How can it be that easy, to abandon babies?

Just learnt about a the shelter for babies in Singapore, Sanctuary House, which was set up since 2005 in this news. Their "business" has grown, sadly.

Not that I don't pity these abandoned babies, but adopting them is not the way.

Ideally, the parents must ... still be fully, or as much as they could to be responsible for them. Yes, the abandoned ones should be taken care of, but I think it is very unwise to directly or indirectly excuse their parents of their responsibilities.

Shouldn't it be considered a crime for one to not want to raise his/her children? Thus, they should be tracked down, and made to be responsible as much as possible. Similar to bankruptcy, but more than it, at the very minimal, a portion of their income/assets must be given to the child indefinitely.

In addition, since a child is related by lineage to his family members and relatives, as long as can track down any of them, they also be somehow made to bare the financial burden. The objective here is not so much as to reduce number of abandoned, but to make everyone aware of the consequence of irresponsible (aka extra-marrital) sex.

The above is really at the bare minimum because financial is just one of the many aspects in raising up children.

Thus, think about it, at present the society/nation/community is baring the burden, i.e. all of us are bearing such increasing burden. If people are concern enough to tell people off because they let kids step on MRT seats, then shouldn't we be more concern to scold [young] people who gets too intimate, regardless in public or in private.

Look deeper

Recently there is a study and the focus is on Indians are ignorant about sex till age 15. From the western perspective, this is a problem, but is it?

If a kid body temperature is found to be 37.8 degrees Celsius, it is an issue from the western medicine perspective, but is it? During the SARS in 2003, guidelines were given to disallowed children with fever to go to school. However, there were a number of kids were being kept away from school for many days because their daily temperature ranges much higher than the "normal" 37 degrees. Later, it was recognized that ... although their measured temperatures were higher than 37 degrees, they are not having fever nor feeling unwell.

So, what's going on? We should not just look at numbers and forget about the context. The normal 37 degrees is an average derived from observations, but not based on theory. For a person who is not similar to those being observed, or even for an individual among those observed, we shouldn't insist that the person normal temperature be that average.

Another example, if there were a study on general knowledge regarding winter, I am quite sure that Singaporeans will have extremely low scores. However, this will not be a worry because such knowledge is not relevant in Singapore, unless the weather changes drastically. Put it another way, it is not that Singaporeans have failed to acquire winter knowledge or Singapore education system has overlooked this area, but the circumstances here doesn't require us to know so much about winter.

So, what does the result Indians are ignorant about sex till age 15 suggest? Does it suggest that Indians are in danger because of this ignorant? Does it mean the India education system is behind time? I seriously don't think so. It should reflect that in India, most people do not need to worry about these knowledge because they are relatively much safer than the western world as they are not too affected by the bad influences from the sexual revolution since the 60's [yet].

Thus, the alarm is that how could we delay or avoid the influence of the terrible sexual revolution?

We need Actions Against AIDS?

When asked about the results of his fight against Aids,

“We have hardly moved from the time we began 20 years ago. The number of infected people has been growing. The trend these last few years shows a jump which is alarming — 357 in 2006, up from 317 the year before,” he (DR ROY Chan) says. Last year, the figure shot up to 422.

And on the question “WHAT MORE MUST BE DONE TO HELP THOSE WHO HAVE HIV/AIDS?”

Three things — HIV sufferers need help to buy expensive retroviral drugs, employers must not discriminate against employees who contract HIV, and three, educational programmes must reinforce the drive for safe sex.

1. I have mentioned before, he and his Action For Aids is not fighting against AIDS. He is fighting ... for the wellbeing of people with HIV/AIDS.

2. Instead of admitting that the approach is not working, many other things were being said, with implications existence of intolerance, discrimination, inappropriate laws, etc.

3. The first two things mentioned have nothing to do in fighting against AIDS. These are about the wellbeing of people with HIV/AIDS.

4. There is no such thing as safe sex! Sex has always been dangerous in terms of viral infections. That's why it should only be done between life trusting people, i.e. husband and wife.

5. I further feel that the possibility of safer sex due to another not exactly related technology in contraception, started and caused the spread of many STDs. Thus, promoting safer sex cannot be the way to go.

Approaches are different

It started from an article about youths and teens getting AIDS/HIV in Singapore last week. The author prefers safer sex message over abstinence. Then, there were three articles published in oppose to her article, all published on Monday. Next came two articles highlighting the issue in relation to business organisations, on Tuesday and Friday.

All of them concerns about AIDS/HIV. However, there are two groups being concerned here, the employees, who are typically adults, and the youths and teens. As such, I question is the approach towards employees by corporate management for the sake of business, suitable? ... when applying to the youths and teens.

Employees are adults. Thus, management won't want to influence their attitude towards their sexual life. Employees are not with the company for life. Thus, management is mainly interested in their wellbeing during the years they are serving the company. In the corporate context, the main concern is business performance. Thus, if an employee, regardless being HIV negative or not, can remain productive for the company, managment is happy.

Youths and teens are not adults. Thus, adults of this society share some responsibility in their good wellbeing and upbringing. I agree that judging others by our standard is not nice and unproductive. However, that doesn't mean that we should shunt from expressing what our standard is. I am quite sure that in general, no extra-marital sex is still the best preference by vast majority, even though many may not think that this should be the only preference.

Youths and teens will be in this society, or world whole of their life. Thus, our concern for them shouldn't be limited to when they are young, although our influence on them will be very limited when they are older. When they became adults, they will be influence the youths of their time. Thus, our concern should also not be limited by the youths of our time, but all youths at all time.

In society, we are here to live our life, and work is only a part of it. Getting married with our life partner, building a happy family, and parenting next generation are some of the other parts. Thus, being infected by HIV is not simply a health issue, but it affect many other parts of one's life.

I can understand that managment doesn't have the position and the need to promote abstinence lifestyle to their employees. Doing so has little or no business value for the company. It is also quite unlikely that employees will care about such messages as these are not job or career related.

Thus, from the perspective of management, it may be OK as long as the employee is productive during the employment with the company, and the company can manage when many of them are infected with AIDS/HIV. How getting AIDS/HIV would affect the employee life, family, future, next generation (if any) are quite out of the scope of the management.

However, youths and teens are learning and observing about this world and what is life from those who have been here longer than them. They may not like us to indoctrinate them, but they are still being influenced by adults in many ways since the society they live in have been built by us.

Thus, as adults who care about the society and its future, our concern is much more than that. We don't want just to delay their extra-marital sex behaviors until they are old enough, but we should at least mentioned that extra-marital sex is bad. We don't want just to reduce their risk by teaching safer sex, but we must clearly present the simple logic that risk avoidance is much better than risk managment.

Thus, the corporate's approach in raising awareness about AIDS/HIV among their employees should not be used when targetting youths and teens.

Singapore, winner of Youth Olympics 2010

In the report FACTBOX-Facts about Singapore, winner of Youth Olympics, there is this point mentioned:

"* Singapore is famous for its tight social controls and restrictions on the sale of chewing gum. Homosexuality is illegal and pornography is banned. Demonstrations are illegal, while public speaking and gatherings of more than four people require a permit. Reporters Without Borders' 2007 press freedom index ranked Singapore 141st out of 169 countries ... So what?, after Azerbajian and Sudan, reflecting restrictions on the media and arts."

These are what I would like Singapore to retain, which is something rightfully described by the slogan Uniquely Singapore! Majority of the media and arts is not doing service to the world. Restricting them is actually not enough. More need to be done to channel them in the better direction.

I find FACTBOX does not have a neutral stand about Singapore. Doesn't matter, since the fact is, Singapore has won the competition to host the first Youth Olympic in 2010! Congratulations! Also read about it in these reports, Olympics-IOC awards 2010 Youth Games to Singapore, and Singapore ecstatic at winning Youth Olympics bid.

What is your generation?

In Taiwan, they used the decade to classify people into generations of the 60's, 70's, 80's, and so on. There are also the descriptive names such as hippies, gypsies, punkies quite some years back. Anyway, I like the name of this ministry, Generations of Virtue.

Check out Generations of Virtue's clearance page and you'll find handfuls of great books at low prices. Choose from titles such as Preparing Your Son for Every Man's Battle and "Setting a Paradigm for Purity".

Be truthful first

There have been much emphasis on speaking positive and encouraging words to children, or anybody, rather than negative ones. Our words are either blessing or curse. Yet, some may over do it by ignoring the need to be truthful, and just say positive words that paint a false picture. Especially when the facts are, sort of, "negative". For example, what should we say to a kid who had scored badly, say 10%, in a test? ... What would you say?

Should we tell him that he hadn't done badly, and should be thankful that he still managed to scored 10%? Is this better than telling him how stupid/lazy he is that he failed badly and scored only 10%? The former is "positive" but to say he hadn't done badly is falsehood. The latter is obviously negative, but rightly state that he failed badly.

In a post a few years back, I mentioned about an article I read that stresses on the importance of consistency in raising up children. Once we started speaking words that are not true, children will notice our inconsistence, and eventually treat our words as unimportant.

Another article I read more recently talks about when parents praise their kids, they need to do it in alignment with the facts. When parents over praise their kids, like the above "positive" statement, kids will be less willing to strive harder for better results.

I think the first pre-requisite in speaking is to be truthful. Then, we choose to speak it in a positive way. In the above example, we should let the child know he has failed badly in the test. Try to substantially work with him on how can we, together, make it better next time. When a plan has been worked out, we can positively emphasize that we appreciate his willingness to want to improve. Thus, there is no falsehood, there is encouragement, and there isn't condemnation.

This is not only about kids. In general, being truthful is so much more important than speaking positively.

Do educators serve the students or their school?

Some JC classmates had a short "reunion" at the 1st month celebration of the daughter of one of them. A friend mentioned about the recent issue of a principal told 27 girls the school wanted 100-per-cent passes, and advised them to seek transfers to the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) since they were unlikely to do well in the GCE O levels.

In general, we think it is better for students to be told frankly and honestly which road might be better for them. The friend said, rather than at the end of the year a boss telling him he wasn't performing well, he would preferred to be told at the beginning that this job or career does not suit him, if the boss already confidently foresee it from his experience. Further, it would be better for a road map be shown at the various decision making junctions in a student life. This should reduce the wastage of resources for many to be trained in a profession but never practice it, and many who are practicing, but unhappily because they made the wrong choice when young.

However, for a principal do so because his school wanted 100% passes is ridiculous! Yet, this has been happening all along I think. My own experience is as early as before mid 80's where half of my class repeated a grade because, according to rumors, the school don't want high failure rates at O level while public is not informed of their passing rates at other grades. Nevertheless, most of them got into university compared to those who "luckily" and barely avoided the repeat.

When the alternative of taking only 3 A level subjects, Junior Colleges (JC) principals started to persuade students from taking 4 A level subjects. Someone I knew experienced that "coercing" when she started JC1 in 2005, but she insisted, which I did encourage her to. It must be some uneasy days or weeks for her to insist. The good news is that she achieved straights A's and distinctions, and also passed S-paper. There seems to be a struggle between being students' principal/teachers and being a school's principal/teachers.

Go Speeding

We know that it is dangerous to speed. In educational materials that tell drivers don’t speed, we don't see a further message that says, if drivers really cannot abstain from speeding, then please wear more protective gears, just in case.

Let suppose someone were to produce a video to curb speeding behaviors.

A catchy title is chosen: “Go Speeding.” 99.9% of the contents are about the potential fatal consequences of speeding such as lost of lives, both one’s own and others’, heart pain of loved ones, permanent injuries, and etc. That is, a very strong and clear message of “don’t speed!”

However, for the sake of some who just couldn’t help but will surely go speeding, the producer also includes “DVD extras” such as how to wear proper and top notch protective gears, do regular checks and maintenance on the vehicle, speed only on familiar roads, and etc.

I doubt any traffic related authority will agree to the inclusion of the above “DVD extras.” It basically tells the audience that you may still go speeding, contradicting the “don’t speed!” message.

I think it is not an issue to most, if not all, that why educational materials for drivers only send the “don’t speed!” message, without, at the same time, also giving advises to some people who just couldn’t help but speed.

Yes, it is also important to know about safety precautions. However, these safety precautions in driving are for normal driving, and should not be used to suggest that speeding is conditionally acceptable. Furthermore, these safety precautions are designed for, and are only quite, but not fully effective to prevent injuries in accidents during normal driving. These are not designed for speeding scenario.

This article is not about traffic safety. This is about a recently DVD entitled "Go Have Sex."

I find it illogical to include the “DVD extras” in the “Go Have Sex” DVD. The “safe sex” message simply contradicts the “no pre-marital sex” message.

Yes, it is also beneficial to know about contraceptive measures. However, these contraceptive measures are for family planning, and should not be used to suggest that pre-marital and extra-marital sex are conditionally acceptable. Furthermore, condoms and the likes are designed for, and are only quite, but not fully effective to prevent pregnancy in normal sexual life, i.e. within marriage. These are not designed for prevention of STDs infections, and pre-marital and extra-marital sexual lifestyles would further reduce their effectiveness.

To all parents and educators, please do not include contradictory contraceptive materials when sending the “no pre-marital sex” message!

Does career support or kill your family?

Someone wrote to Today: "Are career demands killing marriages in Singapore?"
He pointed out the work-life unbalance issues that are killing marriages.

I agree, and would like to also point out another area of concerns. The over stressing on careers, and therefore academic education had left no time for many since their childhood to acquire necessary and sufficient interpersonal skills, appreciation for family values and ties, and sense of responsibility for the family and society.

Abortion is not the main problem

Some more statistics:
Teens accounted for 1,391 abortions last year, with 19 performed on girls under 15.
Of the 1,279 abortions by teenagers in 2005, 16 were performed on girls under 15.
youngsters between 16 and 23 found 13 percent of them were sexually active.
23 percent did not use any form of contraception.

How many of 1391 are first timers?
How many more abortions will these need?
Under 15 means oldest at 14. Abortion at age 14 means the "success" encounter was at 14 or earlier 13. Typically, the first time does not "succeed". Thus, highly possible that at 13 they are already sexually active!
There must be many more "lucky" ones "enjoying" their sexual life since 11, 12, 13!
This speculated possibility is itself the problem to be tackled. NOT the abortion rate, which is just the number of those small portion of "unlucky" ones.
A future problem that have to be handled now is those "lucky" ones, who lead such lives till they eventually "lucky" enough ("thanks" to the contraceptive technology) to get married, become children, and their children will be breaking their "records"!!

Based on academic records, criminal records, we roughly know who are suitable to become certain professionals such as teachers, army officers, ministers, etc. Any good idea to have some records to indicate the suitability of a person to become a parent??