Impose parental consent requirement for minors undergoing abortions

I am dismayed that a young girl became pregnant at age 14, underwent an abortion procedure and even had to split the bill with the man - all without her parents' knowledge (Man jailed for having sex with girl, 14, who split the bill for abortion with him; ST Online, March 5).

In Singapore, a person under 18 cannot legally buy cigarettes or alcohol, consent to be married or enter into a contract.

This is based on the principle that young people are unable to fully understand the consequences of their actions and, therefore, are unable to give valid informed consent.

Hence, it is ironic that under the Termination of Pregnancy Act, there is no minimum age for the abortion procedure.

There is also no legal requirement for parental consent for minors to go through abortion.

Why is this so? Abortion is an invasive surgical procedure which carries with it risks of various complications.

Which parent would want their daughter to shoulder the psychological and physical trauma of abortion at such a young age, and without their knowledge and consent?

Parents are primarily responsible for the upbringing of their children. They are in the best position to protect teenage girls from potentially dangerous medical situations before, during and after an abortion.

The child might suffer from depression or there could be post-abortion complications such as infection or haemorrhaging.

The parents might also decide to offer support to their teenage daughter in bringing up the baby, thereby avoiding abortion altogether.

In cases where the parents are abusive, the girl's life is in danger or obtaining parental consent is difficult, exceptions can be made. But let us not let hard cases make bad laws.

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/impose-parental-consent-requirement-for-minors-undergoing-abortions

Do not ignore the pitfalls of IVF

This letter was sent to The Straits Times Forum but was not published.

I thank Mrs Joni Ong for her honest sharing of her in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) journey, that was emotionally draining but now rewarding since she has borne five children, three of which are naturally conceived ("'Untaboo' IVF and other fertility treatments"; 3 March). 

The same cannot be said for my relatives who went through the excruciating psychological and physical pain of assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatment.  They were drained out of their financial resources and are now still childless. 

In a programme On A Red Dot shown on Channel News Asia last year, Ms Felicia Tan recounted her grief in suffering two miscarriages and having lost three sons while on IVF, all within two years. It was a miracle that she and her husband finally had a boy through natural conception. She asked a poignant question, "Did I create life or destroy them?" 

I read with regret that the Government's co-funding for ART treatment would be raised from $6,300 to $7,700 for fresh cycles and $1,200 to $2,200 for frozen cycles from April 1 this year. This is based on the false premises that people have a right to have children and ART treatment is one of the tools to promote population growth. 

According to the statistics provided by the Ministry of Health (MOH) last year, overall from 2013 to 2015, the average ART success rates are 21.3% at public centres and 19.0% at private centres. This translates to a huge loss of human embryos created through IVF. What about the long-term follow-up on the elevated health risks of children conceived through ART treatment as compared to naturally conceived children? What are the repercussions on the offspring of these children?   

In 2013, over half of the 9,282 abortions were done on married women ("Abortions fall to 30-year low"; July 27,2014). Why not divert our precious resources to helping women with unsupported pregnancies and facilitating life-giving options like adoption? What recourse can a citizen take when he does not agree that Government should use tax proceeds to fund IVF and abortion as they violate his freedom of conscience? 

A child is not an expensive toy that we want at all costs, at our convenient time, imputed with utilitarian value. A child is a gift bestowed, of intrinsic value like us, a sweet burden that no money can buy.

Give yourself a chance to live!

"The pain is real but it may not be the reality.

Suicide is actually doing violence to your own body as well as traumatizing others.

Don't shortchange yourself.

Give yourself a chance to live.

#saynotosuicide

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/video-on-demand/facing-depression/a-woman-s-perspective-9944930

TheSugarBook promotes ‘a hook-up culture’, leads to ‘wounded souls’

In 2013, access to extramarital dating website Ashley Madison was blocked by the Media Development Authority (MDA) after it ruled that the website has content that shows flagrant disregard of our family values and public morality.

Mr Chan Chun Sing, then Minister for Social and Family Development, said that such a website is not welcome in Singapore as it promotes infidelity that undermines trust and commitment between a husband and wife, which are core to marriage.

For The SugarBook mobile application, users are able to select an option indicating their relationship status, including “Married But Looking” when setting up their profiles. It does not verify if users are singles, just like the Ashley Madison website.

The Members of Parliament have rightly voiced their concerns over this dating platform that targets young women in their late teens and early 20s. It is a platform that reinforces the lie that beauty, money and youth are the only essentials in a relationship.

I agree with Minister for Social and Family Development Desmond Lee that the more enduring way to protect young Singaporeans from being exploited is to inculcate in them good values from young, so that “they can exercise discretion and good judgement” when navigating the online world (“Police will keep a ‘close eye’ on TheSugarBook: Demond Lee”; Feb 5)

However, it should be noted that not all young Singaporeans come from families with highly involved or highly educated parents. It is increasingly challenging to teach our young to build sound character.

The SugarBook reinforces the message that money can buy one’s integrity and that money is almighty power. It promotes a hook-up culture that breaks our society apart and leads to wounded souls who are disillusioned with marriage. After all, marriage is hard work and calls for sacrificial love, not just a glamorous life indulging in the luxuries that life has to offer.

If the blocking of the Ashley Madison website sends a message that our nation values stable marriages, then the blocking of The SugarBook app is all the more critical to steer our young to pursue a meaningful relationship that is not built on exploiting another person’s vulnerability. This is public morality.

https://www.todayonline.com/voices/thesugarbook-promotes-hook-culture-leads-wounded-souls

Ban surrogacy to protect the interests of children and women

It is heartbreaking to learn that a precious life was artificially created at a price tag of US$200,000 (S$268,000) (Gay man fails to adopt child he had via surrogacy; Dec 28, 2017).

As a single woman, I, too, have a basic human need to love and be loved by a child.

However, I recognise that there is no right to a child, single or married. There is only the need and right of a child to a father and a mother.

A dual-sex union provides healthy male/female role modelling and establishes a template for a child's future relationships. Children require more than just love and stability. They thrive with a father and a mother.

In surrogacy, a child is treated as a commodity, intentionally separated from his biological mother.

It is most demeaning to a woman to be treated like an incubator. In surrogacy, women, usually of lower economic status, are exploited by wealthy clients.

The Government should enact laws to explicitly ban surrogacy to protect the interests of women and children.

Under the Adoption of Children Act, singles are allowed to adopt children. It is shocking to learn that same-sex couples have made use of this loophole to form a family as I touched on before in a letter last year (Adopted children deserve the best family environment too; Feb 9, 2017 ).

What is being done to address this issue?

Children are the most vulnerable members of our society. Their needs and rights should be put before the desires of adults.

As a citizen, I am committed to speak up for the children who have no voice.

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/ban-surrogacy-to-protect-the-interests-of-children-and-women