I attended a dialogue session last Thursday organised by Reach, the Singapore Government’s feedback arm, on “Creating a Pro-family Environment”. It was basically a bunch of parents talking to members of the government, giving feedback on the pro-family measures introduced over the past few years.
Faith was pregnant with Anne when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced:
- the 5 day workweek, down from the original 5.5
- the extension of maternity leave for working mothers, from 8 weeks to 12 weeks, with the government paying corporations the extra 4 weeks
- a reduction in the levy when hiring a foreign domestic help
- the baby bonus, where the government pays parents a lump sum of $3,000 at the birth of their first child and second child, $6,000 for the birth of their third and fourth
- tax rebates for working mothers, pegged to the number of children they have
- the government’s plan to match parents’ savings for their children’s education up to a certain ceiling, $6,000 for the second child, $12,000 for the third and fourth (none for the first)
This was extremely good news for us back then, and we really felt like the government was doing its part to support couples who were transitioning to become parents.
Most Singaporean families are dual-income, with both parents working, while the children are left under the care of an employed foreign domestic worker, sometimes supervised by the couple’s parents.
With the birth of Caleb, Faith and I are thinking of becoming a single-income family, where Faith either takes long-term no pay leave or quits her job to look after the children. This isn’t the typical Singaporean family arrangement, and I went to the dialogue to have a feel of what other people were doing.
At the dialogue it was clear that we agreed on one thing: Parents are the best caregivers for their children.
But it also became clear that the Singapore government was bent on having us outsource the parenting function.
The above incentives - tax rebates, cash incentives, the reduction in the levy for domestic helpers - only apply if the mother is working (exception of the one time baby bonus). If the mother decides to stay home to look after her children, the family is ineligible for these incentives. These incentives cannot be claimed by the working father.
Troy, a father at the dialogue, summed it up as “stay-home mothers are at best forgotten, or at worst penalised for their choice”.
Dr Amy Khor who was on the panel that night tried to clarify that it wasn’t meant to penalise stay-home mothers, but to incentivise mothers to go back to work. While her statement is logical, it’s potaytoes-potahtoes to the rest of us.
Not only do you suffer the loss of a significant part of your household income, you lose the government’s support. I know that the government wants all the marbles - productivity in the workplace, high GDP, a healthy birthrate - but Singapore needs to make some hard choices here.
Another parent who stood up said that the government’s constantly pushing back the retirement age means that she would be unable to take care of her grandchildren, and her son would considering having less or no children at all.
The conference room overlooked a hundred cranes working on the upcoming casino in Marina Bay, a sore reminder that our government’s choices skewed heavily towards the dollars and cents.
I received the invitation from REACH too, but didn’t realize that I would be around to attend it if I wanted to.
It’s a subject close to all parents’ hearts, and although I can appreciate the good intentions behind getting mothers to remain economically productive, it really is the women who feel the dilemma most. I wish employers and the government can see that.
Deciding to go single-income is a difficult choice to make, because it means rescinding on a certain level of lifestyle that one is accustomed to on two incomes. I’m praying for you and Faith, that you may make the decision without the burden of guilt either ways.
Hi
Carol, my colleague from MOE told me about your blog. I read it and it does sadden me as this is what I too m struggling on parenting…. I guess its so toough to be a good parent in Singapore. I fully agree with what you said and I only wish for more flexibility. That said, from a “public service” hat, I can’t help but also rationalise how Singapore needs as many “workers” to sustain…. sigh…
I like the new look :)
I do grapple with wanting to stay at home, and going to work too. Every single day. I hope you guys find a solution that fits all your needs.
hi there,a friend told me about your blog on this issue.I am a teacher on long term NPL.This issue of staying at home always tug at my heart strings and has always been a source of ‘tear jerker’ for me.I have become quite skeptical about forums like that because i think once the government is set on their goals,such as high national GDP,women to return to workforce and blah,discussions like these are at best to make the people feel better about decisions government already made on their behalf.Being a working mom after my first kid and now a stay home for 2 of my kids,i can really see the vast difference in ‘treatment’ between the working moms and their domestic counterparts.The government,the workplace,their bosses,family members frown upon the decision to stay home most of the time and when the sahm gets past all these,its also herself,her own self esteem,sense of insecurity.I have given up hoping the government will be more compassionate towards sahms,nor even to applaud them.I think the reasons why we choose to stay home,is one of the main motivation,and hubby’s support.As a teacher,i sincerely believe a stay home parent will benefit the child greatly,in many ways.They are intangible and perhaps that is why the pragmatic government do not want to make sacrifices for, but no amount of dollars and cents can buy that.The road ahead may be difficult but you and Faith wont regret your decision,i am sure.
ps:My older son’s Caleb too!:)
Thank you all for sharing the dilemma that comes with parenting. I have no doubt that we all agree the current encouraged arrangement of hiring a domestic helper to play the part of the parent isn’t ideal, and it saddens us that the government seems to concentrate on the short-term goal of economic gain.
Sure, the long-term ramifications of a generation brought up by foreign domestic helpers hasn’t been documented as comprehensively as economic data, but surely they can see that it has a huge impact on migration patterns and that it undermines the “have children so they will look after you when you’re old” cliché.
Faith and I are blessed to have the help of our parents - not so for many whose parents are already busy with the children of their siblings, or whose parents are heeding the government’s call to work forever.
Nice new layout!
I’m now just starting my career as a language/ literacy specialist, and I am convinced that having your children raised by domestic helpers from foreign lands will have an impact on their language development.
Children need rich language input in order to develop proficiency, and that means someone invested in talking with them every day, teaching new words, new concepts, how to string a thought into a sentence etc.
Do you think our helpers can find the energy, beyond helping us with our laundry, food and chores, to do this, even if they were able to?
Read this: http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/04/02/with_babies_words_for_wisdom/?page=2
I definitely agree about improvements in language acquisition if the child is placed in the proper environment. But this also assumes that the parents have a firm grasp of the language.