(I'm sorry if the ideas in this entry are too scattered but I have so much to write I just want to plunk everything down here)
--------------------------------------------------
I have noticed that since young I stood very much on the side of J rather than M, probably to a skewed extent. These recent years I have been oscillating across the divide, if there is any divide, for instance when I had to consider the case of this young Malaysian man sentenced to death in Singapore for drug trafficking. In the end, though I was originally very disinclined to, I helped to sign the petition.
More recently however, in my personal life, M has showed itself to have this perverse side, perverse because it exploits the conscience of decent down to earth fellows. ("What if he does something rash? Will you regret it?" "I can't believe these people are so unkind to me. I'm so lonely. Sob") Yes I believe in compassion but things can get to the point when the world is actually bending over backwards to accomodate the unreasonable. The exploitative. The abusive.
Reading the newspapers recently, I noticed that what I perceived of the riots in Britain to be an extension of my inner struggle.
The mess we see now is a failure of that society morally, and I'll let this article and this article explain more eloquently the situation. In my words, Britain has let M overpower J. M, the irrational whimsical lady, has put her boot in the face of Lady J. J probably has left Britain in a fit of disgust, and M's wayward cousin Chaos has come out to play.
Now onto Singapore. Yes, definitely we have a long way to go before we scale the heights that Britain have. Any discussion about Singapore starting to become like Britain is way too speculative, although I did discuss that possibility yesterday with my friend over dinner.
You may be wondering why I put that quote at the start of the article when all I've been talking so far was about unpleasant people and the British riots. Because I've been thinking quite a fair bit about healthcare subsidies in Medicine and whether they are as just as we think they are.
Consider this: A middle aged lady has not been controlling her diabetes well. She injures her foot, which her husband encourages her to seek treatment for. For three weeks she ignores him before she finally gives in. Luckily no amputation was needed for that wound.
A middle aged security guard, with a rare metabolic condition, comes in for his nth episode of hypoglycemia. Like all previous times, he vehemently refuses treatment. He insists that his handphone is missing although healthcare workers have repeatedly reassured him that his wife has taken it. But he is angry and bursts out at healthcare workers.
In strange circumstances, this elderly lady, under a curious request by her family members, has been transferred to this current hospital from her previous hospital. Presenting complaints point towards nothing other than a URTI but her family members seem to want her in this hospital. She looks and behaves very fine but starts coughing whenever a healthcare worker comes near. The endocrinologist spends 20 minutes at ward rounds thinking through her condition and counselling her about medications. Which are lozenges by the way.
And in case you are wondering, I am quoting real life examples.
J: Getting something you deserve, or not getting something you don't deserve. M: getting something you do not deserve. Will healthcare subsidies be an act of justice or mercy in that case? On one hand, as citizens of this country, we are said to be entitled to have healthcare costs taken care of by the government. It seems fair and just.
But then again, it is apparent that a significant minority (I am guessing, hoping, that it is the minority) of government subsidies are spent on the negligent and worse still the malingerers. Perhaps such labels could be a little harsh, especially on the first patient, because people's view of their health is affected by sociocultural status and also their economical well being. Nevertheless, it is public funds, the hard earned wages of the taxpayer, that are being used to pay for their healthcare which they hardly cared about. Is this just?
In the cases of these people, I conclude that subsidising them is an act of mercy. And all cynicism aside, I have been told by a wise friend that no matter what, our calling is primarily to love these people. It is an idea that I want to be committed to. And I admit it is a weak flame, a smouldering ember that stands alone in the darkness of my hatred of people who hold ransom the wider world (like that guy I was talking about).
Had I the power to fashion society, everything will be orderly and in place. People will understand that they are not entitled by any external source to live a happy life. They have to get it themselves. They don't need to be strong or talented but they will be responsible and disciplined. But at the end of the day it is part of our being human that we learn to love even those who are different. Those who may seem disorderly and irresponsible. Because God loved us first and foremost.
0 comments:
Post a Comment