were not there. I worry for them. I think that we may not quite have come as far as we think, and that their time is not... quite upon us yet.
Singapore is not quite ready for a myopic Me generation, that can think only of itself, and that equates running something as large and complex a country to the simple needs of the individuals.
I would have been distressed in my youth to think that an older self would have changed so very much that I would advocate moderation. I was young and hotheaded then, and I bore the men in white no love. I am older now; I bear them as little love as before, but some of the time I see sense behind the things they do and say, where before I could not. And some of the time they compromise themselves for a few Hard Truths, that cannot be told. Yet some of the shenanigans this elections... some of the antics have been hard to swallow. I can't write about those. Old habits die hard, and even if the culture of fear exists only between my ears, it's still there.
I can touch on some simple things though.
Tin Pei Ling is not young.
She is old enough to be a mother of two, even three. To be responsible for the well being of other lives, to have to think for them, and their futures. 27 is not old in this ridiculous country - it's nearly past prime, time for the shelf...
Nicole Seah is young.
Barely old enough to be a mother of a newborn babe. Fresh out of university. Someone not expected to have an ounce of responsibility about her, who could easy get away with going clubbing and being a good time party girl - someone not old enough to need to settle down and be responsible.
I watched the videos, same as everyone else.
I saw two very, very different individuals. One looked like a person who knew what it was to be responsible, who was self-aware, who could empathize with a target audience. Who had grasped the socio-political issues that were relevant to her and her "clients".
The other looked like someone trying to say all the right things - like someone who wanted to be the other.
Perhaps it's all window dressing. Perhaps it's all substance over form. Perhaps the proof of the pudding is in the eating as the men in white are so wont to say.Or perhaps not.
One thing is for sure - it's really, really not about how old they are.
It's about how mature they are - how old they are in their heads - how they see themselves in their heads - how responsible they want or do not want to be - why they are choosing the paths they are: their motives.
It's about who they were even before signing up for the cause - not about on the job learning or having the potential to become someone else.
Let's be very frank. Tin Pei Ling is not young. Nicole Seah is young.
One seems to be immature, and the other looks mature.
Tin Pei Ling is not that pretty. Neither is Nicole Seah, for that matter. I have friends and acquaintences far more blessed in the looks departments.
We're looking at them through very jaundiced eyes, comparing one to the other. We're not being objective.
Objectively speaking, BOTH these girls are not ready - both of them will have to learn on the job. Both of them have not learned the experiences born of hard-truths and mistakes that come only with age.
Both of them would lose nothing by waiting a little while longer to assume the mantle of tribal elder. Because that's really all an MP is, in this country.
Now is not the time to be raising fledgelings into government, when government looks so shaky and uncertain. Now is the time for leaders, for people who know how to fill in the cracks and shore up the faults - before the system breaks under its own weight.
******
The men in white need to know this: a state-created champion of Youth (and "new media" expert!) just will not work.
Generation Y is young.
Generation Y is immature and filled with teenage angst.
Generation Y is selfish and impetuous.
Generation Y does want not to hear sob stories about fathers, heart attacks and coffee shops - Generation Y does not want to hear that I am a common man/woman from the street and so I can be your leader. Generation Y doesn't give a flying f*** about Your Suffering or your Commonality.
Generation Y wants instant gratification - Generation Y wants musicians born and note made through sweat and hard work. Discovered overnight through insta-celebrity reality TV.
Generation Y wants their leaders to be strong - not to cry in public. To say that they have no regrets to date that will cripple them.
Generation Y wants their leaders to EITHER be common men but not wear it on their shoulder and trumpet it to the world - YET STILL be "uncommonly talented" enough to do things that they themselves cannot -- OR ESLSE be the uncommon man, born with a silver spoon in the ass - but with an unspoken humility that has the same effect - not trumpeting it to the world - with that same undefinable talent that transforms them into more than the layman can be.
Generation Y wants their leaders to look alive, sparkle, and shine. To be witty on their feet, to be unique, to have a fresh perspective - or at least a strongly personal perspective on things.
And most of all Generation Y wants their champion to emerge though popular vote - not be named by a "benevolant" father figure.
*****
Desmond Lee is too old to be a champion - he is Generation X.
But I applaud him for remaining the Gentleman that I vaguely remember him being, back in school.
It was good of him to help his opponents pass the line.
We need more people like him - in both camps. We need less of the ugliness, less talk about incorrectly documented employment statuses, or quibbling matters of mere seconds. We need more good conduct, and fair competition this elections.
We need leaders, not children.
Other people are writing and saying these things. These are the Youth, the much hyped members of Generation Y who feel that they can write and speak with impunity; who were not born in the turbulent times of yesteryear, who do not remember because they were not there. I worry for them. I think that we may not quite have come as far as we think, and that their time is not... quite upon us yet.
Singapore is not quite ready for a myopic Me generation, that can think only of itself, and that equates running something as large and complex a country to the simple needs of the individuals.
I would have been distressed in my youth to think that an older self would have changed so very much that I would advocate moderation. I was young and hotheaded then, and I bore the men in white no love. I am older now; I bear them as little love as before, but some of the time I see sense behind the things they do and say, where before I could not. And some of the time they compromise themselves for a few Hard Truths, that cannot be told. Yet some of the shenanigans this elections... some of the antics have been hard to swallow. I can't write about those. Old habits die hard, and even if the culture of fear exists only between my ears, it's still there.
I can touch on some simple things though.
Tin Pei Ling is not young.
She is old enough to be a mother of two, even three. To be responsible for the well being of other lives, to have to think for them, and their futures. 27 is not old in this ridiculous country - it's nearly past prime, time for the shelf...
Nicole Seah is young.
Barely old enough to be a mother of a newborn babe. Fresh out of university. Someone not expected to have an ounce of responsibility about her, who could easy get away with going clubbing and being a good time party girl - someone not old enough to need to settle down and be responsible.
I watched the videos, same as everyone else.
I saw two very, very different individuals. One looked like a person who knew what it was to be responsible, who was self-aware, who could empathize with a target audience. Who had grasped the socio-political issues that were relevant to her and her "clients".
The other looked like someone trying to say all the right things - like someone who wanted to be the other.
Perhaps it's all window dressing. Perhaps it's all substance over form. Perhaps the proof of the pudding is in the eating as the men in white are so wont to say.Or perhaps not.
One thing is for sure - it's really, really not about how old they are.
It's about how mature they are - how old they are in their heads - how they see themselves in their heads - how responsible they want or do not want to be - why they are choosing the paths they are: their motives.
It's about who they were even before signing up for the cause - not about on the job learning or having the potential to become someone else.
Let's be very frank. Tin Pei Ling is not young. Nicole Seah is young.
One seems to be immature, and the other looks mature.
Tin Pei Ling is not that pretty. Neither is Nicole Seah, for that matter. I have friends and acquaintences far more blessed in the looks departments.
We're looking at them through very jaundiced eyes, comparing one to the other. We're not being objective.
Objectively speaking, BOTH these girls are not ready - both of them will have to learn on the job. Both of them have not learned the experiences born of hard-truths and mistakes that come only with age.
Both of them would lose nothing by waiting a little while longer to assume the mantle of tribal elder. Because that's really all an MP is, in this country.
Now is not the time to be raising fledgelings into government, when government looks so shaky and uncertain. Now is the time for leaders, for people who know how to fill in the cracks and shore up the faults - before the system breaks under its own weight.
******
The men in white need to know this: a state-created champion of Youth (and "new media" expert!) just will not work.
Generation Y is young.
Generation Y is immature and filled with teenage angst.
Generation Y is selfish and impetuous.
Generation Y does want not to hear sob stories about fathers, heart attacks and coffee shops - Generation Y does not want to hear that I am a common man/woman from the street and so I can be your leader. Generation Y doesn't give a flying f*** about Your Suffering or your Commonality.
Generation Y wants instant gratification - Generation Y wants musicians born and note made through sweat and hard work. Discovered overnight through insta-celebrity reality TV.
Generation Y wants their leaders to be strong - not to cry in public. To say that they have no regrets to date that will cripple them.
Generation Y wants their leaders to EITHER be common men but not wear it on their shoulder and trumpet it to the world - YET STILL be "uncommonly talented" enough to do things that they themselves cannot -- OR ESLSE be the uncommon man, born with a silver spoon in the ass - but with an unspoken humility that has the same effect - not trumpeting it to the world - with that same undefinable talent that transforms them into more than the layman can be.
Generation Y wants their leaders to look alive, sparkle, and shine. To be witty on their feet, to be unique, to have a fresh perspective - or at least a strongly personal perspective on things.
And most of all Generation Y wants their champion to emerge though popular vote - not be named by a "benevolant" father figure.
*****
Desmond Lee is too old to be a champion - he is Generation X.
But I applaud him for remaining the Gentleman that I vaguely remember him being, back in school.
It was good of him to help his opponents pass the line.
We need more people like him - in both camps. We need less of the ugliness, less talk about incorrectly documented employment statuses, or quibbling matters of mere seconds. We need more good conduct, and fair competition this elections.
We need leaders, not children.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
The Pledge
We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and
progress for our nation.
我们是新加坡公民，
誓愿不分种族、言语、宗教，
团结一致，
建设公正平等的民主社会，
并为实现国家之幸福、繁荣与进步，
共同努力。
This was the pledge as I knew it, when I was little.
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and
progress for our nation.
我们是新加坡公民，
誓愿不分种族、言语、宗教，
团结一致，
建设公正平等的民主社会，
并为实现国家之幸福、繁荣与进步，
共同努力。
This was the pledge as I knew it, when I was little.
Friday, April 22, 2011
The Mechanist
I've been thinking. It doesn't happen that often these days, but old habits die hard.
I'm doing a masters at a certain university in the west right now in something very esoteric. It wasn't my choice, and it was a mistake.
Many of the modules are poorly taught by foreigners who can barely speak English, let alone communicate complex concepts to the students.
One of the modules is taught by a Professor who speaks English fluently and clearly thinks in a very high-level way. So much so that he, too, cannot communicate the basic concepts to anyone who doesn't think at the same level.
One of our projects involved tens of thousands of computations to arrive at the desired outcomes. After all of two slides - about eight lines of text on the subject. It left me with a bitter taste in my mouth, and a desire to ask him :
Nabei. You &*(&*er (yes, asterix and all.) If I give you one lecture on performing a Whipple's operation and then told you to go do it over the weekend as homework how would you feel? What if I made my lecture really really technical and told you to go home and read what Kocherisation is by yourself before I examined you in your operative technique?
How would I like to be taught? I'd like to be taught by people who know what they are doing.
I'd like to be taught by people who can relate to me, who I can relate to as well, who can communicate clearly with me, who take my desires into consideration, and most of all, know what they are doing.
In that light, let's take a look at the elections.
In all honesty, this elections will not see a fundamental shift in power. I was reading Temasek Review until they went down, because, gosh darn it they were funny. The place is dominated by immature, rabid anti-establishment morons with a single agenda : bring death to the "PAPies" (or whatever)... and half of them write like speechwriters for... the Chinese Communist Party or something. But in their vitroil they're actually quite... entertaining, and some of the pictures they put up are pretty amusing. They're baying for blood, and Change RIGHT NOW.
Mr Chen Show Mao knows better - he didn't return as the messiah to redeem the nation from the clutches of a one-party system. He said as much - he was coming back to initiate the process of change, to start in motion the machine that would someday restore a credible opposition.
And therein lies the truth of it : the face of politics has evolved so... far so that our opposition is now in-credible.
Some of the individuals look promising, but there is no dream-team. There is no opposition. Single individuals do not a party make.
This election is not about an overnight shift in political leadership.
It is about the individuals and their candidacies, or claims to candidacy.
Who do I want in parliament?
I want people who know what they are doing. I want people who take my desires into consideration, who can communicate clearly with me, who I can relate to, and who relate to me as well.
There are promising candidates in all the parties - the PAP included. I want to know just how promising these people really are. I'd like to judge them as objectively as possible, because... these are people who will be Governing, for God's sakes.
Take Dr Puthucheary for instance - a man does not get to become a senior consultant in Pediatrics - in KK hospital not less - without an iota of EQ. I'd like to hear more from him - not read second hand what he purportedly said, in response to something he was purportedly asked. Has anyone ever seen that particular interview everyone's so upset about - anywhere online? I'd like to know how he thinks, and what he thinks about healthcare, for instance.
Take Nicole Seah, who looks (comparatively to someone else...) so very, very promising in her razortv speech, having had ample opportunity to do her past-year-paper rehearsels to some very familiar questions. I'd like to hear what she has to say when she's really challenged, and break it all down to understand how she thinks. She sounds very persuasive and mature - but that's what she does for a living - she sells images. She's an advertising executive. What policies would she personally like changed? How would she personally approach them? (not just party lines, but real, off-the-cuff thoughts and opinions)
I enjoy watching interviews when the candidates are clearly thinking; it's a little bit like debating. You see it in their eyes, their eyebrows furrow a little, or their eyes go a little vacant. The wheels spin. Intelligent things happen, or don't. And then the words come out and you Know.
In contrast when everything's been carefully rehearsed, the answers come a little too quickly, without pause. Faces bear relief, or are stony masks while words come flooding out in breathless torrents, and perhaps the words don't quite make sense when lines or words are missed here and there and the recital goes a little wonky but the narrative just carries on, and on... because all thoughts are focused - not on the question - but on the answers.
you Know too, then.
*********
What is UP with Singtel and Facebook?!
*********
“The person in the photo is just my friend. He works for a community club. We took that photo during one of the grassroots leaders’ wedding.”
“He was never my boyfriend. I find the episode extremely funny,”
Just a thought.
This is actually the wrong response.
It just struck me why.
If I were in her shoes - or if any of you were in her shoes, would we be finding it amusing that our friend was getting bashed online for associating with us? The guy's been called fat, ugly, unworthy - and a host of other things.
How is his personal life suffering? Is there any backlash to his own relationships? If he's truly just an innocent bystander, he deserves our sympathy. Perhaps even an apology.
And he deserves the sympathy of his friends most of all.
Extremely funny?
Got funny meh?
I'm doing a masters at a certain university in the west right now in something very esoteric. It wasn't my choice, and it was a mistake.
Many of the modules are poorly taught by foreigners who can barely speak English, let alone communicate complex concepts to the students.
One of the modules is taught by a Professor who speaks English fluently and clearly thinks in a very high-level way. So much so that he, too, cannot communicate the basic concepts to anyone who doesn't think at the same level.
One of our projects involved tens of thousands of computations to arrive at the desired outcomes. After all of two slides - about eight lines of text on the subject. It left me with a bitter taste in my mouth, and a desire to ask him :
Nabei. You &*(&*er (yes, asterix and all.) If I give you one lecture on performing a Whipple's operation and then told you to go do it over the weekend as homework how would you feel? What if I made my lecture really really technical and told you to go home and read what Kocherisation is by yourself before I examined you in your operative technique?
How would I like to be taught? I'd like to be taught by people who know what they are doing.
I'd like to be taught by people who can relate to me, who I can relate to as well, who can communicate clearly with me, who take my desires into consideration, and most of all, know what they are doing.
In that light, let's take a look at the elections.
In all honesty, this elections will not see a fundamental shift in power. I was reading Temasek Review until they went down, because, gosh darn it they were funny. The place is dominated by immature, rabid anti-establishment morons with a single agenda : bring death to the "PAPies" (or whatever)... and half of them write like speechwriters for... the Chinese Communist Party or something. But in their vitroil they're actually quite... entertaining, and some of the pictures they put up are pretty amusing. They're baying for blood, and Change RIGHT NOW.
Mr Chen Show Mao knows better - he didn't return as the messiah to redeem the nation from the clutches of a one-party system. He said as much - he was coming back to initiate the process of change, to start in motion the machine that would someday restore a credible opposition.
And therein lies the truth of it : the face of politics has evolved so... far so that our opposition is now in-credible.
Some of the individuals look promising, but there is no dream-team. There is no opposition. Single individuals do not a party make.
This election is not about an overnight shift in political leadership.
It is about the individuals and their candidacies, or claims to candidacy.
Who do I want in parliament?
I want people who know what they are doing. I want people who take my desires into consideration, who can communicate clearly with me, who I can relate to, and who relate to me as well.
There are promising candidates in all the parties - the PAP included. I want to know just how promising these people really are. I'd like to judge them as objectively as possible, because... these are people who will be Governing, for God's sakes.
Take Dr Puthucheary for instance - a man does not get to become a senior consultant in Pediatrics - in KK hospital not less - without an iota of EQ. I'd like to hear more from him - not read second hand what he purportedly said, in response to something he was purportedly asked. Has anyone ever seen that particular interview everyone's so upset about - anywhere online? I'd like to know how he thinks, and what he thinks about healthcare, for instance.
Take Nicole Seah, who looks (comparatively to someone else...) so very, very promising in her razortv speech, having had ample opportunity to do her past-year-paper rehearsels to some very familiar questions. I'd like to hear what she has to say when she's really challenged, and break it all down to understand how she thinks. She sounds very persuasive and mature - but that's what she does for a living - she sells images. She's an advertising executive. What policies would she personally like changed? How would she personally approach them? (not just party lines, but real, off-the-cuff thoughts and opinions)
I enjoy watching interviews when the candidates are clearly thinking; it's a little bit like debating. You see it in their eyes, their eyebrows furrow a little, or their eyes go a little vacant. The wheels spin. Intelligent things happen, or don't. And then the words come out and you Know.
In contrast when everything's been carefully rehearsed, the answers come a little too quickly, without pause. Faces bear relief, or are stony masks while words come flooding out in breathless torrents, and perhaps the words don't quite make sense when lines or words are missed here and there and the recital goes a little wonky but the narrative just carries on, and on... because all thoughts are focused - not on the question - but on the answers.
you Know too, then.
*********
What is UP with Singtel and Facebook?!
*********
“The person in the photo is just my friend. He works for a community club. We took that photo during one of the grassroots leaders’ wedding.”
“He was never my boyfriend. I find the episode extremely funny,”
Just a thought.
This is actually the wrong response.
It just struck me why.
If I were in her shoes - or if any of you were in her shoes, would we be finding it amusing that our friend was getting bashed online for associating with us? The guy's been called fat, ugly, unworthy - and a host of other things.
How is his personal life suffering? Is there any backlash to his own relationships? If he's truly just an innocent bystander, he deserves our sympathy. Perhaps even an apology.
And he deserves the sympathy of his friends most of all.
Extremely funny?
Got funny meh?
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Miyagi Dowan Tin Pei Ling
Mr Miyagi writes why he doesn't want Tin Pei Ling to be a member of parliament.
This isn't the heart of the tin man, the eye of the tiger, the center of the storm in a teacup. This is a fringe thought that doesn't need redress, because his isolated deviant thoughts are insignificant when there are bigger issues at hand.
Only a very few people are willing to dissociate maturity from age, and only they are struck by how mature TPL is, or is not; how much depth her replies to Razor TVs interviewer displayed - or did not. How much her present self - and past self - thinks for the future, than for today - or does not. And since only a few people constitute a minority, they are not of substantial consequence.
The sad but real reason our public is angry isn't because they Don't Want Tin Pei Ling, but because they Want to BE Tin Pei Ling.
And hence the vitriol, the rabid dredging through facebook and twitter, and the raking of the coals. Hence the allegations of sleeping with the enemy / boss, the rants that she is too young.
This, being the "majority vote" (google Tin Pei Ling. You'll be amazed at how many pages of angst appear) is worthy of redress, and the Powers that Be have done so. This is bad behaviour, and it shows you are all Blathering Idiots, and therefore Wrong. (and frankly, they are right.) It is a Simple Extension therefore that Since you are Wrong, Tin Pei Ling is the Right Candidate.
Whether she is the right or wrong person for the job, and whether she should button her top button up or not are beyond me.
What I get out of all this, is an immense sadness that we have had so many years as a nation to grow, but this is what we have become.
This isn't the heart of the tin man, the eye of the tiger, the center of the storm in a teacup. This is a fringe thought that doesn't need redress, because his isolated deviant thoughts are insignificant when there are bigger issues at hand.
Only a very few people are willing to dissociate maturity from age, and only they are struck by how mature TPL is, or is not; how much depth her replies to Razor TVs interviewer displayed - or did not. How much her present self - and past self - thinks for the future, than for today - or does not. And since only a few people constitute a minority, they are not of substantial consequence.
The sad but real reason our public is angry isn't because they Don't Want Tin Pei Ling, but because they Want to BE Tin Pei Ling.
And hence the vitriol, the rabid dredging through facebook and twitter, and the raking of the coals. Hence the allegations of sleeping with the enemy / boss, the rants that she is too young.
This, being the "majority vote" (google Tin Pei Ling. You'll be amazed at how many pages of angst appear) is worthy of redress, and the Powers that Be have done so. This is bad behaviour, and it shows you are all Blathering Idiots, and therefore Wrong. (and frankly, they are right.) It is a Simple Extension therefore that Since you are Wrong, Tin Pei Ling is the Right Candidate.
Whether she is the right or wrong person for the job, and whether she should button her top button up or not are beyond me.
What I get out of all this, is an immense sadness that we have had so many years as a nation to grow, but this is what we have become.
Monday, April 4, 2011
The SALAH Handbook
In a sudden moment of catharsis...
... rumours abound on the net how Dr Chee Soon Juan is actually a PAP plant to cause the opposition to own-self explode from the inside-out...
... well the TPL fiasco... maybe, just maybe... the opposition is... could it be? naah...
... but it all fits so well...
devious!
*****
randomthoughtsofamedstudent.blogspot.com is facing his imminent return to the welcoming arms of our local healthcare system with some trepidation, what with all the bad press the local inmates have given him.
Reading him brings me back to when I first came back, and reminds me how I'd wished there was some kind of handbook or manual for me to read, perhaps not to help me cope with what are ultimately very personal issues, but rather to let me know that I wasn't alone, and that someone else out there gave a damn, and really understood. It reminds me of the handfull of people who have asked me what working here is like, after already making the decision to come back and rendering any useful advice I could give (like "DON'T!!! NIET! NEIN! BU YAO!") invalid.
So here it is, the very first draft of the
Singaporean-medics Abroad Looking At returning Home (SALAH)
Handbook.
**************
Welcome to your new life as a houseperson in the world-renowned medical hub that is Singapore.
To successfully make your transition from normal human being to cockroach as seamless as possible, please peruse this entire document before disposing of it.
These are the Fundamental Tenets upon which your new and wonderful life as a physician or surgeon commences :
1. You are Beneath Contempt.
You are Houseman. Your sole purpose is to perform "Changes" (ie menial jobs like taking blood, ordering X rays, etc.)
From time to time you will hear nice words like "learning opportunities", and "protected teaching time", and "mandatory post-call rest hours".
These do not apply to you, since you are not Resident. Residency is reserved for those who have already been Assimilated. One day after your Assimilation you may be afforded Residency. For now, you are Probationary, coupled with Houseman and therefore beneath contempt. (Contempt is Houseman. Resident Houseman is ConteNt.)
As a subcitizen you must realize that you are expected to perform an unreasonable number of changes in a very short time, every day, and to not leave hospital until your changes have been done. In addition, you must complete your changes in time for the results to be ready by the exit round in the evening.
I was fortunate to return as a medical officer and didn't have to suffer the pain of Housemanship in Singapore.
I've watched my housemen coming to work... early... and leaving... late with some sadness, before letting the Medicine of it all wash over me as my housemen drone the results to me, and we go through the checklist of who is well and who isn't. It's just the way it is.
2. You must conform to working hour restrictions.
The ministry now mandates that you keep a log of the number of hours you work in hospital. This means that you must finish your changes in time, and ostensibly knock off work and be out of hospital before a certain time. Regardless of the realities of sheer volume of changes. A houseman who goes beyond their mandated working hours is judged to be inefficient and may be unofficially penalized. A department which has housemen going beyond their mandated hours is judged to be noncompliant, and penalized, officially.
Here are some short phrases to expand your vocabulary :
Everybody likes a team-player.
Truth is subjective.
"Performance Appraisals" are Very Important.
3. The nurses are not your friends
I remember the nurses from the UK who were peers, and interested in what they did.
Our nurses, for all practical purposes, are sentient machines. Much like you are, except you are a Change-making Machine, and they are Bed-Making, Patient-Turning, Report-Passing Machines.
They are a superior model to you, and you are beneath them. This is important to remember, because if ever you overstep your authority on an individual nurse, you will get away with it. She will act subservient to you to your face.
And then all hell will break loose, in a very subtle / not so subtle way, after her colleagues begin to discriminate against you, and after her Sisters get in on the gangbang.
You must remember that they are a separate community, and when push comes to shove it reverts to "Us versus Them" in this country.
I remember an OT nurse from the days when I was in Orthopedics. She was young, pretty, capable, and bright as a button. One of the Profs recognized this and used her to close all his wounds. I first discovered this when I was closing a knee, and she decided to lend me a hand. We smiled at each other and she started closing the opposite end. We shared a silent cameraderie. I marvelled in the privacy of my mind that a nurse could stitch, and so well at that. (OT nurses specialize in counting.) Our two strands met in the center and the result was Immaculate. It was almost a Movie Moment.
Unfortunately, her Sister walked in the door at that point. The result was a mess.
And Loud.
We are not here to work with each other. We are not working in tandem to improve patient welfare. We are working for our own Kind, exclusively. Patient welfare is an incidental byproduct of this union - sometimes.
Bear that in mind, when you are laughing and joking with them, or perhaps flirting lightly - they are not the same as the nurses from where you came.
Be advised to avoid flirting. One of the nursing subroutines is Gossip Making Machine, and Gossip can have unexpected consequences one day in the very, very distant future.
4. Your Role is Different.
The Patient-Doctor relationship is always unique to each consultation, but here in Singapore there is a strong bias towards a Client-Service Provider relationship. This is more frequently than not a more stressful relationship, with less satisfaction afforded to the physician, and more to the patient (or their families).
Young people (read : Me generation) here want to be in control, even if they don't have any fundamental grasp of the salient medical or administrative issues at hand.
They have an understandable perception that they are entitled to a lot, since they are paying a lot.
However many fail to realize that they aren't paying a lot at all, with the government subsidizing most of their healthcare. And that by the same argument that entitles them to be rude to their surgeon / physician, and/or barge in on someone else's consultation and demand to be seen because they have been waiting for too long outside the clinic, and/or complain when they see a doctor leaving clinic / eating food in the cafeteria prior to clinic / complain when they do not get the same doctor for all their visits / complain when they are seen by junior doctors or students -- by that very same argument - that money rules all - private patients who are paying more than them are entitled to more. The straits times forum over the last few days tells a different story though; double standards are sadly the norm and the system backpeddles to save face.
They also don't want to hear it - they don't want to hear that everyone else has been waiting just as long, that the patient you're barging in on now deserves as much time to be seen as you and you're eating into his time wasting time barging in on my room with the only possible outcome - of you being shown back out the door to await your turn - happening whether you vent your frustrations or not. That the doctor leaving clinic isn't even running the same subspecialty as the one you're consulting for / is going to attend to a ward emergency. That the doctors have just finished a long round seeing sick someones who aren't your Grandpa today, but might well be tomorrow... and are snatching a bite before going to run clinic for the next X hours at the very real risk of forgoing lunch, and food is one of those things that keeps people buoyant enough to face a long clinic with a sort-of smile. That junior doctors rotate in and out and even middle grades change teams or hospitals from time to time and that is why you can't see the same doctor through the years, unless you are consistently seen by a consultant - ie a private, paying patient. That big teaching hospitals are teeming with students who will one day be sitting across the table from you as your consultant, and they need to start somewhere too, or else wind up being shitty, incompetent half-trained doctors.
They don't want to hear it. They just want to be told that they are right, and they are king. They want to feel that they are in control, and the fact that they are called later after barging in to the room is proof positive that they made a difference in the grand scheme of things.
What can we do about it? Well, we can eat a hearty breakfast, then grin and bear it... We can be the face of the faceless organization and stonewall the patients politely. We have to - it's Us, or Them.
Speaking of which, I remember once upon a time firmly telling families requesting a "denial of service (information)" to the patients (mum won't be able to take the news that she has cancer. you musn't tell her!) that my patients were my priority, not their families, and that it sounded like they had communication issues and that lying wasn't going to achieve much, since frankly the patients would know eventually - it's their bodies. And that they would be even unhappier being kept in the dark. I would tell them that I'd be back in half an hour to break the news, and perhaps they could use that time positively.
Things are different here. Your role is different here. Your role is to write down in capital letters on the top of the case sheet PATIENT DOES NOT KNOW DIAGNOSIS, or else see to it that someone else does. Because the structures of the family units are different here. The heads of the families are the middle-aged childern, not the elderly. It's all rather confusing, and counter-intuitive. But eventually it strikes you - the old fogies really, really don't want to know. Most of them anyway. They just want to lie in bed and be doted on by their kids, and let the tides wash them whichever way they will. And for the select few who, years later find out after countless colonoscopies that the little operation they had to take out a small harmless lump was in fact a hemicolectomy for carcinoma of the colon, and are outraged... well... nobody really cares about how they feel. They only care that you betrayed the covenant of silence. Prepare for a complaint letter from the family. (Interestingly, the "betrayed" never think to write in and complain about being kept in the dark by their loved ones. Fascinating.)
4. The Patients are Different.
Language for one. It may be a relief to be able to speak in Singlish - for a while. Until that monolingual patient who only speaks Hokkien comes in. (Hua Yi Buay Heow) Or Cantonese. Or Tamil. Or Malay. Or...
Communication is often suboptimal because of this. We rely on family members to help us translate things. Things get lost in translation. Things like "you have cancer" turn into "don't worry there's nothing wrong, you just need a small operation." Things like "I'm sorry we did all we could" turn into "nothing lah."
Old fogies are more passive, as mentioned above.
Young punks are more aggressive.
Overall, people are less educated - not in terms of highest standard of education attained, but in terms of information. They are less informed, and more opinionated - they've read one or two dodgy articles online, or heard something from somebody's aunt, or their dad lived for five years with cancer of the lung before some doctor killed him off after he was admitted to hospital, or their TCM consultant has told them something different -- and suddenly they're the experts, and you're someone to be suspicious of.
These are of course the exceptions to the norm. Most of the time things will pass by smoothly enough. But when you hit a stumbling block like this, what will you do?
It was hard when I first came back, having to explain to a belligerent, inappropriately aggressive family member that novo-7 is not the standard of care for an intracranial haemorrhage, and that grandma might still be dying even with it. It was difficult to think with his face so close to mine that the spittle from his mouth as he shouted was landing on my glasses. I chose to be civil and attempt to explain it to him, with aid of the internet, over and over again until it became apparent that he was not here to hear, but to shout. At which point I told him as much, and left the ward, and hit a wall some distance out from the ward in frustration. (Hitting the wall, it's a turn of phrase, isn't it?)
Now that I've been Assimilated, I do what everyone else does. Talk until their time is up (approximately 5 min) then excuse myself and leave. If they didn't take anything on board in those 5 minutes, in clinic, on the ward... if they were too busy making themselves heard to hear in return - then nothing you say will make a difference. If there's a complaint letter hovering somewhere in the background, chances are it's already been written, and posted to the New Paper - even before Ms X showed up on the ward full of righteous fury.
Interestingly, sometimes Ms X shows up for the first time, after Ms Y and Mr Z, her sister and brother have spent the last month with dear old dad, and are completely informed and understanding. And Ms X will be the one to rain fire and brimstone upon the incompetent healthcare providers so obviously intent on killing dad, nevermind that she doesn't know why he's even been admitted. There's a simple reason for that, I think, and I think it's guilt. Ms X actually deserves more time; I usually give her about 15 to 20 minutes before packing it in.
People are different here.
5. The Other Doctors are Different.
Perhaps these are biased memories, but it seemed easier to be happy with Medicine while back in the UK.
You'd be hard-pressed to find someone here happy and fulfilled in their medical lives. The common grouses are excessive hours, incommensurately low pay and lack of public gratitude.
I think you'd be missing a fundamental truth if you chose to focus on any one single point of the above - or even on all of them combined. The truth of the matter is many doctors are depressed. Cast your net wider and you'll see it's not just doctors.
I remember how everyone used to go get pissed thursday (or was it wednesday?) nights at the pub, from the consultants to housemen. And how we'd all dance and generally make fools of ourselves.
I can't help but compare those memories to the present-day infrequent department parties, when professors and peons auto-segregate, and professors remain... professorial.
Yes, there is decorum and aplomb, and dignity befitting of royalty here. But maybe we've just... forgotten how to have fun.
How to cope? Just remember that fun here starts when you step out of hospital. Remember your family, your wife and your children are what make living worthwhile. I don't know if it works, but that's what everyone does.
7. Ethics are Different.
Be prepared to back down on those ethics your medical school ingrained into you. And prepare yourselves for the changes in your own ethical code which will invariably follow. It's a natural progression.
Perhaps the only real rule is to stay out of trouble, and don't offend anyone, be it your colleagues or your peers.
A few random names to google :
S***n Lim
Eu K*ng W*ng
Also, there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to effect diplomacy. Again, see the above.
More random terms you need to know before you start:
"Do Not Resuscitate" - what is the difference between this and...
"Max Ward Care / Not for SICU / Not for intubation?"
Dangerously Ill (DIL) - what is the difference between this and...
Dangerously Dangerously Ill (DDIL) ?
Hypothetical question :
Is it ethically permissable to inform a family who lives far away that their father / mother is dangerously ill and they should hurry down as soon as they can to see him, if the patient is fading fast and their chances of making it in time are about as high as an opposition team winning a GRC? If not, perhaps it is kinder?
How about if the patient is already dead from say, a massive MI?
8. The Administration is Different.
This goes from the ministerial level, to the SMC, to the SMA, down to your local hospital administration.
There are notable differences between administrations of different countries.
Ours is a strong administration, that is efficient in achieving its aims.
Do not bemoan your "low starting pay" as a cockroach though. There have been recent revisions. Prior to them housemen were truly earning a pittance, at levels inappropriate for university graduates.
Pay revisions are not pegged to civil service. Medical professionals are servants, but apparently uncivil.
There is doubtlessly a reason for this. Perhaps there are just too many of us.
Do not stir the pot, or bite the hand that feeds you. Spectacular things have happened in the past.
The system is oddly dichotomous when analyzed from a financial perspective.
Either way you need to decide early on what your career path will be. Early on is now, when you have just graduated from medical school - because you are a graduate student and significantly older than the rest. There is an unhealthy obsession with age in this country. Life stops after 20, yet 27 year olds are too young for politics...
If your priority is to make money fast and have a comfortable lifestyle, become a GP. The net earnings over time will outstrip those of a government specialist.
The alternative is to give up medicine altogether and use your degree to seek another job. As ridiculous as this sounds now, it isn't. Senior Pilots for instance bring home $50k or more a month. Politicians need money to remain honest and uphold their integrity, so they earn... more than I can count in my head.
If your priority is to make ridiculous amounts of money to swim in, then specialize NOW. Choose your specialty NOW, even before you graduate. Join a residency programme NOW. It's what everyone else is doing, right now... and exit early, and go private. And become a very, very rich one trick horse. Just avoid $24 million bills.
If your heart is in it for your art (ie surgery) or the intellectual challenge (ie medicine) then tough luck. You're doomed to stick it out in government service and earn less than your peers in many of their lucrative business careers, and your lot is to whinge about it for the rest of your life, or else to just put it out of your head altogether and do what you enjoy most. If you fall in the latter category you are admirabe, but probably deluded or else dysfunctional in some way. Sadly, I am in that category.
9. Everything is Different.
Yet everything is the same.
Some things are better, some things are worse. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times and all that.
Standards of living here are good, possibly even high.
Costs of living are also high, if you seek the lifestyle of a young, executive professional, which although you kind-of are, you're not... (remember the cockroach) Decent sized condominiums cost in excess of a million dollars. Landed property cost about four to more times this. COEs are expensive. Annual road tax is about a month's salary.
If you are comfortable with a lower standard of living, you can achieve this comfortably, eg living in a HDB flat - which is fairly good and comfortable, functional living.
Things are clean here. Really clean. Sidewalks are clean, roads are clean, HDB landings are clean. Ministers are clean.
It's just the public toilets that are filthy... MRT toilets made the news today.
For some strange reason people here like to drape toilet paper into the bowl and trail it out, in the mens loos. Perhaps its to line the seats while they squat on the sitting toilets? Nobody ever lifts the seats. This makes for pee-water tracking out onto the floor thanks to inconsiderate laws of physics (capillary action).
This highlights something unspoken about our population.
It is a tiered population. Clean and dirty.
These should be sufficient for now.
... rumours abound on the net how Dr Chee Soon Juan is actually a PAP plant to cause the opposition to own-self explode from the inside-out...
... well the TPL fiasco... maybe, just maybe... the opposition is... could it be? naah...
... but it all fits so well...
devious!
*****
randomthoughtsofamedstudent.blogspot.com is facing his imminent return to the welcoming arms of our local healthcare system with some trepidation, what with all the bad press the local inmates have given him.
Reading him brings me back to when I first came back, and reminds me how I'd wished there was some kind of handbook or manual for me to read, perhaps not to help me cope with what are ultimately very personal issues, but rather to let me know that I wasn't alone, and that someone else out there gave a damn, and really understood. It reminds me of the handfull of people who have asked me what working here is like, after already making the decision to come back and rendering any useful advice I could give (like "DON'T!!! NIET! NEIN! BU YAO!") invalid.
So here it is, the very first draft of the
Singaporean-medics Abroad Looking At returning Home (SALAH)
Handbook.
**************
Welcome to your new life as a houseperson in the world-renowned medical hub that is Singapore.
To successfully make your transition from normal human being to cockroach as seamless as possible, please peruse this entire document before disposing of it.
These are the Fundamental Tenets upon which your new and wonderful life as a physician or surgeon commences :
1. You are Beneath Contempt.
You are Houseman. Your sole purpose is to perform "Changes" (ie menial jobs like taking blood, ordering X rays, etc.)
From time to time you will hear nice words like "learning opportunities", and "protected teaching time", and "mandatory post-call rest hours".
These do not apply to you, since you are not Resident. Residency is reserved for those who have already been Assimilated. One day after your Assimilation you may be afforded Residency. For now, you are Probationary, coupled with Houseman and therefore beneath contempt. (Contempt is Houseman. Resident Houseman is ConteNt.)
As a subcitizen you must realize that you are expected to perform an unreasonable number of changes in a very short time, every day, and to not leave hospital until your changes have been done. In addition, you must complete your changes in time for the results to be ready by the exit round in the evening.
I was fortunate to return as a medical officer and didn't have to suffer the pain of Housemanship in Singapore.
I've watched my housemen coming to work... early... and leaving... late with some sadness, before letting the Medicine of it all wash over me as my housemen drone the results to me, and we go through the checklist of who is well and who isn't. It's just the way it is.
2. You must conform to working hour restrictions.
The ministry now mandates that you keep a log of the number of hours you work in hospital. This means that you must finish your changes in time, and ostensibly knock off work and be out of hospital before a certain time. Regardless of the realities of sheer volume of changes. A houseman who goes beyond their mandated working hours is judged to be inefficient and may be unofficially penalized. A department which has housemen going beyond their mandated hours is judged to be noncompliant, and penalized, officially.
Here are some short phrases to expand your vocabulary :
Everybody likes a team-player.
Truth is subjective.
"Performance Appraisals" are Very Important.
3. The nurses are not your friends
I remember the nurses from the UK who were peers, and interested in what they did.
Our nurses, for all practical purposes, are sentient machines. Much like you are, except you are a Change-making Machine, and they are Bed-Making, Patient-Turning, Report-Passing Machines.
They are a superior model to you, and you are beneath them. This is important to remember, because if ever you overstep your authority on an individual nurse, you will get away with it. She will act subservient to you to your face.
And then all hell will break loose, in a very subtle / not so subtle way, after her colleagues begin to discriminate against you, and after her Sisters get in on the gangbang.
You must remember that they are a separate community, and when push comes to shove it reverts to "Us versus Them" in this country.
I remember an OT nurse from the days when I was in Orthopedics. She was young, pretty, capable, and bright as a button. One of the Profs recognized this and used her to close all his wounds. I first discovered this when I was closing a knee, and she decided to lend me a hand. We smiled at each other and she started closing the opposite end. We shared a silent cameraderie. I marvelled in the privacy of my mind that a nurse could stitch, and so well at that. (OT nurses specialize in counting.) Our two strands met in the center and the result was Immaculate. It was almost a Movie Moment.
Unfortunately, her Sister walked in the door at that point. The result was a mess.
And Loud.
We are not here to work with each other. We are not working in tandem to improve patient welfare. We are working for our own Kind, exclusively. Patient welfare is an incidental byproduct of this union - sometimes.
Bear that in mind, when you are laughing and joking with them, or perhaps flirting lightly - they are not the same as the nurses from where you came.
Be advised to avoid flirting. One of the nursing subroutines is Gossip Making Machine, and Gossip can have unexpected consequences one day in the very, very distant future.
4. Your Role is Different.
The Patient-Doctor relationship is always unique to each consultation, but here in Singapore there is a strong bias towards a Client-Service Provider relationship. This is more frequently than not a more stressful relationship, with less satisfaction afforded to the physician, and more to the patient (or their families).
Young people (read : Me generation) here want to be in control, even if they don't have any fundamental grasp of the salient medical or administrative issues at hand.
They have an understandable perception that they are entitled to a lot, since they are paying a lot.
However many fail to realize that they aren't paying a lot at all, with the government subsidizing most of their healthcare. And that by the same argument that entitles them to be rude to their surgeon / physician, and/or barge in on someone else's consultation and demand to be seen because they have been waiting for too long outside the clinic, and/or complain when they see a doctor leaving clinic / eating food in the cafeteria prior to clinic / complain when they do not get the same doctor for all their visits / complain when they are seen by junior doctors or students -- by that very same argument - that money rules all - private patients who are paying more than them are entitled to more. The straits times forum over the last few days tells a different story though; double standards are sadly the norm and the system backpeddles to save face.
They also don't want to hear it - they don't want to hear that everyone else has been waiting just as long, that the patient you're barging in on now deserves as much time to be seen as you and you're eating into his time wasting time barging in on my room with the only possible outcome - of you being shown back out the door to await your turn - happening whether you vent your frustrations or not. That the doctor leaving clinic isn't even running the same subspecialty as the one you're consulting for / is going to attend to a ward emergency. That the doctors have just finished a long round seeing sick someones who aren't your Grandpa today, but might well be tomorrow... and are snatching a bite before going to run clinic for the next X hours at the very real risk of forgoing lunch, and food is one of those things that keeps people buoyant enough to face a long clinic with a sort-of smile. That junior doctors rotate in and out and even middle grades change teams or hospitals from time to time and that is why you can't see the same doctor through the years, unless you are consistently seen by a consultant - ie a private, paying patient. That big teaching hospitals are teeming with students who will one day be sitting across the table from you as your consultant, and they need to start somewhere too, or else wind up being shitty, incompetent half-trained doctors.
They don't want to hear it. They just want to be told that they are right, and they are king. They want to feel that they are in control, and the fact that they are called later after barging in to the room is proof positive that they made a difference in the grand scheme of things.
What can we do about it? Well, we can eat a hearty breakfast, then grin and bear it... We can be the face of the faceless organization and stonewall the patients politely. We have to - it's Us, or Them.
Speaking of which, I remember once upon a time firmly telling families requesting a "denial of service (information)" to the patients (mum won't be able to take the news that she has cancer. you musn't tell her!) that my patients were my priority, not their families, and that it sounded like they had communication issues and that lying wasn't going to achieve much, since frankly the patients would know eventually - it's their bodies. And that they would be even unhappier being kept in the dark. I would tell them that I'd be back in half an hour to break the news, and perhaps they could use that time positively.
Things are different here. Your role is different here. Your role is to write down in capital letters on the top of the case sheet PATIENT DOES NOT KNOW DIAGNOSIS, or else see to it that someone else does. Because the structures of the family units are different here. The heads of the families are the middle-aged childern, not the elderly. It's all rather confusing, and counter-intuitive. But eventually it strikes you - the old fogies really, really don't want to know. Most of them anyway. They just want to lie in bed and be doted on by their kids, and let the tides wash them whichever way they will. And for the select few who, years later find out after countless colonoscopies that the little operation they had to take out a small harmless lump was in fact a hemicolectomy for carcinoma of the colon, and are outraged... well... nobody really cares about how they feel. They only care that you betrayed the covenant of silence. Prepare for a complaint letter from the family. (Interestingly, the "betrayed" never think to write in and complain about being kept in the dark by their loved ones. Fascinating.)
4. The Patients are Different.
Language for one. It may be a relief to be able to speak in Singlish - for a while. Until that monolingual patient who only speaks Hokkien comes in. (Hua Yi Buay Heow) Or Cantonese. Or Tamil. Or Malay. Or...
Communication is often suboptimal because of this. We rely on family members to help us translate things. Things get lost in translation. Things like "you have cancer" turn into "don't worry there's nothing wrong, you just need a small operation." Things like "I'm sorry we did all we could" turn into "nothing lah."
Old fogies are more passive, as mentioned above.
Young punks are more aggressive.
Overall, people are less educated - not in terms of highest standard of education attained, but in terms of information. They are less informed, and more opinionated - they've read one or two dodgy articles online, or heard something from somebody's aunt, or their dad lived for five years with cancer of the lung before some doctor killed him off after he was admitted to hospital, or their TCM consultant has told them something different -- and suddenly they're the experts, and you're someone to be suspicious of.
These are of course the exceptions to the norm. Most of the time things will pass by smoothly enough. But when you hit a stumbling block like this, what will you do?
It was hard when I first came back, having to explain to a belligerent, inappropriately aggressive family member that novo-7 is not the standard of care for an intracranial haemorrhage, and that grandma might still be dying even with it. It was difficult to think with his face so close to mine that the spittle from his mouth as he shouted was landing on my glasses. I chose to be civil and attempt to explain it to him, with aid of the internet, over and over again until it became apparent that he was not here to hear, but to shout. At which point I told him as much, and left the ward, and hit a wall some distance out from the ward in frustration. (Hitting the wall, it's a turn of phrase, isn't it?)
Now that I've been Assimilated, I do what everyone else does. Talk until their time is up (approximately 5 min) then excuse myself and leave. If they didn't take anything on board in those 5 minutes, in clinic, on the ward... if they were too busy making themselves heard to hear in return - then nothing you say will make a difference. If there's a complaint letter hovering somewhere in the background, chances are it's already been written, and posted to the New Paper - even before Ms X showed up on the ward full of righteous fury.
Interestingly, sometimes Ms X shows up for the first time, after Ms Y and Mr Z, her sister and brother have spent the last month with dear old dad, and are completely informed and understanding. And Ms X will be the one to rain fire and brimstone upon the incompetent healthcare providers so obviously intent on killing dad, nevermind that she doesn't know why he's even been admitted. There's a simple reason for that, I think, and I think it's guilt. Ms X actually deserves more time; I usually give her about 15 to 20 minutes before packing it in.
People are different here.
5. The Other Doctors are Different.
Perhaps these are biased memories, but it seemed easier to be happy with Medicine while back in the UK.
You'd be hard-pressed to find someone here happy and fulfilled in their medical lives. The common grouses are excessive hours, incommensurately low pay and lack of public gratitude.
I think you'd be missing a fundamental truth if you chose to focus on any one single point of the above - or even on all of them combined. The truth of the matter is many doctors are depressed. Cast your net wider and you'll see it's not just doctors.
I remember how everyone used to go get pissed thursday (or was it wednesday?) nights at the pub, from the consultants to housemen. And how we'd all dance and generally make fools of ourselves.
I can't help but compare those memories to the present-day infrequent department parties, when professors and peons auto-segregate, and professors remain... professorial.
Yes, there is decorum and aplomb, and dignity befitting of royalty here. But maybe we've just... forgotten how to have fun.
How to cope? Just remember that fun here starts when you step out of hospital. Remember your family, your wife and your children are what make living worthwhile. I don't know if it works, but that's what everyone does.
7. Ethics are Different.
Be prepared to back down on those ethics your medical school ingrained into you. And prepare yourselves for the changes in your own ethical code which will invariably follow. It's a natural progression.
Perhaps the only real rule is to stay out of trouble, and don't offend anyone, be it your colleagues or your peers.
A few random names to google :
S***n Lim
Eu K*ng W*ng
Also, there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to effect diplomacy. Again, see the above.
More random terms you need to know before you start:
"Do Not Resuscitate" - what is the difference between this and...
"Max Ward Care / Not for SICU / Not for intubation?"
Dangerously Ill (DIL) - what is the difference between this and...
Dangerously Dangerously Ill (DDIL) ?
Hypothetical question :
Is it ethically permissable to inform a family who lives far away that their father / mother is dangerously ill and they should hurry down as soon as they can to see him, if the patient is fading fast and their chances of making it in time are about as high as an opposition team winning a GRC? If not, perhaps it is kinder?
How about if the patient is already dead from say, a massive MI?
8. The Administration is Different.
This goes from the ministerial level, to the SMC, to the SMA, down to your local hospital administration.
There are notable differences between administrations of different countries.
Ours is a strong administration, that is efficient in achieving its aims.
Do not bemoan your "low starting pay" as a cockroach though. There have been recent revisions. Prior to them housemen were truly earning a pittance, at levels inappropriate for university graduates.
Pay revisions are not pegged to civil service. Medical professionals are servants, but apparently uncivil.
There is doubtlessly a reason for this. Perhaps there are just too many of us.
Do not stir the pot, or bite the hand that feeds you. Spectacular things have happened in the past.
The system is oddly dichotomous when analyzed from a financial perspective.
Either way you need to decide early on what your career path will be. Early on is now, when you have just graduated from medical school - because you are a graduate student and significantly older than the rest. There is an unhealthy obsession with age in this country. Life stops after 20, yet 27 year olds are too young for politics...
If your priority is to make money fast and have a comfortable lifestyle, become a GP. The net earnings over time will outstrip those of a government specialist.
The alternative is to give up medicine altogether and use your degree to seek another job. As ridiculous as this sounds now, it isn't. Senior Pilots for instance bring home $50k or more a month. Politicians need money to remain honest and uphold their integrity, so they earn... more than I can count in my head.
If your priority is to make ridiculous amounts of money to swim in, then specialize NOW. Choose your specialty NOW, even before you graduate. Join a residency programme NOW. It's what everyone else is doing, right now... and exit early, and go private. And become a very, very rich one trick horse. Just avoid $24 million bills.
If your heart is in it for your art (ie surgery) or the intellectual challenge (ie medicine) then tough luck. You're doomed to stick it out in government service and earn less than your peers in many of their lucrative business careers, and your lot is to whinge about it for the rest of your life, or else to just put it out of your head altogether and do what you enjoy most. If you fall in the latter category you are admirabe, but probably deluded or else dysfunctional in some way. Sadly, I am in that category.
9. Everything is Different.
Yet everything is the same.
Some things are better, some things are worse. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times and all that.
Standards of living here are good, possibly even high.
Costs of living are also high, if you seek the lifestyle of a young, executive professional, which although you kind-of are, you're not... (remember the cockroach) Decent sized condominiums cost in excess of a million dollars. Landed property cost about four to more times this. COEs are expensive. Annual road tax is about a month's salary.
If you are comfortable with a lower standard of living, you can achieve this comfortably, eg living in a HDB flat - which is fairly good and comfortable, functional living.
Things are clean here. Really clean. Sidewalks are clean, roads are clean, HDB landings are clean. Ministers are clean.
It's just the public toilets that are filthy... MRT toilets made the news today.
For some strange reason people here like to drape toilet paper into the bowl and trail it out, in the mens loos. Perhaps its to line the seats while they squat on the sitting toilets? Nobody ever lifts the seats. This makes for pee-water tracking out onto the floor thanks to inconsiderate laws of physics (capillary action).
This highlights something unspoken about our population.
It is a tiered population. Clean and dirty.
These should be sufficient for now.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Beginning of the End
Back in the day when I was still a bushy-eyed, bright-tailed spring chicken, I remember how some of my less anatomically confused peers would wax lyrical about how they wanted to enter politics to fix the PAP from within.
I used to snigger cynically and think privately that the machine will never change from within, but just assimilate all who strive to be different.
I've never been interested in politics in Singapore despite once having been a debator, because, well, there are no politics in Singapore. There's no debate, no engagement of intellects. Motions are passed at the time of conceptualization, not in parliament. (Interestingly I remember a very dignified old Englishman who, post craniotomy for a devastating brain bleed, when asked if he had passed motion replied grandly, "young man, motions are only passed in parliament!") AS I've aged I've realized that that's what makes Singapore special though. Brutal efficiency translates into instant action. The players don't matter as much as the process.
The fielding of Tin Pei Ling has struck a chord within me though. It's a bit like the tolling of a bell that just won't stop.
Let's see how people have reacted to her thoughts :
temasek online
Temasek Review
Online Citizen
Onesingaporean
Rockson Tan (by proxy) - this one is priceless. hahhahahahahaha
Let's see what Tin Pei Ling has to say...
Hmm.
Well, what I will say is this - I remember Desmond Lee. We used to call him "The Minister" - not because of his father, but because of the his demeanour - staid, sombre and sincere to the extent of being priestlike.
I'm glad for the people like him entering politics - on both sides of the fence. I'm glad for the people who are willing to do what it takes, to make the changes that need to be made, or to pull an Atticus Finch with the hopes of achieving an aim, even at the cost of a personal loss.
I just can't help wondering this time around though, just who is the underdog here? The public is crying foul - while the rest of us spectate with bated breath.
I used to snigger cynically and think privately that the machine will never change from within, but just assimilate all who strive to be different.
I've never been interested in politics in Singapore despite once having been a debator, because, well, there are no politics in Singapore. There's no debate, no engagement of intellects. Motions are passed at the time of conceptualization, not in parliament. (Interestingly I remember a very dignified old Englishman who, post craniotomy for a devastating brain bleed, when asked if he had passed motion replied grandly, "young man, motions are only passed in parliament!") AS I've aged I've realized that that's what makes Singapore special though. Brutal efficiency translates into instant action. The players don't matter as much as the process.
The fielding of Tin Pei Ling has struck a chord within me though. It's a bit like the tolling of a bell that just won't stop.
Let's see how people have reacted to her thoughts :
temasek online
Temasek Review
Online Citizen
Onesingaporean
Rockson Tan (by proxy) - this one is priceless. hahhahahahahaha
Let's see what Tin Pei Ling has to say...
Hmm.
Well, what I will say is this - I remember Desmond Lee. We used to call him "The Minister" - not because of his father, but because of the his demeanour - staid, sombre and sincere to the extent of being priestlike.
I'm glad for the people like him entering politics - on both sides of the fence. I'm glad for the people who are willing to do what it takes, to make the changes that need to be made, or to pull an Atticus Finch with the hopes of achieving an aim, even at the cost of a personal loss.
I just can't help wondering this time around though, just who is the underdog here? The public is crying foul - while the rest of us spectate with bated breath.
Friday, March 18, 2011
On blogging and Other Things
I once took my blog down after being stalked by a clinically-diagnosed Schizophrenic I'd never met. I'd dealt with the mentally ill before, mostly in medical school. I understood her condition well (Psychiatry was, strangely, one of the things I really found interesting in med school) and that she couldn't help herself. It didn't help in the least bit to lessen the slowly mounting sense of alarm when the phone was ringing for the xth time, or when the gifts started showing up at the gym I went to. It didn't help when I picked up the phone, and conversations took oddly predictable yet incomprehensible slants, and somewhere in there I felt sorry for, and concerned for - someone else's patient.
I hope she's doing better now.
I tried to restart the blog some time later when things had simmered down. It had been hijacked by a porn site. Laugh.
These days I just can't find the time or will to write, and there's just so much happening in real life...
I ask prospective bright-eyed bushy-tailed hatchlings why they want to study medicine when they could be doing so, so much else.
The answer is always the same - I want to make a difference, I want to help people (or some permutation thereof). Always so rehearsed, and so unconvincing.
I can almost understand why the NUS interviewers asked me what they did : So why do you want to do medicine, aside from all that being nice and saving people shit?
Almost, but not quite. I would never ask that. There's the off chance that this person is actually for real - it happens - and not just in it for the "prestege" or "money". And right now, right here, he/she believes it with his/her heart. So just pause, and wait for the rest of the story. And then I tell them, I'm glad, because this will stay with you.
And if they haven't got a story, they just... want to help people, because.... well... it's good.
Then I inhale, and start telling them about how they'll feel one day in the distant future, watching their friends grow up around them while they languish in career infancy, drowning day to day in multitudes of thankless calls, succumbing slowly to Real Life after the glow fades.
I'm still glad to do what I do. I tell people it's because I like cutting off legs, and in truth part of me does (well, I like doing things well, and I think I do that pretty well... heh). But I much prefer saving legs. I say it's because I like the nature of the operations, and I really, really do. But, well : there's many other things I like too, and I really, really would like to be retired with all the time in the world to write, lounge around, and relax too :)
I've been asked what the point is, since these people will just go back to smoking anyway, and you'll see them again soon, and they'll be dead even sooner.
I guess I just have a story.
I hope she's doing better now.
I tried to restart the blog some time later when things had simmered down. It had been hijacked by a porn site. Laugh.
These days I just can't find the time or will to write, and there's just so much happening in real life...
I ask prospective bright-eyed bushy-tailed hatchlings why they want to study medicine when they could be doing so, so much else.
The answer is always the same - I want to make a difference, I want to help people (or some permutation thereof). Always so rehearsed, and so unconvincing.
I can almost understand why the NUS interviewers asked me what they did : So why do you want to do medicine, aside from all that being nice and saving people shit?
Almost, but not quite. I would never ask that. There's the off chance that this person is actually for real - it happens - and not just in it for the "prestege" or "money". And right now, right here, he/she believes it with his/her heart. So just pause, and wait for the rest of the story. And then I tell them, I'm glad, because this will stay with you.
And if they haven't got a story, they just... want to help people, because.... well... it's good.
Then I inhale, and start telling them about how they'll feel one day in the distant future, watching their friends grow up around them while they languish in career infancy, drowning day to day in multitudes of thankless calls, succumbing slowly to Real Life after the glow fades.
I'm still glad to do what I do. I tell people it's because I like cutting off legs, and in truth part of me does (well, I like doing things well, and I think I do that pretty well... heh). But I much prefer saving legs. I say it's because I like the nature of the operations, and I really, really do. But, well : there's many other things I like too, and I really, really would like to be retired with all the time in the world to write, lounge around, and relax too :)
I've been asked what the point is, since these people will just go back to smoking anyway, and you'll see them again soon, and they'll be dead even sooner.
I guess I just have a story.
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Much ado about Nothing
In the aftermath of events still unfolding in Japan it seems almost wrong for everyday, humdrum life to go on. It feels as if we shouldn't... be going about our daily chores, making inane chatter at work, screwing over colleagues for personal gain, stabbing each other in the backs... it just seems so wrong, somehow. And then the weirdos pitch in and start spreading hoax nuclear rain SMSs and make light of a tragedy of monumental proportions, and then self-centered morons write into the straits times complaining about how personally inconvenienced they were by the disaster (SIA where were you etc)... word. People are fucked up. Bigtime.
The Susan Lim scandal has lost momentum; knocked for six it will plod on now-unnoticed to a public that has cast judgement and moved on. Few people are left to care as the smoke clears.
I can't help but wonder what precipitated this bizarre show-and-tell by the Singapore Medical Council. The layman may not be able to discern the trees from the woods, but to an insider... it's even more bewildering. Wood? There's just matchsticks here.
I don't imagine that the court case is going to be cheap. Who will pay for it? Why we will of course - us doctors who pay our annual subscription, wonder what happens to it for a moment, and then stop caring... (ah suddenly the clouds are parting. This is the true destiny of our subscription monies!)
The butterfly effect had started... public mutterings of discontent, of rich and poor, of greed on an unusual scale so at odds with the "noble" field of medicine" were already rippling outwards and building to a crescendo just before the hammer of Mother Nature fell upon Japan and turned the mountain into a molehill.
Like the layman I'm burning for answers too - but to different questions.
I don't care how or why Susan Lim could have asked such outrageous prices. It's easy to understand how someone like Susan Lim could have asked the going prices that she did. Just put yourself in her shoes for an instant.
In her head she was "up there" with the best in the world. The much-touted Medical Hub of singapore had arrived in her mind, and she was the epicenter.
Her corporate website proclaims that common knowledge splattered all over wikipedia, and the web, thanks to unifem and the australian high commission - that she is the first surgeon to perform a successful liver transplant in asia.
Trawl back through time and reality emerges. The first liver transplants in Asia - living donor related (1989) and cadaveric (1964) - were done by the Japanese.
Susan Lim performed the first liver transplant in Singapore - not Asia. And she did it when she was young - in her mid thirties, as a young consultant.
Look still deeper and you will see the names of the three surgeons who were members in the team she "led". All of them Professors, all old enough to be her father (kind of), "assisting" her through one of the most difficult operations known to medicine. And suddenly the picture becomes much, much clearer.
Conjecture? A favourite amongst favourites, public recognition, going private.
Sounds a bit like a Taiwanese medical drama...
I don't know Dr Lim personally, and I don't think I'd care to after reading her reproduction of erroneous claims to regional fame.
She strikes me as someone driven to market herself at all costs. Someone selfish and self-centered.
This is what the public resentment really centered about - doctors aren't meant to be selfish or money-faced! They swore the Hippocratic oath! They're all meant to be paupers and Saints who toil without rest, and live hand to mouth until they die from it!!
Well fuck you. Doctors are people too, same as you are. And if you had the means to make big bucks - and if you ran a big business involving marketing yourself - you'd probably go the same way Susan Lim did. Don't kid yourself.
Granted, a larger proportion of medics don't than average, and not through want of talent. Medicine does weed out the oddballs that prioritize the needs of others over their own, and are willing to try to help alleviate suffering by forgoing some of their own pleasures of the flesh. That's what the "rigorous selection" is for, innit? But no system is perfect... and bear in mind that it's still just a job. In the same way that not all politicians are noble, not all models brainless, and not all lawyers incorrigible - not all doctors are blathering goody two-shoes who buy breakfast for their impoverished C-class patients every day and serve it on a silver platter, balanced precariously on bended knee.
Having said that, Dr Lim achieved her aim - she got to where she was through hard work and aggressive marketing and one (or two?) misleading claims - but this doesn't detract from the act that she got There. People came to her - rich people, like the Bruneian Sultanate. That alone shouts volumes about her regional reputation.
And frankly, if she was on the level - world best, patronized by royalty - then she had every damn right to charge the way she did. The UK surgeon who charged five hundred thousand pounds for two days consultation with this same patient -- two days -- why isn't anyone wondering about that? Why - because the white man must have been a world expert of course. His time was valuable.
So too, was Susan Lim's. She is an expert - in her patients' eyes - as much a world expert as Woffles Wu. So she charged tens of millions of dollars - so what? This was a very demanding patient that treated her more as a personal retainer than a consultant surgeon. The patient-doctor relationship was skewed towards client-consumer from the start. Respect appeared to be a one-way street. The patient demanded, the patient received.
Dr Lim claims she made her fees clear to her patient beforehand. The patient spent years prior to her death paying exorbitant fees apparently without complaint. This appears to corroborate those claims.
And everyone knows that when you do favours for asian royalty you get kickbacks. Perhaps Dr Lim doesn't have a thing for camels, Maserati's or expensive wine and just likes cold hard cash - we'll never know. This sort of stuff doesn't come out in court.
At the end of the day, this was a mutual agreement between doctor and patient. You treat me like a servant, take me away from work, and endanger my eyes - well sod you, I'll charge you like the royalty you are. (Just doing a House.)
Dr Lim did what all of us wish we could when dealing with our own patients from hell. And I kind-of applaud her, while hating her for it at the same time. I can empathize with her, even though I don't agree and certainly wouldn't have done it myself.
Was what she did so wrong? Step away from your pre (mis) conceptions of saints and doctors, and Hippocratic oaths (which just says we shall do no harm... and well. Taking money from a willing, very, very rich donor isn't exactly doing harm... Oh but wait, but the patient died! Surely that's evidence of harm! Think again. The woman had cancer. She was dying from the get-go. A recurrence? Was there curative surgery that... failed? Bollocks. You get cancer, you get cured, it comes back - them's the breaks. That's just bad luck and statistics, not a failure of the physician.) and look at it anew with unbiased eyes, from the view of a healthcare professional.
Does Susan deserve to be "disciplined" for entering into a mutual agreement with a willing patient? Did she deceive the patient in any way? Is it even overcharging when your patient is pre-warned about exorbitant costs and wants to go ahead? Would anyone bat an eye if Dr Lim had been a lawyer, or a businesswoman? Or a minister?
How much do the doctors-turned-ministers earn before they "fall from grace" and accept their paycuts to don the white short-sleeved shirt and long pants again? How do you think they were earning such big bucks before signing up for their one true calling? By seeing thousands of patients a day -- or charging big bucks to a privileged few?
And why, why on earth would the SMC build a case against it's own public image?
That's what bugs me the most. Why in the blue blazers would the one organization that was created with the sole purpose of protecting the profession seek to encite the public against itself? What could it have taken to bring this about?
One more thing.
1) Susan Lim sends bill to Royal family
2) Royal family complains to Ministry of Health
3) Ministry of Health assigns Singapore Medical Council to mediate
4) SMC raises disciplinary hearing
5) Hearing dissolved - allegations of prejudice
6) Susan Lim brings SMC to court to prevent hearing being raised again
7) Press involved
Hmm. Which one doesn't quite fit in there, one wonders? Which ones are closed-door events, and which open to the public?
Let's take a look at the key players.
Salma Khalik and Prof Satku aren't strangers to each other. Let's see what Prof Satku had to say about her reporting style, even if it was oblique. Not... exactly the best of friends, eh.
I've seen it said on forums that poor Prof Satku is a victim himself, removed from his position of power as Registrar to the SMC (hmm. once director medical services. Registrar must be a step up?) because the Men in White are staging some kind of cover up. The poor deluded fools.
Perhaps what Susan Lim herself has to say about Prof Satku can shed some light on his abrupt reassignment of duties, and why a new position - non-constitutional - was created and legalized expressly for this trial.
Does anybody smell a warm, fuzzy, long-tailed mammal?
The Susan Lim scandal has lost momentum; knocked for six it will plod on now-unnoticed to a public that has cast judgement and moved on. Few people are left to care as the smoke clears.
I can't help but wonder what precipitated this bizarre show-and-tell by the Singapore Medical Council. The layman may not be able to discern the trees from the woods, but to an insider... it's even more bewildering. Wood? There's just matchsticks here.
I don't imagine that the court case is going to be cheap. Who will pay for it? Why we will of course - us doctors who pay our annual subscription, wonder what happens to it for a moment, and then stop caring... (ah suddenly the clouds are parting. This is the true destiny of our subscription monies!)
The butterfly effect had started... public mutterings of discontent, of rich and poor, of greed on an unusual scale so at odds with the "noble" field of medicine" were already rippling outwards and building to a crescendo just before the hammer of Mother Nature fell upon Japan and turned the mountain into a molehill.
Like the layman I'm burning for answers too - but to different questions.
I don't care how or why Susan Lim could have asked such outrageous prices. It's easy to understand how someone like Susan Lim could have asked the going prices that she did. Just put yourself in her shoes for an instant.
In her head she was "up there" with the best in the world. The much-touted Medical Hub of singapore had arrived in her mind, and she was the epicenter.
Her corporate website proclaims that common knowledge splattered all over wikipedia, and the web, thanks to unifem and the australian high commission - that she is the first surgeon to perform a successful liver transplant in asia.
Trawl back through time and reality emerges. The first liver transplants in Asia - living donor related (1989) and cadaveric (1964) - were done by the Japanese.
Susan Lim performed the first liver transplant in Singapore - not Asia. And she did it when she was young - in her mid thirties, as a young consultant.
Look still deeper and you will see the names of the three surgeons who were members in the team she "led". All of them Professors, all old enough to be her father (kind of), "assisting" her through one of the most difficult operations known to medicine. And suddenly the picture becomes much, much clearer.
Conjecture? A favourite amongst favourites, public recognition, going private.
Sounds a bit like a Taiwanese medical drama...
I don't know Dr Lim personally, and I don't think I'd care to after reading her reproduction of erroneous claims to regional fame.
She strikes me as someone driven to market herself at all costs. Someone selfish and self-centered.
This is what the public resentment really centered about - doctors aren't meant to be selfish or money-faced! They swore the Hippocratic oath! They're all meant to be paupers and Saints who toil without rest, and live hand to mouth until they die from it!!
Well fuck you. Doctors are people too, same as you are. And if you had the means to make big bucks - and if you ran a big business involving marketing yourself - you'd probably go the same way Susan Lim did. Don't kid yourself.
Granted, a larger proportion of medics don't than average, and not through want of talent. Medicine does weed out the oddballs that prioritize the needs of others over their own, and are willing to try to help alleviate suffering by forgoing some of their own pleasures of the flesh. That's what the "rigorous selection" is for, innit? But no system is perfect... and bear in mind that it's still just a job. In the same way that not all politicians are noble, not all models brainless, and not all lawyers incorrigible - not all doctors are blathering goody two-shoes who buy breakfast for their impoverished C-class patients every day and serve it on a silver platter, balanced precariously on bended knee.
Having said that, Dr Lim achieved her aim - she got to where she was through hard work and aggressive marketing and one (or two?) misleading claims - but this doesn't detract from the act that she got There. People came to her - rich people, like the Bruneian Sultanate. That alone shouts volumes about her regional reputation.
And frankly, if she was on the level - world best, patronized by royalty - then she had every damn right to charge the way she did. The UK surgeon who charged five hundred thousand pounds for two days consultation with this same patient -- two days -- why isn't anyone wondering about that? Why - because the white man must have been a world expert of course. His time was valuable.
So too, was Susan Lim's. She is an expert - in her patients' eyes - as much a world expert as Woffles Wu. So she charged tens of millions of dollars - so what? This was a very demanding patient that treated her more as a personal retainer than a consultant surgeon. The patient-doctor relationship was skewed towards client-consumer from the start. Respect appeared to be a one-way street. The patient demanded, the patient received.
Dr Lim claims she made her fees clear to her patient beforehand. The patient spent years prior to her death paying exorbitant fees apparently without complaint. This appears to corroborate those claims.
And everyone knows that when you do favours for asian royalty you get kickbacks. Perhaps Dr Lim doesn't have a thing for camels, Maserati's or expensive wine and just likes cold hard cash - we'll never know. This sort of stuff doesn't come out in court.
At the end of the day, this was a mutual agreement between doctor and patient. You treat me like a servant, take me away from work, and endanger my eyes - well sod you, I'll charge you like the royalty you are. (Just doing a House.)
Dr Lim did what all of us wish we could when dealing with our own patients from hell. And I kind-of applaud her, while hating her for it at the same time. I can empathize with her, even though I don't agree and certainly wouldn't have done it myself.
Was what she did so wrong? Step away from your pre (mis) conceptions of saints and doctors, and Hippocratic oaths (which just says we shall do no harm... and well. Taking money from a willing, very, very rich donor isn't exactly doing harm... Oh but wait, but the patient died! Surely that's evidence of harm! Think again. The woman had cancer. She was dying from the get-go. A recurrence? Was there curative surgery that... failed? Bollocks. You get cancer, you get cured, it comes back - them's the breaks. That's just bad luck and statistics, not a failure of the physician.) and look at it anew with unbiased eyes, from the view of a healthcare professional.
Does Susan deserve to be "disciplined" for entering into a mutual agreement with a willing patient? Did she deceive the patient in any way? Is it even overcharging when your patient is pre-warned about exorbitant costs and wants to go ahead? Would anyone bat an eye if Dr Lim had been a lawyer, or a businesswoman? Or a minister?
How much do the doctors-turned-ministers earn before they "fall from grace" and accept their paycuts to don the white short-sleeved shirt and long pants again? How do you think they were earning such big bucks before signing up for their one true calling? By seeing thousands of patients a day -- or charging big bucks to a privileged few?
And why, why on earth would the SMC build a case against it's own public image?
That's what bugs me the most. Why in the blue blazers would the one organization that was created with the sole purpose of protecting the profession seek to encite the public against itself? What could it have taken to bring this about?
One more thing.
1) Susan Lim sends bill to Royal family
2) Royal family complains to Ministry of Health
3) Ministry of Health assigns Singapore Medical Council to mediate
4) SMC raises disciplinary hearing
5) Hearing dissolved - allegations of prejudice
6) Susan Lim brings SMC to court to prevent hearing being raised again
7) Press involved
Hmm. Which one doesn't quite fit in there, one wonders? Which ones are closed-door events, and which open to the public?
Let's take a look at the key players.
Salma Khalik and Prof Satku aren't strangers to each other. Let's see what Prof Satku had to say about her reporting style, even if it was oblique. Not... exactly the best of friends, eh.
I've seen it said on forums that poor Prof Satku is a victim himself, removed from his position of power as Registrar to the SMC (hmm. once director medical services. Registrar must be a step up?) because the Men in White are staging some kind of cover up. The poor deluded fools.
Perhaps what Susan Lim herself has to say about Prof Satku can shed some light on his abrupt reassignment of duties, and why a new position - non-constitutional - was created and legalized expressly for this trial.
Does anybody smell a warm, fuzzy, long-tailed mammal?
Saturday, September 25, 2010
In Fairness
While talking to the other half it struck me that no, it wasn't always like this. Being a doctor wasn't always rough - I enjoyed my housemanship.
Pause. Crickets chirping, and somewhere in the background the sound of locally-trained claws coming unsheathed.
Sure, I did my housemanship overseas where everyone's a wimp and nobody there works as hard as we do here, etcetcetc, people actually go out and drink on wednesday evenings and show up bleary eyed the next day for work, shock horror.
And horror of horrors we started work at 8.30 am, long after sunrise (especially in summer when the sun came up at four).
No horror stories there of people trudging to work at 6 am and leaving at 9-10 pm, sometimes midnight. No whinging about the tedium of running around ad nauseum arranging scans and taking bloods etcetc.
The thing is, we did work till late - not every day perhaps, but often enough. I remember well still being on the wards at 8.30 pm and bumping into my urology sister Cid who was also working past her hours and laughing about it. I remember how the other housemen used to be there too, and when the NHS started enforcing the calman act how we used to change into civvies and go on working.
There was something different about the feel of it all; we did it for our patients, whom we knew well and actually gave a damn about, and for the sense of cameraderie we felt for each other. We were happy.
It's the whole rat in an electrified cage thingie; the houserats here are trapped against their will receiving electric shocks unpredictably. Depression sets in.
We dictated our own suffering, we opted when to suffer and when not to, and we justified our pain in our heads as sacrifice, for other people so they wouldn't have to hurt so much.
I was happy as an SHO too, working crazy shifts that had me walking home in the wee hours past frozen lakes and leaving footprints in the snow. Same story.
The truth is being a doctor isn't all doom and gloom, and it isn't all drudgery and tedium.
I watch my housemen constantly losing their struggle day to day, and I watch myself occasionally berating them for not getting things done quickly enough, and I can't help but think maybe it doesn't have to be like this... Maybe there's some way to fix this mess. Maybe we could start work a little later, maybe enforce laws to restrict doctors' working hours -- transforming overtime into an act of volunteerism and selflessness. Maybe we'd be surprised at how good we really can be, at heart... instead of dictating that anyone failing to make the cut as a tireless mule is a "failure". But as each day passes yesteryear fades in memory and I begin to forget the way it used to be...
I'm still happy being a doctor, from time to time. I love stitching little things together, and I love being senselessly irradiated as I twiddle some wire down a long, narrow tube. But there's the crux - "from time to time".
In fairness, maybe it's possible to float through medicine on goodwill, selflessness and happy thoughts -- just not here, not now.
Pause. Crickets chirping, and somewhere in the background the sound of locally-trained claws coming unsheathed.
Sure, I did my housemanship overseas where everyone's a wimp and nobody there works as hard as we do here, etcetcetc, people actually go out and drink on wednesday evenings and show up bleary eyed the next day for work, shock horror.
And horror of horrors we started work at 8.30 am, long after sunrise (especially in summer when the sun came up at four).
No horror stories there of people trudging to work at 6 am and leaving at 9-10 pm, sometimes midnight. No whinging about the tedium of running around ad nauseum arranging scans and taking bloods etcetc.
The thing is, we did work till late - not every day perhaps, but often enough. I remember well still being on the wards at 8.30 pm and bumping into my urology sister Cid who was also working past her hours and laughing about it. I remember how the other housemen used to be there too, and when the NHS started enforcing the calman act how we used to change into civvies and go on working.
There was something different about the feel of it all; we did it for our patients, whom we knew well and actually gave a damn about, and for the sense of cameraderie we felt for each other. We were happy.
It's the whole rat in an electrified cage thingie; the houserats here are trapped against their will receiving electric shocks unpredictably. Depression sets in.
We dictated our own suffering, we opted when to suffer and when not to, and we justified our pain in our heads as sacrifice, for other people so they wouldn't have to hurt so much.
I was happy as an SHO too, working crazy shifts that had me walking home in the wee hours past frozen lakes and leaving footprints in the snow. Same story.
The truth is being a doctor isn't all doom and gloom, and it isn't all drudgery and tedium.
I watch my housemen constantly losing their struggle day to day, and I watch myself occasionally berating them for not getting things done quickly enough, and I can't help but think maybe it doesn't have to be like this... Maybe there's some way to fix this mess. Maybe we could start work a little later, maybe enforce laws to restrict doctors' working hours -- transforming overtime into an act of volunteerism and selflessness. Maybe we'd be surprised at how good we really can be, at heart... instead of dictating that anyone failing to make the cut as a tireless mule is a "failure". But as each day passes yesteryear fades in memory and I begin to forget the way it used to be...
I'm still happy being a doctor, from time to time. I love stitching little things together, and I love being senselessly irradiated as I twiddle some wire down a long, narrow tube. But there's the crux - "from time to time".
In fairness, maybe it's possible to float through medicine on goodwill, selflessness and happy thoughts -- just not here, not now.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The Retelling
Talking to a friend of a friend the other day, or rather was being plied by him for answers about what it was like to be a doctor.
Listening to him tell me he wants to make a difference, and help where he can, when he can puts me in mind of a different time and place...
I was him once, all earnesty and bright eyed, waggy-tailed sincerity. An army of old men telling me to be prepared - do you really really want this; you must really want this, because the sky's the limit but the sky has a low ceiling... a legion of old men couldn't dampen my hopes.
A panel of four interviewers listening intently while I tell them just Why; tell them about how my father (whom I love a great deal but just can't bring myself to show it - it's just how I was raised and who I am now) treated my grandmother in her last days as she succumbed slowly and painfully to the ravages of hepatocellular carcinoma; watching his stoic silence as he put up her morphine, watching how he made the long trek across the island every day to be there with her after work... watching as the life drained out of both of them day by day made me realise I wanted to be like him; I wanted to be Good. Perhaps it showed in my eyes as I babbled incoherently, who knows : but the interview panels wanted me. And I wanted them, because they didn't throw me tired, bitter lines like "Why Do you Want to be a Doctor aside from Saving lives and All that Crap"... but simply wanted to know about me, and why I wanted what I did, as much as I did.
Cut back to present day, and I'm telling him : this fuzzy feeling you have right now isn't enough; it will melt away - it's inevitable. We can't be that person all the time, and as time passes you'll be that person less and less. You need something more... you just have to really, really want this; i'm mindful how I was told the same thing once upon a lifetime ago, and I thought secretly, but I'm not like you, I'll be different... and I secretly pitied the doctor on the other side of the conversation intimating that he was burning out; I'm not like you, I won't falter... I know I really, really want this.
And I realise how futile it all is; or perhaps I'm just choosing the words wrong.
So for those of you hopeful bunnies for whom its not too late, and for the rest who I would like to share this with - S, I wish I could have told you this since you told me what being a vet was like, and Agent J, who's busy saving the world right now and loves me enough to feel outraged on my behalf...
Being a doctor is getting that phone call after 3 gruelling hours of medical statistics made Hard (ie taught all wrong) and racing back to hospital at ten pm to fly into OT. Not because you want to impress the boss, or even because of a sense of duty to help him out while he vanquishes the monster, nor even because you owe it to this poor patient whose liver just keeps packing up post liver transplant, but because you need to know what went wrong, and you need to learn how to fix it; because you need to be there, for no particular reason. You just do.
Being a doctor is scrubbing out at one am, and gazing glassy eyed at the desolate, deserted road stretching out before you.
Getting home and eating cold carbonara out of the fridge because you're so damn hungry you can't wait the two minutes it takes to nuke it back to life. And marvelling at how divine it tastes - cream is such a wonderful, wonderful thing!
Dropping your clothes in a trail behind you like Hansel and Gretal did (well, perhaps those were tidbits and not clothes, but clothes would make for a more exciting story, no?) as you meander towards the toilet (say hello, late-night cockroach) to wash the sebum off your face and out of your eyes.
Flopping into bed and picking up that biostats book because time is short, and tomorrow is another day - and thinking Thank God this is me having an Easy Time, imagine if I was full-time right now.
And yet feeling - yes, this is what I want. It sucks ass, and some of my friends are being paid triple my salary and don't have to fork out thousands of dollars for radiation protection wear. For high powered operating binocular spectacles. For all sorts of things the government will shriek at when I try to claim it from them.
And said friends are working maybe half the total number of hours I am each week.
But it doesn't matter, because this is... me.
Listening to him tell me he wants to make a difference, and help where he can, when he can puts me in mind of a different time and place...
I was him once, all earnesty and bright eyed, waggy-tailed sincerity. An army of old men telling me to be prepared - do you really really want this; you must really want this, because the sky's the limit but the sky has a low ceiling... a legion of old men couldn't dampen my hopes.
A panel of four interviewers listening intently while I tell them just Why; tell them about how my father (whom I love a great deal but just can't bring myself to show it - it's just how I was raised and who I am now) treated my grandmother in her last days as she succumbed slowly and painfully to the ravages of hepatocellular carcinoma; watching his stoic silence as he put up her morphine, watching how he made the long trek across the island every day to be there with her after work... watching as the life drained out of both of them day by day made me realise I wanted to be like him; I wanted to be Good. Perhaps it showed in my eyes as I babbled incoherently, who knows : but the interview panels wanted me. And I wanted them, because they didn't throw me tired, bitter lines like "Why Do you Want to be a Doctor aside from Saving lives and All that Crap"... but simply wanted to know about me, and why I wanted what I did, as much as I did.
Cut back to present day, and I'm telling him : this fuzzy feeling you have right now isn't enough; it will melt away - it's inevitable. We can't be that person all the time, and as time passes you'll be that person less and less. You need something more... you just have to really, really want this; i'm mindful how I was told the same thing once upon a lifetime ago, and I thought secretly, but I'm not like you, I'll be different... and I secretly pitied the doctor on the other side of the conversation intimating that he was burning out; I'm not like you, I won't falter... I know I really, really want this.
And I realise how futile it all is; or perhaps I'm just choosing the words wrong.
So for those of you hopeful bunnies for whom its not too late, and for the rest who I would like to share this with - S, I wish I could have told you this since you told me what being a vet was like, and Agent J, who's busy saving the world right now and loves me enough to feel outraged on my behalf...
Being a doctor is getting that phone call after 3 gruelling hours of medical statistics made Hard (ie taught all wrong) and racing back to hospital at ten pm to fly into OT. Not because you want to impress the boss, or even because of a sense of duty to help him out while he vanquishes the monster, nor even because you owe it to this poor patient whose liver just keeps packing up post liver transplant, but because you need to know what went wrong, and you need to learn how to fix it; because you need to be there, for no particular reason. You just do.
Being a doctor is scrubbing out at one am, and gazing glassy eyed at the desolate, deserted road stretching out before you.
Getting home and eating cold carbonara out of the fridge because you're so damn hungry you can't wait the two minutes it takes to nuke it back to life. And marvelling at how divine it tastes - cream is such a wonderful, wonderful thing!
Dropping your clothes in a trail behind you like Hansel and Gretal did (well, perhaps those were tidbits and not clothes, but clothes would make for a more exciting story, no?) as you meander towards the toilet (say hello, late-night cockroach) to wash the sebum off your face and out of your eyes.
Flopping into bed and picking up that biostats book because time is short, and tomorrow is another day - and thinking Thank God this is me having an Easy Time, imagine if I was full-time right now.
And yet feeling - yes, this is what I want. It sucks ass, and some of my friends are being paid triple my salary and don't have to fork out thousands of dollars for radiation protection wear. For high powered operating binocular spectacles. For all sorts of things the government will shriek at when I try to claim it from them.
And said friends are working maybe half the total number of hours I am each week.
But it doesn't matter, because this is... me.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Legacy
The thing about blogs is that they immortalize us.
The last time I spoke to Slinky she was still with The Boy; she was worrying about the future and where things were going. That's how long ago it was.
Reading Slinky's posts about Labradorboy, and Captain Starlight (although it gets too a bit too intimate and iccky for comfort) I can't help but marvel at how much happened in the span of a year.
The Straits Times article didn't make any mention of Celina Chua being a blogger; I suppose being a straight cut-and-paste job from the Australian newspiece it wouldn't have done...
The thing about blogs is they immortalize us - but usually only an impression of us, whether it be that part we want to be best known for, or whether it be that part in us that we wish existed, or want the world to believe really exists... Online personas are like that... Look over a long enough period of time and the cracks in the mask start to show.
Sometimes we write down what we really think, sometimes we hide what we think for fear of persecution or ridicule. For some they're vehicles to advertise their "faces" or their lifestyles, but for some others they're private journals laid bare to the world for all to see.
I guess, as House puts it, everybody lies. And almost everybody has an agenda.
But once in a while people just write - about their lives, their loves, their pasts and presents, their doubts about the future and the things that make them laugh and cry... and yes, perhaps as some of Singapore's "top bloggers" are wont to say, these people aren't really bloggers.
Perhaps they're something else, because who knows what a blogger really is in these crazy mixed-up days?
These people, the way they write... their blogs pay them tribute after they're gone. They capture their essence in some way, and let you know who they really were. They make you feel and empathise with the writers, even through that one-way looking glass of yesterday. And perhaps they make you wish you had known the writer a little better.
And I realize again what I realized a while ago: that even though I had not been happy in years, even though I am chronically sleep-deprived and exams are in two weeks, even though I'm always broke and I have no idea where my future is headed, I am happy with my life. -- Slinky, Saturday October 31, 2009
I'm glad you were, Slinky. I'm glad.
Be well, now.
The last time I spoke to Slinky she was still with The Boy; she was worrying about the future and where things were going. That's how long ago it was.
Reading Slinky's posts about Labradorboy, and Captain Starlight (although it gets too a bit too intimate and iccky for comfort) I can't help but marvel at how much happened in the span of a year.
The Straits Times article didn't make any mention of Celina Chua being a blogger; I suppose being a straight cut-and-paste job from the Australian newspiece it wouldn't have done...
The thing about blogs is they immortalize us - but usually only an impression of us, whether it be that part we want to be best known for, or whether it be that part in us that we wish existed, or want the world to believe really exists... Online personas are like that... Look over a long enough period of time and the cracks in the mask start to show.
Sometimes we write down what we really think, sometimes we hide what we think for fear of persecution or ridicule. For some they're vehicles to advertise their "faces" or their lifestyles, but for some others they're private journals laid bare to the world for all to see.
I guess, as House puts it, everybody lies. And almost everybody has an agenda.
But once in a while people just write - about their lives, their loves, their pasts and presents, their doubts about the future and the things that make them laugh and cry... and yes, perhaps as some of Singapore's "top bloggers" are wont to say, these people aren't really bloggers.
Perhaps they're something else, because who knows what a blogger really is in these crazy mixed-up days?
These people, the way they write... their blogs pay them tribute after they're gone. They capture their essence in some way, and let you know who they really were. They make you feel and empathise with the writers, even through that one-way looking glass of yesterday. And perhaps they make you wish you had known the writer a little better.
And I realize again what I realized a while ago: that even though I had not been happy in years, even though I am chronically sleep-deprived and exams are in two weeks, even though I'm always broke and I have no idea where my future is headed, I am happy with my life. -- Slinky, Saturday October 31, 2009
I'm glad you were, Slinky. I'm glad.
Be well, now.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Farewell
I first met her online, in the immediate aftermath of the last breakup when I was feeling a little distraught and betrayed, and the gradual creeping realization that I'd been a terrible judge of character - of my own volition - and loved and trusted someone who I shouldn't even have been friends with was starting to set in.
I was at turns bitter, disappointed and resigned, and was spending a lot of time hanging around the lab working on a project because of the quiet and solitude it offered me away from trivial thoughts of red flags that I had ignored, balances in relationships, people taking other people for granted, and whether it was inevitable to stray when absolute trust was gifted; I needed to do.
I think it was a Sunday afternoon; I remember the evening sun streaming in. I messaged her on a whim, she was one of the strangers on my gchat, friend of a friend, and author of a blog which I liked to visit from time to time.
She was studying for an exam - either path or physiology - but took the time out to listen and offer what comfort she could. We spoke in between doing our work far past sundown and got to know each other. I remember she was funny, humorous and a good listener. And that she was happy - so happy - to be chasing down her dream of becoming a veterinarian, under all the growly resentment of having to mug for the malignant "basic" science exam-monsters that I once slew myself.
Everyday life got in the way, and we spoke less and less frequently. She flew back once and rang me up, and we came within a hair's breadth of meeting up for a coffee, but our schedules were just a little too busy and it didn't quite happen.
Life went on, and she became The Person who Posted Funny Snips about Being Assaulted by Horses and other Farm Animals on my facebook wall. I took it for granted that she would always be there, and that we would meet someday in the distant future; that she was a stone's throw away on gchat and sms. I treated her the way I treat most of my friends, which is poorly.
I saw the post by one of our mutual friends on facebook yesterday while I was dozing off in the tea room waiting for the operation to start; I followed the link and read the newspaper article. And somewhere along the way the pieces finally fell into place, in my muggy post-call, food-deprived head. My God, this person - this faintly familiar firstnamelastname - was Her. Double whammy, She was dead.
Dead in the worst possible way, at the prime of her life, in a trivial moment that cost her her life, driving her family back to the airport, the unlucky sole non-survivor of a tragic accident, dying on site just as help arrived with her family incapacitated all around her. Five weeks away from graduation, from attaining her dream.
Dead and gone. Her facebook wall is flooding over with sadness, with people pouring out their grief about missing her and hoping that she rests in peace; that's what bubbly, cheerful, brave people get when they die.
It's just not enough.
What they deserve is life; to be going on doing all the things that we loved and knew she loved doing.
Goodbye Slinky. We never met you and I, face to face, but you were one of the few good people I'm honoured to call "friend".
I'll miss you.
I was at turns bitter, disappointed and resigned, and was spending a lot of time hanging around the lab working on a project because of the quiet and solitude it offered me away from trivial thoughts of red flags that I had ignored, balances in relationships, people taking other people for granted, and whether it was inevitable to stray when absolute trust was gifted; I needed to do.
I think it was a Sunday afternoon; I remember the evening sun streaming in. I messaged her on a whim, she was one of the strangers on my gchat, friend of a friend, and author of a blog which I liked to visit from time to time.
She was studying for an exam - either path or physiology - but took the time out to listen and offer what comfort she could. We spoke in between doing our work far past sundown and got to know each other. I remember she was funny, humorous and a good listener. And that she was happy - so happy - to be chasing down her dream of becoming a veterinarian, under all the growly resentment of having to mug for the malignant "basic" science exam-monsters that I once slew myself.
Everyday life got in the way, and we spoke less and less frequently. She flew back once and rang me up, and we came within a hair's breadth of meeting up for a coffee, but our schedules were just a little too busy and it didn't quite happen.
Life went on, and she became The Person who Posted Funny Snips about Being Assaulted by Horses and other Farm Animals on my facebook wall. I took it for granted that she would always be there, and that we would meet someday in the distant future; that she was a stone's throw away on gchat and sms. I treated her the way I treat most of my friends, which is poorly.
I saw the post by one of our mutual friends on facebook yesterday while I was dozing off in the tea room waiting for the operation to start; I followed the link and read the newspaper article. And somewhere along the way the pieces finally fell into place, in my muggy post-call, food-deprived head. My God, this person - this faintly familiar firstnamelastname - was Her. Double whammy, She was dead.
Dead in the worst possible way, at the prime of her life, in a trivial moment that cost her her life, driving her family back to the airport, the unlucky sole non-survivor of a tragic accident, dying on site just as help arrived with her family incapacitated all around her. Five weeks away from graduation, from attaining her dream.
Dead and gone. Her facebook wall is flooding over with sadness, with people pouring out their grief about missing her and hoping that she rests in peace; that's what bubbly, cheerful, brave people get when they die.
It's just not enough.
What they deserve is life; to be going on doing all the things that we loved and knew she loved doing.
Goodbye Slinky. We never met you and I, face to face, but you were one of the few good people I'm honoured to call "friend".
I'll miss you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)