My Learning Experience

It’s been 13 weeks into my journey of ES1102. Yet, I still feel that the classes were not enough. There is much to writing than just practicing on a few points such as summary, reader response and an essay. Along the way, I figured that part of the objective of the course was to help us find out about our specific problems in writing.

For me, the one thing that I struggled with and still do is with the organization of content. I had a tendency to go straight into writing without making a skeleton of the structure. For example, when I decided on Eugenics as the topic for my essay, I researched and discovered a few good points that I could utilize, without a clear goal in mind. I believed that I did not have much to do as these points were readily available. All I needed to do was to elaborate on then.

It turned out to be so much more work than that. Without a clear end in mind, my points were scattered throughout the essay and I had great trouble trying to piece them together. That process of restructuring took a lot of time and effort – much more than I would need to put in if I had bothered to create an essay outline in the first place.

Sad I was to see some of the good points go, it made all the difference in helping my essay flow better. I realized then that I had to work on forming some sort of blue print before I start writing and not simply rush into things. My excitement during research was not helpful as it clouded my judgement. It was sometimes almost essential for me to use irrelevant points, especially since some of those content were so good. This usually ends in either cutting away those points or painstakingly trying to fuse it to my original topic.

As with all assignments and exams, deadlines are a given. I find myself often taking too much time on a specific task when compared to others. It dawned on me that if I concentrated only on the relevant points, I would be able to save up on a lot of time.

As we progressed, another good learning experience was through the presentation of essay. As mentioned in my previous post, I supported the exercise simply because there was great relevance in our university life. One aspect which I learnt was the idea of “fake it till you make it”. When I first watched the video, I was relatively unconvinced. People who can speak on stage can usually speak well the first time. I later understood “faking it” to just be practicing. This means practicing on stage, not in the bedroom in front of a mirror as to truly get the feel of what it’s like being in front of an audience.

The first step before that? Understanding the material at hand. In my previous presentations, I realized that I focused too much on writing the speech or appearing less nervous instead of truly taking time to absorb what I wanted to present. I managed to apply this in my marketing presentation where I learnt the content by heart, before starting on any form of presentation practice. The result? I was much less nervous than I was before. Plus, I could answer the questions without much worries.

Therefore, my learning experience in ES1102 had been somewhat enlightening. Hopefully I am able to practice more on organizing my content so that it turns into a habit.

 

Presentation

Supporting the system

Presenting is one of the unavoidable task in university as a student. Therefore it makes sense for students to also try it out during the ES1102 classes.

As mentioned by our tutor Brad, speaking and presenting also requires a good grasp of English writing. What words to present on the slides and how to phrase your sentences are just examples.

The idea of having presentation also helps if the presenter is given immediate feedback to work on it. Often times we go through presentations without understanding how we did in terms of body language, tone of voice and even clarity.

Perhaps the most important part is to have students have a feel of what it feels like to be on stage. The experience although terrifying at first gets better over time.

The terms “fake it till you make it” never caught on to me in the beginning. However it made sense over time since the only concern was for the audience to believe in what you’re saying.

I also particularly liked that we were encouraged to not used slides as to get better in understanding our material.

This way we don’t have to be tied down to the words on the slides. The plus side to this also comes in during the Q&A session where you’ll be more prepared for questions about your content. Many of us often forget this aspect as they are too focused on getting their speech right or working on their slides.

They forget that the presentation ultimately involves presenting an idea which you know and fully understand about.

Therefore I agree to having presentations at the end of the semester to not only learn about ourselves but also from others.

Essay Final Draft

Tung Lye Yee

A03

Eugenics in Singapore: How It’s Costing Our Population

According to Goldin (2009), globalization is getting more complex and is occurring at a rapid rate..Humans will therefore need to manage their population growth using technology that not only allows humans to grow older, but also grow wiser, so as “to support the populations of the future”. As a result, the Singapore government has introduced various eugenics policies in an attempt to create a better and stronger nation for the future and stay competitive with the rising demands of globalization.

Introduced by Sir Francis Dalton, the term eugenics is the “study of agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations, either physically or mentally.” (Newman, p. 441) Dalton believed that by selectively breeding for desirable traits, a “super race” of humans could possibly be created. His idea of eugenics gave rise to various social movements throughout history, such as the German Nazis who conducted mass sterilization and genocide during World War II. Hitler, who was a great believer in eugenics, believed that he could achieve “racial hygiene” by wiping out the Jews.

Another supporter of eugenics was Singapore’s former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, who believes that smart couples are more likely to produce smart children than couples who are less smart (Plate, 2013). In the National Day Rally speech of August 14 1983, he warned citizens that “the economy, administration and society will suffer” when less-educated women have more children than well-educated mother, since the country could only depend on human intelligence for progress (Lee, 1983).

However, as Goldin also mentioned, globalization does not happen equally. The growth only benefits those who have access to new technology while low income groups continue to be left out. In this case, education is closely linked to income level as it is generally found that those with lower income have less education. In such a situation, class inequality has been observed in many countries including Singapore. By providing social and economic initiatives only to a selected few through its eugenic policies, the Singapore government is further intensifying the social gap between the educated and less educated.

Currently, Singapore is faced with population woes as fertility rate continues to decrease. At 1.2, the country’s total fertility rate is well below the required replacement level (World Bank, 2013).

However, the government is still enforcing policies such as Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme, which continues to promote de-facto eugenics in the face of low birth rates. The HOPE scheme currently provides financial support to low-income families but only if they don’t have more than two children (Ministry of Social and Family Development, 2010). For some parents, this also spells emotional turmoil as they undergo abortion procedures to secure the scheme. It also reflects how the government wishes to discourage lower income groups from reproducing through such schemes in the name of eugenics.

Similarly, compulsory abortion counselling is only required for Singaporeans with secondary education or higher and who have fewer than three children (Ministry of Health Singapore, 2013) Those who do not meet this requirement are allowed to request for abortion without any question. With such an effect in place, Singaporeans are faced with this question: Why do some children seem more important than others?

Another form of class inequality can be observed in education. According to Giddens (1997), education has consistently been seen as a means of equalisation. Singapore has also prides itself on practicing meritocracy at all levels as  “academic grades are considered as objective measures of the students’ ability and effort, irrespective of their social background” (Yamashita, 2002). However, there is a practice where Singapore children with siblings in school or whose parents had previously studied in the institution, are given priority for admission to the school. As only children of the better educated will have more opportunities for education, the social gap between the educated and less educated widens. 

Therefore, social groups representing lower income community should pressure government to revisit such eugenic policies and effect change. This is to provide more equality among citizens regardless of background.

           

Another initiative is to focus on helping with the education of children from lower income families so that they do not get left behind. Financial aid and special education programs can be introduced to help them with their studies. The belief that lower income children are not smart can be easily disproved by Eysenck, the eugenic scientist who retired Prime Minister Lee borrowed ideas from. He stated that Singapore’s program was a misapplication of his ideas ast “there is the regression – where a very dull parent might have a bright child and vice versa…It would be quite wrong to decide the fate of a child by the intelligence of the parent” (Palen, 1986) With such policies in place, Singapore will have a wider pool of young generation to help lead the country into the future.

In the end, what eugenics represents in Singapore is something which is logically correct but ethically wrong. The cost of creating a better future for the nation should never be at the expense of discriminating against citizens based on their education status or income level. Therefore, the government should consider other solutions so that Singapore can improve further with the help of all the citizens equally.

Reference:

Giddens, Anthony. Sociology. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Policy Press, 1997.

Goldin, I. (2009). Navigating our global future. TED Talks (online). Retrieved on March 3rd 2014 from: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future.html

Lee, K.Y. (1983) National Day Rally Speech of Aug. 14, 1983. Straits Times.

Mika Yamashita (2002). “Singapore Education Sector Analysis”. Education Resources Information Center.

Ministry of Health Singapore (2013) Pre-abortion counselling. Retrieved on March 15th 2014 from: http://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/pressRoom/Parliamentary_QA/2013/pre-abortion-counselling.html

Ministry of Social and Family Development (2010). Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme (online). Retrieved on March 2nd 2014 from: http://app.msf.gov.sg/Assistance/HomeOwnershipPlusEducationHOPEScheme.aspx

Newman, Horatio Hackett. Evolution, Genetic and Eugenics. New York, New York: Greenwood Press, Publishers, 1969.

Palen, J (1986). Fertility and Eugenics: Singapore’s Population Policies. Population Research and Policy Review , Vol. 5, No. 1 (1986)

Plate, T. (2013). Giants of Asia: Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew: Citizen Singapore: How to Build a Nation. Marshall Cavendish International Asia Pte Ltd.

World Bank. (2013). Fertility rate of Singapore (online). Data retrieved March 2, 2014, from: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp_dyn_tfrt_in&hl=en&dl=en&idim=country:SGP:HKG:MYS

Essay Final

Tung Lye Yee

A03

https://randomdesignsbyme.wordpress.com/

 

 

Eugenics in Singapore: How It’s Costing Our Population

 

According to Goldin, globalization is getting more complex and is occurring at a rapid rate. Humans will therefore need to manage their population using technology that not only allows us to grow older, but also grow wiser, as “to support the populations of the future”. As a result, the Singapore government has introduced various eugenics policies in an attempt to keep up with the demands of globalization.

So what exactly is eugenics? Introduced by Sir Francis Dalton, he coined the term eugenics as the “study of agencies under social control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations, either physically or mentally.” (Newman, 441) By selectively breeding for desirable traits among humans, Dalton believed he could achieve a “super race” of humans. His idea of eugenics gave rise to various social movements throughout history, such as the German Nazis who conducted mass sterilization and genocide during World War II.

Another supporter of eugenics was Singapore’s retired Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who believed that smart couples are more likely to produce smart children than couples who are less smart (Plate, 2013). In the National Day Rally speech of August 14 1983, he warned citizens that “the economy, administration and society will suffer” when less-educated women have more children than well-educated mother, since the country could only depend on human intelligence for progress (Lee, 1983).

 

However, Goldin also mentioned that globalization does not happen equally. For those who cannot reap the benefits of globalization such as technological advancement due to low income, they remain firmly below others. In this case, education is closely linked to income level as it is generally found that those with lower income have less education. Therefore, class inequality has been observed in many countries including Singapore. By providing initiatives only to a selected few, I argue that government eugenic policies are further intensifying the gap between the educated and less educated.

 

Currently, Singapore is faced with population woes as fertility rate continues to decrease. At 1.2, the country’s total fertility rate is well below the required replacement level (World Bank, 2013).

However, the government is still enforcing policies such as Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme which continues to promote eugenics in the face of low birth rates. The HOPE scheme currently provides support to low-income families but only if they don’t have more than two children (Ministry of Social and Family Development, 2010). Not only does such a policy reflect the extent of eugenic practices, it also highlights the social gap between classes where the lesser educated are forced to carry out drastic measures. For some parents, this also spells emotional turmoil as they undergo abortion procedures to secure the scheme.

Similarly, compulsory abortion counselling is only required for Singaporeans with secondary education and who have fewer than three children (Ministry of Health Singapore, 2013) Those who do not meet this requirement are allowed to request for abortion without any question. With such an effect in place, Singaporeans are faced with this question: why do some children seem more important than others?

 

Another form of class inequality can be observed in education. According to Giddens, education has consistently been seen as a means of equalisation. Singapore has also prides itself on practicing meritocracy at all levels as  “academic grades are considered as objective measures of the students’ ability and effort, irrespective of their social background” (Yamashita, 2002). However, there is a practice where Singapore children with siblings in school or whose parents had previously studied in the institution, are given priority for admission to the school. This shows the importance placed on the children of the better educated as compared to the less educated.  

To reduce such social inequality, the government should introduce adoptions options for struggling families as a way to preserve the life of children. This not only reduces the pain of undergoing abortion but also ensures that the child will be taken care of by other loving couples.

 

Another initiative is to focus on helping with the education of children from lower income family so that they do not get left behind. Financial aid and special education programs can be introduced to help them with their studies. The belief that lower income children are not smart can be easily disproved by Eysenck, the eugenic scientist who retired Prime Minister Lee borrowed ideas from. He stated that Singapore’s program was a misapplication of his ideas ast “there is the regression – where a very dull parent might have a bright child and vice versa…It would be quite wrong to decide the fate of a child by the intelligence of the parent” (Palen, 1986)

 

In the end, what eugenics represents in Singapore is something which is logically correct but ethically wrong. The cost of creating a better future should never be at the expense of discriminating citizens based on education status or income level. Therefore, the government should consider other solutions so that Singapore can improve further with the help of all the citizens equally.

Reference:

Giddens, Anthony. Sociology. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Policy Press, 1997.

Goldin, I. (2009). Navigating our global future. TED Talks (online). Retrieved on March 3rd 2014 from: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future.html

 

Lee, K.Y. (1983) National Day Rally Speech of Aug. 14, 1983. Straits Times.

Mika Yamashita (2002). “Singapore Education Sector Analysis”. Education Resources Information Center.

 

Ministry of Health Singapore (2013) Pre-abortion counselling. Retrieved on March 15th 2014 from: http://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/pressRoom/Parliamentary_QA/2013/pre-abortion-counselling.html

Ministry of Social and Family Development (2010). Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme (online). Retrieved on March 2nd 2014 from: http://app.msf.gov.sg/Assistance/HomeOwnershipPlusEducationHOPEScheme.aspx

Newman, Horatio Hackett. Evolution, Genetic and Eugenics. New York, New York: Greenwood Press, Publishers, 1969.

Palen, J (1986). Fertility and Eugenics: Singapore’s Population Policies. Population Research and Policy Review , Vol. 5, No. 1 (1986)

Plate, T. (2013). Giants of Asia: Conversations with Lee Kuan Yew: Citizen Singapore: How to Build a Nation. Marshall Cavendish International Asia Pte Ltd.

World Bank. (2013). Fertility rate of Singapore (online). Data retrieved March 2, 2014, from: https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=sp_dyn_tfrt_in&hl=en&dl=en&idim=country:SGP:HKG:MYS

 

Essay Draft 2

Tung Lye Yee

A03

Eugenics in Singapore: How It’s Costing Our Population

In Goldin’s video, he mentioned that humans will need to manage their population using technology that not only allows us to grow older, but also grow wiser, as “to support the populations of the future”. Similarly, Singapore’s goal to create a better and stronger nation for the future has led to the introduction of various eugenics population policies. Therefore, this essay will discuss how such eugenic practices impede Singapore’s population growth. This essay will also evaluate current solutions and suggest possible changes to help promote Singapore’s overall population.

So what exactly is eugenics?

Defined as a practice of improving human population, eugenics is achieved through selectively breeding for desirable trait. This modern concept was originally developed by Francis Galton who was intrigued by the idea of hereditary desirable traits after he read Charles Darwin’s publication of “The Origin of Species”. His idea of eugenics gave rise to various social movements throughout history, such as Nazi’s Holocaust that saw the murder of approximately six million Jews during World War II. Hitler, who was a great believer in eugenics, believed that he could achieve “racial hygiene” by wiping out the Jews.

In Singapore’s context, the government practices eugenics by encouraging procreation between the better educated and higher income groups. In the National Day Rally speech of August 14, 1983, Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew talked about hereditarian H.J. Eysenck’s writing which states that “’studies have shown that 80 percent of how well you do depends on nature and only 20 percent on nurture”  (Asiaweek, 1984). He therefore warned about how “the economy, administration and society will suffer” when less-educated women have more children than well-educated mother, since the country could only depend on human intelligence for progress (Lee, 1983).

However, the implementation of the Graduate Mothers’ Scheme which encouraged degree-holding women to procreate and women without an O-level degree to get sterilised was not effective and was subsequently abolished. The scheme aims to increase fertility by providing benefits to graduate mothers such as school admission priorities over the lesser-educated. According to Education Minister Dr Tony Tan, the decision to abolish the scheme was “in view of the anxiety and resentment which the priority scheme has aroused in Singaporeans, both graduate and non-graduate” (Straits Times, 1985).

The problem with eugenics now lies in how it impedes Singapore’s population growth. Although economic factors such as high living costs in Singapore discourage women from having children, policies such as the Graduate Mothers’ Scheme have also shaped the mind-set of women. With the government prioritizing better educated mothers, women started to shift their life priorities: from starting a family to focusing on their studies. Furthermore, policies such as Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme continue to promote eugenics in the face of low birth rates. The HOPE scheme currently provides support to low-income families but only if they don’t have more than two children. For some parents, this spells emotional turmoil as they undergo abortion procedures to secure the scheme.

An existing solution to curb the dip in fertility rate is with compulsory abortion counselling. As a result, the number of women who kept their pregnancy after counselling increased, from 268 in 2011 to 336 in 2012 (Channel News Asia, 2014). However, the program is only compulsory for Singaporeans with secondary education and who have fewer than three children. This is limiting because women who do not fit this category can contribute to Singapore’s population but are free to undergo abortions without counselling.

Therefore, the government should focus on helping with the education of children from lower income family so that they do not get left behind. Financial aid and special education programs can be introduced to help them with their studies. The belief that lower income children are not smart can be easily disproved since Eysenck has stated that Singapore’s program was a misapplication of his ideas. He said that “there is the regression – where a very dull parent might have a bright child and vice versa…It would be quite wrong to decide the fate of a child by the intelligence of the parent (London Daily Telegraph,1984). Adoptions options may also be introduced for struggling families as a way to preserve the life of children. This not only reduces the pain of undergoing abortion but also ensures that the child will be taken care of by other loving couples.

In the end, what eugenics represents in Singapore is something which is logically correct but ethically wrong. The cost of creating a better future should never be at the expense of discriminating citizens based on their income level. Therefore, the government should consider other solution so that Singapore can improve further with the help of all the citizens equally.

(784 words)

 

References:

Goldin, I. (2009). Navigating our global future (online). Retrieved on March 3rd 2014 from: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ian_goldin_navigating_our_global_future.html

Ministry of Social and Family Development (2010). Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme (online). Retrieved on March 2nd 2014 from: http://app.msf.gov.sg/Assistance/HomeOwnershipPlusEducationHOPEScheme.aspx

Palen, J (1986). Fertility and Eugenics: Singapore’s Population Policies. Population Research and Policy Review , Vol. 5, No. 1 (1986)

Channel News Asia (2014). MOH proposes pre-abortion counselling be made mandatory (online). Retrieved on March 6^th 2014 from: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/moh-proposes-pre-abortion/1001192.html

Essay Draft 1

Eugenics in Singapore: How It’s Costing Our Population

In Goldin’s video, he mentioned that the development in genetics may see the rise of a new eugenics where “only those that are able to afford it be able to be this super race of the future”.

Similarly, Singapore’s eugenics population policies have only encouraged procreation between the better educated and higher income groups. Therefore, this essay seeks to discuss how such eugenic practices not only creates ethical issues but also impedes population growth. This essay will also evaluate existing solutions for promoting overall population in Singapore.

So what exactly is eugenics?

Defined as a practice of improving human population, eugenics is achieved through selectively breeding for desirable trait. This modern concept was originally developed by Francis Galton who was intrigued by the idea of hereditary desirable traits after he read Charles Darwin’s publication of “The Origin of Species”.

His idea of eugenics gave rise to various social movement throughout history, with roots in countries such as France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States.

One notable example of eugenics was Nazi’s Holocaust that saw the murder of approximately six million Jews during World War II. Hitler who was a great believer in eugenics, believed that he could achieve “racial hygiene” by wiping out the Jews.

While Singapore’s version of eugenics is not as extreme, there has been a history of outcry regarding policies that seek to benefit the upper-class. After World War II, the government introduced policies such as “Stop at Two” to control birth rates in fear of being unable to cope with such a boost in population.

Years later, the government also introduced the Graduate Mothers’ Scheme to encouraged degree-holding women to procreate and women without an O-level degree to get sterilised. The justification for this was to build a better nation and prevent lower-income families from unnecessary hardship as they would struggle financially with too many children.

The problem with eugenics now lies in Singapore’s current population troubles. What started as a plan to create a “better generation” may very well end up with no future generation at all.

To illustrate, early population control such as the Graduate Mothers’ Scheme have shaped the mindset of women, causing a demographic shift. In other words, the focus of the government have influenced a woman’s focus in life: from starting a family to achieving better education. Coupled with Singapore’s high cost of living in the world, women today are much less reluctant to have more kids.

Yet current policies such as the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme continues to promote eugenics in the face of low birth rates. HOPE scheme aims to provides support to low-income families, but only if they don’t have more than two children. For some parents, this spells emotional turmoil as they undergo abortion procedures to secure the scheme.

An existing solution to curb the dip in fertility rate is with compulsory abortion counselling.

Women who are Singapore citizens or permanent residents; have passed the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE); have at least some secondary education, and have fewer than three children, have to attend a mandatory pre-abortion counseling.

As a result, the number of women who kept their pregnancy after counselling increased, from 268 in 2011 to 336 in 2012 according to The Ministry of Health (MOH).

However, the initiative is limited by the fact that the pre-abortion counseling fails to target a larger pool of women who can contribute to Singapore’s population. Foreigners who may be married to Singaporeans, Singaporeans who can afford three or more children are not subjected to such counseling and are able to have abortion right away.

With such poor policies in place, perhaps it would be better for the government to remove eugenics practices if they hope to one day increase the nation’s population. Instead, there should be more policies that focus on helping with the education of children from lower income family so that they do not get left behind. This would then be a step towards creating equality among citizens of different classes. Adoptions options may also be introduced for struggling families as a way to preserve the life of children. Well-off parents who have the means may then take over to support the children better.

In the end, what eugenics represents in Singapore is something which is logically correct but ethically wrong. The cost of creating a better society should never be at the expense of citizens from lower socio-economic groups. Many other solution can be further explored to correct this situation. After all, there have been many examples in history that shows how genes are not the only factor in intelligence.

(768 words)

 

Reference:

Singapore government is continuing to practice a form of eugenics (2013). Retrieved on March 3rd 2014 from: http://sgismyhome.blogspot.sg/2013/03/singapore-government-is-continuing-to.html

Ministry of Social and Family Development (2010). Retrieved on March 2nd 2014 from: http://app.msf.gov.sg/Assistance/HomeOwnershipPlusEducationHOPEScheme.aspx

Essay Outline

Research question

How can Singapore’s government reduce impediments to increasing the nation’s population?

Thesis statement

Singapore’s government can increase the nation’s population by removing eugenics population policies that discourages lower income citizens from reproducing.

Introduction – Eugenics defined and history

So what is eugenics?

Eugenics is defined as a practice of improving human population by selectively breeding for certain desirable trait.

This modern concept was originally developed by Francis Galton who was intrigued by the idea of desirable traits being hereditary.

after he read Charles Darwin’s publication of The Origin of Species.

The publication by his cousin Charles Darwin of The Origin of Species in 1859 was an event that changed Galton’s life.Galton believed that desirable traits were hereditary based on biographical studies

Rise of social movement in many forms France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States

One popular example of eugenics was Hitler’s  Holocaust that mass murder or genocide of approximately six million Jews during World War II,

Introduction:

Singapore’s version was placed in the Stop at Two policy targeted towards lowly-educated and low-income women. Reason is to create a population of higher standing. This has continued to this day.

Link to “But will this only be available for the super rich, for those that can afford it? Are we headed for a new eugenics?Will only those that are able to afford it be able to be this super race of the future?”

Problem:

Singapore’s eugenics population policies impede the progress of increasing Singapore’s population.

In today’s context,  Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme. This ironically named scheme provides support to low-income families, but only if they don’t have more than two children. Cash incentives are given out to couples to fund ligation or vasectomy procedures. Further lowers the population.

Logically correct, ethically wrong. At what cost?

Solve low population by bringing in foreign immigrants that create further social problem.

Existing solution

“Abortions of convenience” discouraged, with compulsory abortion counselling

There is mandatory pre-abortion counseling if the women are Singapore citizens or permanent residents; have passed the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE); have at least some secondary education, and have fewer than three children.

There is no counseling for foreigners, rape victims or Singaporeans with three or more children, and those who have not passed the PSLE. If they seek an abortion, they get it right away.

Effectiveness: There has been a steady decline in the number of women who requested to terminate their pregnancy since 2008.

The number of women who submitted an abortion request fell from 12,208 in 2011 to 10,960 in 2012 — the lowest figure since 2005 when 11,979 requests were made.

The number of women who kept their pregnancy after counselling increased, from 268 in 2011 to 336 in 2012.

Limitation: The increase in number could be just an equivalent increase in women going for counselling. Also, the pre-abortion counseling still fails to target a larger pool of women going for abortion. Foreigners may be married to Singaporeans while Singaporeans with three or more children may still be able to afford.

Solution:

Better education for all, create equality not further inequality

Policies that aid the kids of low income family

Consider adoption for well-off parents. Surely able to support their children better.

Have mandatory counselling for abortion regardless of nationality.

Instead of trying to aim for perfect generation, take time to explore options.

 

Policies: http://sgismyhome.blogspot.sg/2013/03/singapore-government-is-continuing-to.html

http://app.msf.gov.sg/Assistance/HomeOwnershipPlusEducationHOPEScheme.aspx

Reader Response Final Version

In his paper titled “Globalization of Culture Through the Media”, Kraidy (2002) discusses two theories that influences culture: culture imperialism, where one culture imposes its culture on others and globalisation, an integration process between countries. The idea of Western culture domination due to advancement in technology, such as media has been widely accepted by certain parties. However, Kraidy argues that media only intensifies existing cultural hybridity rather than homogenise them as nations only adopt influences that complement their own.

To further discuss the debate, Kraidy discusses about how cultural imperialism theory regarded the power of the media as a force so powerful that it is able to influence audiences worldwide. In essence, cultural imperialism materialized as a consequence of Western countries’ greed and colonization practices. Naturally, mass media became the tool to disseminate dominant culture and ideologies that led us to cultural imperialism today. There is no doubt about the influence of Western culture in the world, seeing as how Singapore continues to hold British’s version of English as the “true” version of the language.

Next, Kraidy considers the shift from cultural imperialism to globalisation as the world evolves to become more integrated, focusing less on nation-states but on various levels of transaction. The question is then posed to the readers: Did mass media trigger the globalization of culture, or was it only a tool to intensify a phenomenon that already existed? Kraidy goes on to reply the question using his own  perspective: cultural hybridization, that is, the integration process between cultures have existed long before and is further intensified by the media, as an alternate response to the question.

While there is no denying the effects of globalisation, perhaps more thought should be held in suggesting that the world has truly shift away from cultural imperialism.

In fact, one could argue that globalisation is just a larger extension or an alternate form of cultural imperialism. Dominating influences still exists but appear to us in different forms.

The emergence of non-Western but powerful cultures has created the false illusion of an “equal and integrated” world. The truth remains that many countries continue to remain silence. For example, Japan’s cultural soft power has taken over in many parts of the world, especially in Asia but is rarely critiqued for it. So what accounts for this difference?

Ultimately, it all boils down to perception. People tend to view the aggressiveness of Western cultures as demanding as compared to Japan’s mellow but effective approach. While Kraidy’s alternate view may better respond to the complexity of the debate, cultural imperialism remains to be a relevant phenomenon that deserves a better second view.

Reader Response Draft 1

In his paper titled “Globalization of Culture Through the Media”, Kraidy (2002) discusses two theories that influences culture: culture imperialism, where one culture imposes its culture on others and globalisation, an integration process between countries. The idea of Western culture domination due to advancement in technology, such as media has been widely accepted by certain parties. However, Kraidy argues that media only intensifies existing cultural hybridity rather than homogenise them as nations only adopt influences that complement their own.

To further discuss the debate, Kraidy discusses about how cultural imperialism theory regarded the power of the media as a force so powerful that it is able to influence audiences worldwide. In essence, cultural imperialism materialized as a consequence of simple economics since powerful countries’ need to conquer stemmed from seeking profits. As a result, mass media became the tool of which the dominant culture and ideologies were disseminated and taught to the locals because how else would people worldwide be able to recognize McDonald’s golden arches?

As I read this, I found myself agreeing with the concept since such events are spotted throughout history and can be illustrated best with the nations of Southeast Asia. Every developing nation has adopted Western cultures in one form or another. Singapore for one, still holds British’s version of English as the “correct” version of the language.

Next, Kraidy considers the shift from cultural imperialism to globalisation as the world evolves to become more integrated, focusing less on nation-states but on various levels of transaction. The question is then posed to the readers: Did mass media trigger the globalization of culture, or was it only a tool to intensify a phenomenon that already existed?

Here, I personally find globalisation just as a larger extension of cultural imperialism in the sense that dominating influences still exists but only in different forms.

The emergence of non-Western but powerful cultures only creates the false illusion of an “equal and integrated” world when in fact many voices remain silenced. For example, Japan’s cultural soft power dominates the world, especially in Asia but is rarely critiqued for it. The difference in reaction all boils down to perception. The aggressiveness of Western cultures has widely critiqued whereas Japan’s mellow approach has earned them a place in disseminating influences. Either way, cultural imperialism is still a relevant phenomenon that deserves a better second view.

In the end, Kraidy introduces cultural hybridization, that is, the integration process between cultures that existed long time ago that is further intensified by the media, as an alternate response to the question. As a reader, I stay true to my opinion but appreciates Kraidy’s view that combines both theories together that seems to better respond to the complexity of the debate.

Summary for “Globalisation of Culture Through the Media”

In his paper titled “Globalization of Culture Through the Media, Kraidy (2002) compares culture imperialism and globalisation influences on culture. The idea that Western culture dominates due to advancement in technology, such as media has been widely accepted by various parties.
However, Kraidy argues that media only intensifies existing cultural hybridity rather than homogenise them as nations adopt influences that complement their own.

Outline:
– culture imperialism definition and summary
– globalisation summary
– personal reaction towards shift from culture imperialism to globalisation
– final conclusion