TR EMERITUS

I refer to the Straits Times report, “Beyond money: Why financial incentives alone aren't encouraging more births It's all in the head” (Sep 14). The population of most developed countries is shrinking, this will be an inevitable trend. Singapore is following suit. Usually, a country encourages its people to have more children are based on the following considerations: 1.Sustainably maintain a sufficient workforce, strengthen the country’s economy. 2.Prevent or delay population aging 3.Reduce the financial burden on existing taxpayers 4.Cut the reliance upon the foreign immigrants. 5.Ensuring the sufficient supply of soldiers It’s indeed in the interest of a nation. Since 1987, the Singaporean government has actively encouraged its married people (especially those young married couples) to have more children. The relevant authorities have worked hard, spent huge sums of money, and used a lot of human and material resources to promote procreation. The Government has introduced preferential policies and measures to raise fertility and encourage marriage. For examples: - Housing Grants, MediSave Grant for newborns, Baby Bonus, Affordable and quality preschool education for all, KidStart programme and Shared parental leave. However, its results have always been unsatisfactory; they have not reached the pre-set goal of 2.1 replacement fertility rate. Why is my country’s fertility rate so low? Let's analyze some possible reasons: 1.Due to the hustle and bustle of life and high costs of living. 2.Due to stiff competitions in jobs of this cosmopolitan city, most people are struggling to make a decent living in order to put foods on the table, and people have no desire of priority in the thought of procreation. 3. Many salaried employees are worried that the economic uncertainty and downturn will affect their company's business, which will lead to the instability of their jobs and affect their mood for procreation. 4. Many people worry that raising children is a lifelong matter. Couples must be mentally prepared to a certain extent and must sacrifice their own time, energy and money to plan how to raise children from birth to graduation from college. 5.Some parents of today do not wish to see their children who will face greater and harder challenges, difficulties and uncertainty of their future. 6. Some married couples also worry about having unhealthy babies, such as those born with rare congenital or autistic syndromes. 7.Certainly, there are some married couples who are suitable to have children because of their medical conditions. Although having children is indeed a natural responsibility. It is originally a joyful thing, and a couples can enjoy the happiness of a family. But it varies from person to person. Anyway, the subject of procreation is very personal, there is no right and wrong answer to it, we should respect each individual’s decision.   Teo Kueh Liang (Mr)      Read More →

From Ukraine's 泼水节 to China's 摸奶节. What more needs said?     * This video is inserted to push down the older articles as they are no longer relevant.      Read More →

Vexing over the birth rate decline? Well, Psychologist Amy Lim surmises the problem well. It’s not about the money, but the mindset. She presents the psychology behind this across-the-board reluctance to contribute to the birth rates. It is a psychology about having more, thereby allowing material possessions to gradually define us. That outweighs the intangible benefits of having babies. “The quest for societal success need not eclipse the dream of a family; it’s a matter of fostering an environment where both aspirations can co-exist harmoniously,” said Dr Amy Lim. Here’s the bite. “The intricate interplay between social status, resource competition, and family planning paints a comprehensive picture of the fertility dilemma.” That’s the issue, and may just be the iceberg behind the watermark. The tip of it is, well, financial incentives, to address the high cost of living - BTO and car? As for the standard of living issue, we seems to have that never-enough mindset. We are striving for more, and this pursuit undermines the goal of family planning. This pursuit of social status can be quite intense based on this academic research funded by MOE and other tertiary institutions. “Their revelation cast a new light on the baffling decline in birth rates. Beyond the prism of economic affordability, it was found that the critical factor revolves around the allure of social status.” “Specifically, people believe that they need to go through intense competition in order to achieve higher social standing. People can prioritise acquiring this social status at the expense of their marriage and reproduction.” I don’t think there’s anything new here. The world may be flat, but the rampant rise of inequality, especially in our garden state, may have generated many unintended effect that have thwart the sincere efforts of government policies to promote families here. This flat world has many unequal peaks, and it is this race up to achieve higher social standing that young couples are reprioritising the goals of starting a family; the later, the better, if ever. Dr Amy said: “…research has consistently demonstrated that when it comes to gauging their social status, people look at it in terms of where they stand in relation to others and not in absolute terms - in other words, it is not about how much one has achieved, but about how this achievement compares with others.” And what fuels this competition is largely a matter of perception, a scarcity (“kiasu”) mindset, where having enough is still not enough. This is made worse by social media, where the rich and famous, whether authentic or exaggerated, wantonly parade or strut their wealth and possessions for all to marvel. Our timeless values thus take a step back for the blinding glitters of mirage gold. Lesson? Just one. Krishnamurti once said: “It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” I won’t go to the extent of saying that our affluent society is sick, but I sense a certain level of learned helplessness. And this attitude has come to accept how society has evolved, with the challenges it pose, and the limited ways we can address it, without tackling the one issue that is our sacred cow, prosperity. Mind you, that P-word has even revolutionised religion to make what is sacred, profoundly sacrilegious. At times, we need bolder re-imagination and out-of-this-world courage to experience a breakthru, and not just complacently building on what we have been building on thus far. You have heard it, right? The ladder of success is leaning on the wrong wall? But first, let’s give credit where it is due. Economic prosperity has brought us so far, and we all benefited from it, immeasurably. However, it changes society too, even globally. The classic frog in the boiling pot, myth or not, is really about that comfort zone we embrace, that warm feeling of security, before we sense that something is just not right anymore. Likewise with prosperity, even the ameliorated ones, because there’s no point rearranging deck chairs on Titanic. And likewise, just saying “no” does not prevent teen pregnancy, and starting the morning with the greeting “have a nice day” does not cure depression. Some problems are obvious, and some are more than meet the eye. Prosperity changes the society for good, but it may come to a point where it changes it for bad, more than good. The question is, and I suppose this is blasphemy for an affluent society, can we change direction to emphasise more of one and less of the other? Will it even be effective, if your ladder is leaning against the wrong wall? Should we go beyond “no” and morning greetings, so to speak, if we want sustained and sustainable changes for the better, for everyone, if not, for most of us? I write this reflection this morning because Dr Amy Lim has drawn upon bankable social science data to (hopefully) give us some pause for thought. The situation may no longer be what parents can control, for our future generation. Outside influences are now much more embedded in a flat world with advanced technology. And starting a family is becoming more expensive not because of the cost to start one, but the mindset that starting one will cause us to lag behind others. That is one prosperity-fuelled mindset that calls for a radical rethinking of how we want our society to evolve further. Or is it too late? Penny for your thoughts?   Michael Han * The author was a Director at Han & Lu  Law Chambers and blogs on Facebook.      Read More →