Desmond Lee
Singapore
“The Leadership, Enrichment, Achievement, Participation and Service (LEAPS) 2.0 is a framework for recognising student participation and achievement in secondary school co-curricular programmes.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) is mindful of the impact that rising temperatures may have on our students, teachers and officials taking part in the National School Games. Matches are scheduled only after students have had the time to train and become progressively more heat acclimatised.”
“As shared in Parliament in March 2026, the proportion of students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools has remained stable, at around 7% of the overall student population. This stability is observed across both primary and secondary schools.”
“The Ministry recruits and assesses applicants based on merit and suitability for the teaching profession, regardless of gender. We look for individuals with a passion for teaching, a belief in the potential of every child, and who possess the values and character to make a positive difference in students' lives.”
“Over the past five years, an average of 750 teachers resigned from the Education Service annually, representing a resignation rate of around 2%.”
“MOE has also progressively strengthened open access within the Primary 1 Registration Framework through Phase 2C, which is open to students regardless of whether they have prior connections to the school. MOE had increased the number of reserved Phase 2C places from zero to 20 in 2014; and from 20 to 40 in 2022.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,698 lines we hold for Desmond Lee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 59 of 74.
“MOH has also expanded senior care centres into Active Ageing Hubs (AAHs) which not only provide day care and day rehabilitation to frail seniors but also seek to engage seniors who are healthy in active ageing programmes. With this framework in place, the Government will be able to tap on the skills and the networks in different sectors to ensure a more robust support system is in place for vulnerable individuals. Mr Henry Kwek called for a stronger push for LPA adoption to prepare our society for potential loss of mental capacity. I agree. The Office of the Public Guardian has embarked on a Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) exercise precisely to enable us to be future-ready in protecting our seniors who may lose mental capacity. One key objective is to see how we can move towards universal adoption of LPAs in a citizen-centric yet efficient manner and adopting a life stage approach. An interagency workgroup has been formed to do this, and will consult the public and stakeholders, and I will ask the workgroup to work and study Mr Kwek's ideas further. Finally, Ms Sylvia Lim suggested that MSF look into streamlining the application process of deputyship to make it less costly and to make it more expeditious. The Family Justice Courts, the Ministry of Law (MinLaw) and MSF had convened the Committee to Review and Enhance Reforms in the Family Justice System (RERF) in January this year. One of the tasks that we have assigned them is to see how the deputyship application can be made simpler, more affordable and accessible, especially for straightforward and uncontested cases. More details will be provided when the Committee finalises its recommendations. We will also continue exploring ways to ensure that the vulnerable among us are supported.”
“Third, with the merger of the Silver Generation Office (SGO) with AIC, SGO has trained our Silver Generation Ambassadors (SGAs) to proactively reach out to, and identify both social as well as health risks and needs among our elderly, and encourage seniors to step out of their homes to participate in preventive health screening and active ageing programmes to draw them away from social isolation. Fourth, MOH will expand the Community Network for Seniors island-wide. Through this effort, AIC links up different Government agencies and community partners to sew up care across both the health and social domains for seniors, especially those living alone. In particular, AIC works with various community-based organisations and grassroots organisations to recruit and train befrienders to look out for seniors living alone in the community. Where SGAs or grassroots leaders identify vulnerable seniors, AIC will coordinate both social and health support from various Government agencies and community partners to help them and, there, the SSOs and the Silver Generation officers will work very closely on the ground in the local communities. This includes financial assistance, aged care services and health services. Similarly, if persons with disabilities are identified to have unmet needs, they will be linked up to the relevant agencies, such as SG Enable. Finally, the social care and health care aspects of aged care have become integrated to support seniors, especially those who are frail and/or have weak social support. For example, MOH has integrated home and day care packages, as well as home medical, home nursing, home therapy and home personal care services, to support seniors more holistically so that they can age in place.”
“And VWO Transport Subsidies are also available for persons with disabilities who need to take dedicated transport provided by VWOs to access care services. Sir, the effectiveness of Singapore’s adult protection framework is dependent on the strength of our family units in Singapore and the support of the community. Mr Henry Kwek asked how we can better stay in touch with vulnerable adults. MSF remains committed to working with families and community partners to build capabilities and competencies to support vulnerable adults and to detect abuse or neglect. Therefore, while we seek to operationalise the Bill, the Government has already been working on strengthening the social-health integration framework. First, as part of SG Cares, MSF will strengthen the role and capabilities of our Social Service Offices (SSOs) over the next five years. We will build even tighter networks with Government agencies, FSCs, SSOs, VWOs and other community partners to improve work processes and share information relating to the needs of our seniors and persons with disability that will help close the gaps in the adult protection landscape. Second, MSF has transferred our functions under the Senior Cluster Networks, such as the Senior Activity Centres (SACs), Cluster Support, Caring Assistance from Neighbours (CANs) and other programmes, such as befriending services, over to MOH. This will allow MOH to bring a host of preventive health and healthcare services that will twin the social support provided by the SACs to seniors in rental precincts and studio apartments. These include exercises and nutritional programmes, chronic and functional screening, as well as nursing posts set up at the SACs to help seniors better manage their health conditions.”
“There are several support services that the Government has put in place for vulnerable adults and their caregivers. First, we have centre-based care services where seniors can receive care during the day. This includes day care, dementia day care and day rehabilitation services. Second, respite care options are also available so that caregivers can take a break. They can opt to send their family members to eldercare centres for a few hours on weekends so that caregivers can recharge. For caregivers who need a slightly longer break of several days to a few weeks, they can tap on nursing home respite care. Third, the Caregivers Training Grant supports caregivers, including foreign domestic workers, to enhance their caregiving skills. Fourth, Foreign Domestic Worker Levy Concessions are also available for those who need to hire a domestic helper at home. For caregivers of persons with disabilities, they can also reach out to SG Enable. Support for caregivers range from day care to long-term residential care. They include the Drop-in Disability Programme – these are centres located within the community that provide social activities to higher functioning persons with disabilities who are able to travel to the centre independently for a few half-day sessions per week. Day Activity Centres (DACs), which are day programmes to equip persons with disabilities with daily and community living skills and provide care relief for caregivers. Adult Disability Hostels (ADHs) are available as alternative housing arrangements for adults with disabilities who do not require institutional care but are unable to live with their families.”
“In cases of family violence, individuals can apply for a protection order against the perpetrator under the Women’s Charter. But we recognise that there may be situations where victims of family violence, after prolonged or intense abuse, may become physically or mentally incapacitated, or both. The Bill will be invoked as these victims may no longer be able to protect themselves. As I have mentioned earlier, the public as well as community agencies can approach MSF and we will review all reports holistically. Ms Joan Pereira raised the issue of caregiver support. I agree with her that caregiver support is important. Caregivers can face tremendous stress caring for vulnerable family members and, indeed, family matters which involve family violence and abuse are not always black-and-white. In the case of Sam, which I described earlier, the vulnerable adult is a 29-year-old man who is both a victim but, in a way, also the cause of the tremendous stress on the part of his father. Let me briefly sketch out the options available for caregivers, and I encourage all Members of this House to return to your communities and help share this information to those who need it. For caregivers of vulnerable seniors, they can reach out to the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) as they provide coordinated support to families with vulnerable adults and help them to access care services and schemes. Caregivers can call AIC's Silver Line, 1800-650-6060. This is the AIC's Silver Line for information on referrals to services. Caregivers can also approach the AICareLinks at hospitals and their office at Maxwell Road. These are one-stop resource centres for caregivers to get information and advice on the appropriate services for their loved ones.”
“MSF has sought to limit a deputy’s or donee’s powers to consent or refuse treatment for the vulnerable adult under the Bill, as there may be situations where the donee or deputy cannot be contacted in time, or – and this is pertinent – the donee or deputy is the abuser of the vulnerable adult and, thus, out of fear or some other reason, may refuse to give consent to treatment. In such situations, we have allowed for treatment to be administered, as withholding treatment would, in such circumstances, go against the best interests of the vulnerable adult. Mr Louis Ng asked how the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act (MHCTA) will operate in relation to the Bill. Not all vulnerable adults will fall under MHCTA. First, not all vulnerable adults suffer from mental disorders. Some of the vulnerable adults that APS sees today may only suffer from physical disability or infirmity but not mental disorder. Second, not all vulnerable adults should be admitted to a psychiatric institution when found to be suffering from ill-treatment or neglect. Some, with mental disorders, may benefit more from living in a gazetted care facility or with a fit person, and may even be able to live alone, as these arrangements may better meet their care needs. Again, it is very specific to the individual's case. Others may actually be able to live alone and just require protection from the perpetrator. In such cases, a protection order may be applied for to ensure the vulnerable adult’s safety. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about the interface between the Vulnerable Adults Bill and the Women’s Charter. The Women’s Charter protects individuals of all ages from violence committed by family members.”
“The MCA then allows the Office of the Public Guardian to intervene, by applying to Court if the powers of the vulnerable adult’s donee or deputy need to be suspended or revoked to prevent further abuse of the adult and, if necessary, another deputy brought in, or a professional deputy, as the case may be. Where such incidents occur, it actually does not really quite matter to whom the complaint about the donee or deputy was made. MSF, including our APS and the Office of the Public Guardian, will have to assess each complaint holistically before determining the next steps. Ms Thanaletchimi asked if there is any conflict between the MCA and the Bill. Let me clarify that under the Bill, a doctor or dentist may administer the medical or dental treatment to a vulnerable adult, despite the existence of an appointed donee or deputy, if the doctor or dentist is of the view that such consent from the deputy or donee cannot be obtained within a reasonable time; or that such consent is unreasonably withheld by the donee or deputy. While a donee or deputy appointed under the MCA can give or withhold consent to treat a vulnerable adult, the MCA actually already allows for doctors or dentists to override the donee’s or deputy’s decision. This occurs when the person providing healthcare reasonably believes that treatment is necessary to prevent serious deterioration of the adult's condition. A similar principle now applies in the Bill.”
“Where possible, MSF will help facilitate the family in caring for their vulnerable members. This may include the provision of social support. Several Members, including Ms Denise Phua, asked about the Bill’s interface with other legislation. The Bill complements the existing legal framework that protects vulnerable individuals. As the Bill covers a wider scope of vulnerable individuals, there will inevitably be some overlap. But the Bill will, ultimately, strengthen the current framework by allowing MSF to take a more proactive approach to protecting vulnerable adults. MSF can only do our work when we have the support of the community. We will work with community partners to put in place robust protocols. If practitioners based in the community are unsure, they can approach MSF and we will advise them on the best approach to take in relation to that particular case. This already happens on the ground and will remain so, going forward. I now move to Ms Sylvia Lim’s question on whether a complaint against a donee or deputy should be made to the Director of Social Welfare under the Bill, or to the Public Guardian under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The Bill overlaps with the MCA in that both protect vulnerable adults who lack mental capacity. But both Bill and the Act complement each other and strengthen the protection afforded to these vulnerable adults. The Vulnerable Adults Bill allows the state to intervene swiftly to assess and remove a vulnerable adult to safety and apply for the necessary Court orders to ensure his protection.”
“I note her suggestions and we will explore these ideas with the management of the facilities to ensure that these vulnerable adults feel safe and comfortable even while they are there. Fifth, Ms Thanaletchimi and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked who will bear the costs of the care of a vulnerable adult. Families are primarily responsible to provide for their vulnerable members. Hence, if families have the means, the costs of placement and any other services or treatment of the vulnerable adult requires should be borne by them. But we recognise that not all families can provide for their vulnerable family members. In such instances, the state will pay for the temporary placement of these individuals in gazetted care facilities and related costs that may be incurred to ensure the vulnerable adult’s well-being. Let me assure this House that a vulnerable adult's or his family's inability to pay for such services will not be a barrier to him receiving the necessary intervention, treatment and care. Sixth, Mr Louis Ng and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about reintegration of vulnerable adults with their families. It is not ideal for a vulnerable adult to stay in a care facility for the long term. We will engage both the vulnerable adults and their families to establish safety and care plans at home. The vulnerable adult will only return home after we deem it is safe for him to do so. We will then work with a community agency to monitor the case and provide necessary support, until it is assessed that no further risks exist. I agree with Assoc Prof Daniel Goh that the Government must exercise restraint before interfering with family prerogatives with regard to a vulnerable adult’s personal care arrangements.”
“Third, Dr Intan Mokhtar also asked how the competencies and qualities of a "fit person" are defined, and about the care plan that will be put in place if a vulnerable adult is committed to a facility. "Fit persons" are individuals or organisations whom the Director of Social Welfare thinks are competent to provide care and protection to the vulnerable adult. The main consideration as to whether one qualifies to be a fit person is whether he has the ability to provide the necessary care and protection to ensure the vulnerable adult’s safety and allow him to recuperate. Hence, a fit person could actually be a family member or a friend who is willing and able to care for the vulnerable adult. As for care plans, MSF will put them in place to ensure that the vulnerable adult receives the care and protection he requires while in the facility. The care plan sets out a care and recovery framework based on a comprehensive assessment of the vulnerable adult’s social, mental and physical state. MSF, together with a Review Board comprising professionals, will review these plans regularly. Fourth, Dr Intan Mokhtar asked whether family members are allowed to visit vulnerable adults in gazetted facilities. Indeed, they are allowed and encouraged to do so. But there are exceptions. For instance, a Court may issue an order preventing the alleged perpetrator of abuse or neglect from visiting or contacting the vulnerable adult. MSF may also limit the contact between the vulnerable adult residing in gazetted facilities and individuals if such contact does not serve the best interest of the adult. Again, all these need professional assessments. Ms Sylvia Lim also provided several suggestions to help vulnerable adults adjust to their new environment.”
“Some Members raised questions about care facilities and arrangements for vulnerable adults. First, Dr Intan Mokhtar and Dr Lily Neo asked which premises will be gazetted as places of temporary care and protection and how long a vulnerable adult would reside in these premises. Some existing residential care facilities, such as some of the adult disability homes and sheltered homes, will be gazetted as places of temporary care and protection and places of safety. A few medical facilities may also be gazetted to cater to situations where the vulnerable adults have clear medical needs. These facilities are intended to protect vulnerable adults who cannot remain safely in their place of residence, while allowing them to receive appropriate care. The choice of gazetted care facilities and period of committal will depend on a vulnerable adult's care needs. However, places of temporary care and protection are only meant to house vulnerable adults for an interim period, so that investigations can be carried out and longer-term care plans made. Therefore, the length of stay in these premises will generally not be longer than six months. Again, this depends on specific circumstances of the vulnerable adult and the family or lack thereof. Second, Ms Denise Phua asked whether these facilities and staff are equipped to care for vulnerable adults. These facilities have experience providing for residents who are vulnerable and have in place suitable standards of care to provide for their care and protection. As I have said earlier, MSF is also working with frontline officers of relevant agencies to ensure that they have the capabilities to provide support to vulnerable adults under their care.”
“Where there are reasonable grounds to believe that a suspected vulnerable adult is withholding consent because of coercion or undue influence, for example, we will bring this to the Court's attention. The Court can then make an order for MSF to intervene to protect the vulnerable adult. If there are concerns whether it is expeditiously enough, especially where the case is particularly urgent, then there are provisions in the Bill that allow ex-parte application. Dr Intan Mokhtar asked if engagement and communication should be applied first before we invoke the law to remove a vulnerable adult, while Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked if MSF can exercise some of its powers under the Bill while family and community interventions are ongoing. Allow me to reiterate that family engagement and social work intervention by community partners, supported by MSF, will be the principal response to cases involving vulnerable adults. But statutory intervention and family or community interventions are not mutually exclusive and there may be times when a combination is necessary. To Dr Intan Mokhtar's questions on how a vulnerable adult will be removed from his place of residence, if this is necessary, MSF is currently developing its SOPs to guide the actions of officers when dealing with vulnerable adults, including removal from their homes, where understanding and training are absolutely key. To ensure that the experience does not traumatise the vulnerable adult, MSF will engage the help of support persons, which may include social workers, psychologists and community partners who have interacted with the adult, to assist with this removal. Friends and close family members may also be present as a form of assurance and support for him.”
“On the state's power to remove, Ms Chia Yong Yong said that MSF should be able to remove a vulnerable adult for assessment of placement if there are reasonable grounds to believe that an adult is withholding consent due to some form of coercion. Other Members felt that we should be more judicious in the exercise of powers. Again, as Ms Chia Yong Yong has rightly pointed out, it is a matter of perspective, whether you are focusing on the needs of the vulnerable adult or whether you are concerned about whether there is statutory overreach. In fact, both are valid concerns and we want to strike the right balance, avoiding overreach while ensuring that the first and paramount interest is that of the vulnerable adult, as enshrined in clause 4 of the Bill. I agree that a vulnerable adult’s right to self-determination should be respected. And that is why we hardwired this as one of the key principles in the Bill, and also why there are safeguards in the Bill against unnecessary intervention. But there may be exceptional situations where intervention may be necessary even when the vulnerable adult has mental capacity and refuses assistance. As Ms Chia Yong Yong highlighted, there may be instances where the adult is under duress or pressured by their loved ones to refuse external assistance. I also mentioned the case of Mr Wong earlier, the elderly man who refused admission to a hospital or nursing home to treat his diabetes and wounds. There is a real risk that Mr Wong's life will be in danger in the future, if the state cannot intervene. That would not be right. So, where the need arises, MSF has built in a safeguard. We can only intervene in such a situation after a Court order has been obtained.”
“Neither will we remove a vulnerable adult because his family members do not have financial means to provide care. In such cases, we will work with our social service agencies and other agencies to provide assistance to the family. Ms Sylvia Lim had given examples of cases where a person fulfills the example in the illustration but in her view and certainly in mine, I should not invoke a removal of the adult, for example, if the vulnerable adult is unclothed after a bath but the caregiver needs to go and prepare some medication, for instance. This would not be the way in which APS and our agencies act. It would involve concerns being raised; it would involve interviews, talking to the caregiver, talking to the family members, talking to the neighbours, speaking to the community, speaking to the vulnerable adult. It is not a case of looking at a snapshot of facts that within these 10 seconds, what you did and, therefore, I come and use these powers. It cannot be so. That would not really be within the ambit of how we do social work. And as I mentioned in my opening speech, we will be judicious in how we exercise the powers under this Bill. When we identify a vulnerable adult, the default, where possible, should be to rely on social suasion with the support of his family and the community, because that approach is often more effective and sustainable, internalised by the vulnerable adult and the family. Only when this is ineffective, will we rely on the Bill. Sir, Members asked about MSF's powers to intervene despite the vulnerable adult's refusal to accept this assistance.”
“Mr Speaker, under the Bill, MSF may intervene so long as the adult is suffering or at risk of abuse, neglect or self-neglect, and has physical or mental infirmity that renders him incapable of protecting himself. This will be confirmed by a qualified assessor who can conduct physical and mental capacity assessments or it might be different assessors would have come in together and do the assessments. Assessing the mental capacity of a vulnerable adult is important because, as far as possible, an adult with the capacity to make decisions should do so. To ensure that we protect his right to participate in the decision-making process, MSF has been working with our partners to develop a mental capacity assessment form. This form sets out certain requirements and checklists that will determine if a vulnerable adult lacks mental capacity. For example, if the vulnerable adult is unable to understand information that is relevant to the decision at hand, to retain that information or to communicate his decision to others, then he will be considered as lacking mental capacity. On Ms Denise Phua's example, where the vulnerable adult has mental capacity but shows signs of self-neglect, MSF can intervene to protect him from further neglect. On Ms Sylvia Lim's examples, MSF will not remove a vulnerable adult without assessing the situation holistically. Where a caregiver is willing and able to look after the vulnerable adult but lacks the skills to provide adequate support, we will help him enhance his caregiver skills, instead of removing the vulnerable adult. We will invoke removal only when the vulnerable adult's safety and well-being have been compromised or are at risk.”
“If there is a concern, our community and social work agencies and MSF will respond with social work as our primary tool, but as far as the exercise of these intrusive statutory powers are concerned, then we are limited by the definitions under the Bill. So, I hope Members understand that these definitions and the scope of the Bill do not prevent us from acting as we have always done, both now and in the past. Ms Denise Phua asked about how the Bill will complement existing services, including that by APS. Dr Intan Mokhtar asked about the qualities required of protectors and their roles under the Bill. Sir, APS will assist the Director of Social Welfare in exercising powers under the Bill. Protectors will be our senior officers in MSF's APS who have suitable qualifications and experience to handle vulnerable adult abuse, neglect and self-neglect cases. Mr Louis Ng asked about the similarities and differences between APS and Child Protective Service (CPS). The principles guiding APS and CPS' work are similar in that the best interest and welfare of the vulnerable adult and child respectively must be paramount. Beyond the distinct age groups each Service looks after, APS' work requires them to look into the vulnerable adult's mental capacity so that the client's right to self-determination is upheld as far as possible. This leads me to Ms Denise Phua and Ms Sylvia Lim's question on how MSF decides when to intervene, and the rigour of our assessment, particularly when we remove a vulnerable adult. I agree with both of them that mental incapacity is a continuum, and that mental capacity is not a black-and-white concept. Indeed, there are good days and there are bad days.”
“This is by design. Physical abuse already has a limiting factor, in that the abuse must be physical in nature. There is unlikely to be largely differing views on what would constitute physical abuse. This is less clear for emotional and psychological abuse, neglect or even self-neglect. There may be differing opinions among professionals as well as members of the public on what these would constitute. These definitions are, therefore, crafted definitively, to provide as much clarity and certainty as possible on who the powers in the Bill apply to, and limit our discretion on how these terms are interpreted. Ms Chia Yong Yong also asked why psychological assessment was not included in the definition of "assessment" under the Bill. The current definition of "assessment" allows interviews and examinations to be conducted to determine a person's mental state. This allows psychologists or psychiatrists to interview and examine a vulnerable adult to ascertain if there are any psychological concerns. But, Deputy Speaker, let me take a step back from all the points that have been raised, whether on financial abuse or on the definitions of abuse, neglect or self-neglect, and assure Members that these scope the statutory powers that we can exercise under the Bill. The FSC, FVSC and our Adult Protective Service (APS) and our Rehabilitation and Protection Group (RPG) units in MSF are not prevented from social work interventions, reaching to the family, reaching out to the community, reaching out to neighbours, reaching out to the vulnerable adult because of the scope of definitions in this Bill.”
“If the caregiver who financially abuses the vulnerable adult is neither a donee nor deputy, MSF and our partners will carry out social work interventions and assessments to look at what the situation is about. We may ask the Public Guardian to step in to ask for the Court to appoint a deputy to look into the vulnerable adult's financial situation. Again, this is also open to next-of-kin to do so, to solve this problem within the family. If there is suspicion that offences have been committed, and the Police will also investigate. So, for now, the Vulnerable Adults Bill's focus is on physical and emotional abuse. Let us gain more experience in operationalising this vulnerable adult protection framework, while we continue to study the complex issue of financial exploitation among family members. We have ideas. Members have raised ideas to us in the course of this debate and the recent Motion on protecting our seniors and, of course, in many other debates and other platforms. As I said, we have some ideas. Let us continue to look at them and, at an appropriate time, we will bring it to this House. Mr Louis Ng asked why the Bill does not define sexual abuse as an independent head of abuse, and how it considers verbal sexual harassment. Sexual offences are covered under the Penal Code, for example. If there is conduct or behaviour that coerces or attempts to coerce an individual to engage in sexual activity, this is "physical abuse" under the Bill, and action can be taken. For verbal sexual harassment, this can fall under "emotional or psychological abuse". Ms Chia Yong Yong asked why the definitions of "emotional or psychological abuse", "neglect" and "self-neglect" are definitive, as compared to the definition of "physical abuse" which is non-exhaustive.”
“So, where financial abuse occurs alongside other forms of abuse and neglect that are already covered under the Bill, the state can intervene. There are also some other levers in place to deal with financial abuse against vulnerable adults. In cases where vulnerable adults have been exploited by caregivers, we often do see other family members, such as children, stepping forward to put a firm stop to this. If need be, our social work agencies can nudge next-of-kin to act. So, the family can take action to resolve financial abuse within their own families. But in cases where the vulnerable adult lacks mental capacity and the alleged abuser is a donee appointed under an LPA or a deputy appointed by the Court, the Public Guardian may seek a Court order to suspend or revoke his powers to make decisions on the vulnerable adult's behalf, to prevent further abuse. Criminal charges or criminal investigation are not the only ways by which the Public Guardian can apply to Court to take action, again in cognisance of other facts, such as the donee or deputy not acting in the best interest of the elderly person, including financially abusing the elderly person. In fact, family members can also make such an application to Court. If the vulnerable adult lacks mental capacity and has no family members, a deputy may be appointed by the Court to manage his property and affairs as well as his personal welfare matters. Under our upcoming Professional Deputies and Donees Scheme which will commence in the second half of this year, a professional deputy can be appointed by the Courts to step in. The professional deputy will be subject to the same requirements as any other deputy.”
“It sounds very much like our Community Network for Seniors where we rely on community and partners and people on the ground to form networks to look after seniors and, in this case, to look after vulnerable adults. We thank her for her suggestion and we will certainly explore this in greater detail. Mr Deputy Speaker, I now turn to questions relating to the scope of the Bill. Mr Louis Ng and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked why the Bill only protects vulnerable adults aged 18 and older. How about legal protection for those above 16 but below 18, since the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA) only covers individuals below 16? First, vulnerable individuals, aged 16 to 18, have some protection under existing legislation, such as the Women's Charter. The Women's Charter protects individuals, regardless of their gender and age, from family violence. A personal protection order (PPO) may be applied for under that Act on behalf of the vulnerable person. Secondly, and could be more importantly, as I have mentioned in my earlier speech, we are reviewing the CYPA in order to extend the statutory protection to those above 16 but under 18 under the Child Protection Framework as opposed to the Vulnerable Adults Framework. A number of Members, including Dr Lily Neo, asked why the Bill does not cover financial abuse. Indeed, many of the Members have come across cases where parents have provided for the children, sold their homes and helped their children buy their new homes only to find themselves ejected out of those homes, or to be financially abused in any other case. I agree with Assoc Prof Daniel Goh that cases of financial abuse often involve elements of psychological and emotional abuse.”
“But not every case of harm to vulnerable adults may necessarily warrant Police involvement, at least from the get go. Where the safety concerns are not so clear or immediate, our FSCs and FVSCs will first look into the matter and alert us at MSF if state intervention is necessary and then we will move in together. Mr Seah Kian Peng suggested implementing a mandatory reporting system for stakeholders who interact with suspected vulnerable adults. We did consider this. But we decided against it for now for two reasons. First, professionals have expressed to us concerns that mandatory reporting laws, such as this, especially in a family violent situation, may prevent abusers from seeking help for themselves or their victims, as they fear being taken to task. Second, we understand that mandatory reporting laws in overseas jurisdictions have led to over-reporting, many of which were also unsubstantiated. So, we prefer, for now, to assure people who step forward, through whistleblower protection. So, let us see how it goes. We will also be developing protocols and guidelines, similar to those used in the child protection sector, to educate professionals and the public on when, how and who to report such cases to. So, for those Members who are familiar with the Child Protection Scheme, there is a Child Abuse Reporting Guide which we share with our network, preschools, schools, clinics, the Police, medical professionals, hospitals, and using methodical approach, guide them on what to look out for, what to ask and what information to get and who to report to. So, we are looking at the same protocol for adult abuse. Ms Denise Phua recommended forming a National Vulnerable Adults Support Services Association.”
“Second, we want frontline staff in relevant agencies to be well-trained and equipped to identify cases of abuse, neglect and self-neglect. These include our Family Violence Specialist Centres (FVSCs) and Family Service Centres (FSCs) as well as medical and healthcare professionals. To Mr Louis Ng's question on their training, MSF has established protocols and training platforms that equip them to handle and detect family violence. These include training modules at the Social Service Institute on identifying and managing vulnerable adults. MSF is also building on our existing Integrated Family Violence Manual, which agencies rely on to guide their intervention into family violence. This manual will soon also cover the safety of vulnerable adults – so, work in progress. To more effectively identify and help vulnerable adults, MSF is currently working with our community partners to co-develop relevant Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and assessment guides. Third, the Government must provide avenues for easy reporting and react quickly to reports that come in. Ms K Thanaletchimi, Mr Louis Ng and Ms Joan Pereira asked about a public hotline where people can report abuse and neglect of vulnerable adults. Mr Louis Ng also asked if every case of vulnerable adult abuse will be reported to the Police for action. So, who should the public call if they come across suspected cases? They can alert the nearest FSC, they can call any of the three FVSCs set up by MSF, the numbers for both are available on our website, or they can call MSF's ComCare Hotline at 1800-222-0000. Where there are immediate safety concerns or danger to a vulnerable adult, the public can call the Police.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Members who have spoken passionately on this Bill. Let me now take some time to respond to the Members' queries. Some Members suggested identifying vulnerable adults early, to ensure their well-being, to be as proactive as possible. Ms Thanaletchimi and Ms Denise Phua asked what the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) can do to educate our stakeholders and Singaporeans generally, to report suspected abuse cases that they come across. Sir, this Bill will be effective only if all of us play an active part. Let me elaborate. First, everyone should actively report suspected cases of abuse, neglect and self-neglect. MSF launched a three-year "Break the Silence" campaign in late 2016 to encourage open conversations about family violence, including abuse of vulnerable adults, to urge bystanders to action. We went onto social media, we went onto radio, television (TV), cinema screens, outdoor media and roadshows to campaign for greater public awareness that family abuse is not a private matter and cannot be tolerated. And, Sir, this has gone some way to shape public attitudes towards family violence. Last year, one in three callers to our hotline who reported family violence matters were do-gooders, such as neighbours, friends and passers-by. This is an increase from one in five, prior to the campaign. MSF has also been training community partners and grassroots volunteers. They are on the ground and can help us detect formerly "invisible" cases. We will continue to step up on our efforts in this area, as the work of public education and capacity building can never end. The whistleblower clauses in this Bill will support both of these efforts.”
“Even as we operationalise the Bill, we will continue to work with families, professionals and volunteers to strengthen the care networks across the community. Together, we can all do our part to keep an eye out for the most vulnerable members of our society. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Based on your family’s needs, they may provide counselling and support and, if required, link your family with agencies like the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) or SG Enable. There, your family members may benefit from care services for vulnerable seniors or persons with disabilities, such as day care or residential services. Those of you who are caregivers may also receive respite care services so that you may take a break from your caregiving duties. In order to care for our loved ones, we must also exercise self-care. Let us not wait until we are distressed and unintentionally harm those whom we love. While helping others, do reach out to seek help early if you yourself need help. Mr Speaker, I will now conclude my speech in English. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill will only be effective if each and every one of us in the community continues to play our part. We must look out for the safety of vulnerable people and extend warmth and a helping hand to families who care for their vulnerable family members. But the abuse and neglect of vulnerable adults are not a private matter and must not be tolerated. Everyone, including family members, neighbours, community leaders, employers and healthcare professionals, have a role to play to prevent vulnerable people from being abused, and to stop it if it happens. So, let us step forward to break the silence by reporting suspected cases of abuse, neglect and self-neglect. Beyond the Bill, MSF will continue to facilitate the community's efforts in reaching out to vulnerable adults. We will reinforce our existing help networks, such as our Social Service Offices' local networks and the Community Network for Seniors programme, to better reach out to vulnerable adults and their caregivers.”
“]: Our population is ageing rapidly. By 2030, about one in four Singaporeans will be aged 65 and above. As our demography changes and more individuals, along with their caregivers, age, more may face abuse, neglect and self-neglect. The Vulnerable Adults Bill will better protect vulnerable adults living in our midst. Under the law, when caregivers did not take good care of the vulnerable adult in their family, the relevant authorities will have the power to intervene by appointing suitable family members to care for the vulnerable adult. Family members may also apply for Court orders to prevent a perpetrator from having access to the vulnerable adult for his safety. Individuals will be protected from legal liability, when they whistleblow and report alleged harm caused to a vulnerable adult or perform their duties to help a vulnerable adult. Such protection is given to anyone in the community who has acted in good faith, including professionals, family members, neighbours and members of the public. Only where necessary, MSF will intervene to protect vulnerable adults, as a last resort. Where family and community intervention has failed, MSF may enter a vulnerable adult's premises, assess his condition and relocate him for his safety. To deter abuse and neglect, the law provides for heavier penalties for offences committed against vulnerable adults. Mr Speaker, caring for family members is never easy. At times, it can, understandably, be overwhelming. We want to tell those caregivers who face challenges that you are not alone. We recognise the stresses you face. Partners in the community, such as FSCs, stand ready to support you.”
“Clause 22 also places restrictions on the publication of information identifying a vulnerable adult. Any information that may lead to the identification of a vulnerable adult cannot be published or broadcast. This is to safeguard a vulnerable adult's privacy and allow him to recover; this privacy will also allow the vulnerable adult and the family to focus on repairing their relationship. That said, clause 24 allows the disclosure of confidential information relating to a vulnerable adult to MSF, and by us to any other Government agency, statutory body, Police Officer or prescribed person or body. This would include MSF's community partners, such as our Family Violence Specialist Centres (FVSCs) and FSCs, as well as medical and healthcare professionals. This is to ensure that swift action can be taken by different agencies to protect the vulnerable adult, hold perpetrators accountable, and ensure that appropriate assistance is provided to their families. MSF recognises that working with vulnerable adults sometimes requires submitting of difficult professional judgements. If we want those who work with vulnerable adults to carry out their duties diligently and professionally, we must provide them peace of mind. So, clause 34 protects anyone performing a function or exercising powers under the Vulnerable Adults Bill from legal liability, so long they have acted in good faith and with reasonable care. Such protection is extended to any member of the Review Board, any person appointed by Court, and any person working in the care facilities. However, protection will only be afforded if they act professionally and responsibly. Mr Speaker, allow me to say something about the Bill in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“This complements our existing adult protection system which seeks to support both the vulnerable adult as well as their family and caregivers. Finally, I will now explain how the Bill enables our wider community to play a bigger role in preventing family violence and the abuse and neglect to vulnerable adults. Members will recall the sad and tragic case of Ms Annie Ee. Ms Ee was a 26-year-old intellectually disabled waitress who left home because she wanted to work and be independent. She stayed with people whom she believed were her friends. Unfortunately, she was severely abused by her flat mates and eventually passed away. This was a horrible and tragic case. While the Bill will allow the state to step in to protect individuals like Ms Ee, none of the intervention powers in this Bill will be meaningful unless those who meet and interact or come across vulnerable individuals like Ms Ee step forward and raise the alarm bells for community agencies and the authorities to intervene. For example, in the case of Mdm Chua, in the first example I gave, her neighbours saw bruises on her arm and around her eyes and promptly sounded the alert. Our FSCs were, therefore, able to enquire about the circumstances and alert us to take action. We have, therefore, included clauses in the Bill to strengthen the roles of both the family and community. Specifically, clause 23 protects people who report such cases to the relevant authorities. These whistleblowers will be protected from civil and criminal liability, as long as they had acted with reasonable care and in good faith. They will also not be regarded to have breached any professional etiquette or ethics. This will protect professionals, such as doctors, counselors, lawyers and so on.”
“Some vulnerable adults may face difficulties applying for such Court orders on their own. So, clause 12 allows approved welfare officers to apply for Core Protection Orders. More importantly, clause 12 preserves the role of the family as it also empowers family members, including a vulnerable adult's donee or deputy, to apply for protection orders. By donee, I refer to a person who has been appointed by the vulnerable adult under a Lasting Power Attorney (LPA) to make decisions on his behalf for his personal welfare, property and financial affairs, if and when he loses mental capacity. And by deputy, I refer to a person appointed by the Court to make such decisions on the vulnerable adult's behalf if he no longer has mental capacity to decide for himself and did not make an LPA earlier. Our aim is to help every vulnerable adult to turn to the love and care of his family eventually. So, I would like to come back and talk about Sam, that 29-year-old young man whose father had hit him in order to control his behaviour. The Bill, if Members support it, will allow Sam to be placed in a care facility, where he will receive the support necessary for him to manage his condition and recover from physical abuse. Having Sam temporarily away from his home may also provide respite for Sam's parents. MSF can then continue to engage Sam's father and ask that he attend therapy and counselling sessions to help him better understand and care for Sam and, if he refuses, we can try to apply to Court for an order requiring him to go for such counselling or other such programmes that the Court deems necessary as an added push. The Bill allows us to calibrate the level of intervention necessary for each case, through a combination of statutory orders as well as social work interventions.”
“Clause 14 empowers the Family Justice Courts to make intervention orders to protect vulnerable adults from further harm. The need to apply for a Court order serves as a safeguard against excessive statutory intervention. When considering whether to make orders and what orders to make, the Court must have regard to the same five principles in the Bill that I have articulated earlier. But it may also take into account any other relevant matters it deems fit. There are three categories of Court orders. First, Core Protection Orders. These Core Protection Orders protect the vulnerable adult from any third party who may cause him to suffer from abuse or neglect. It includes Restraining Orders, Exclusive Occupation Orders, and orders prohibiting a person from visiting or communicating with the vulnerable adult. Second, Alternative Placement Supervision Orders, and what are these? These orders ensure that the vulnerable adult is relocated to a safe environment. The Court may order a vulnerable adult to be committed to a care facility for a specified period of time, or order that the vulnerable adult be placed under the supervision of an appointed person. This appointed person may include a protector or an approved welfare officer. Third, the Court can also make other protection and intervention orders, including orders to make the vulnerable adult's residence a safe living environment, and an order requiring the vulnerable adult or any other person to attend counselling or any such programmes as directed by the Court. This includes the power to order a vulnerable adult or any other person, including a caregiver who may have caused the abuse or neglect to go for counselling or training and get additional support.”
“Similarly, in British Columbia, Canada, the state can intervene, without the vulnerable adult’s agreement, to remove an adult, provide them with emergency health care and take any other emergency measures necessary to protect the adult, if the adult is suffering from abuse or neglect. The state can do this if it is of the view that it is necessary to act without delay, in order to preserve the life of the adult; prevent serious physical or mental harm to the adult; or protect the adult’s property from significant damage or loss. Like the adult protection laws in these countries, our Bill will similarly allow MSF to intervene despite a vulnerable adult’s wishes, if it is necessary to protect him and ensure his safety. But, as a safeguard, we will get a Court order to do so. Ensuring the vulnerable adult's welfare and best interests is paramount. However, we must also hold abusers accountable for their actions if they are culpable. Clauses 26 to 29 empower MSF to investigate offences under the Bill. And to deter people from harming vulnerable adults, clauses 40 and 41 make related amendments to the Penal Code and Protection of Harassment Act respectively to enhance the maximum penalties of specific offences by up to one and a half times if these acts are committed against the vulnerable adult. This aligns with the enhanced penalties for Penal Code offences against domestic workers who are also a vulnerable group. Clause 42 also amends the Women's Charter to enhance the penalties for breaches of the Women's Charter, Personal Protection Orders (PPOs), to maintain parity with the Bill. These enhancements receive strong support during consultation. I will now move on to the orders that the Court may make to protect vulnerable adults and support their caregivers.”
“The Review Board will also advise MSF on whether a vulnerable adult can be discharged when the period of committal ends. By and large, the Bill is premised on the vulnerable adult’s autonomy to make his own decisions. That said, our experience working with vulnerable adults is that there are exceptional circumstances where we may have to intervene to ensure his safety despite his refusal to consent to intervention. This includes instances where the vulnerable adult refuses to consent to assistance because he is under duress or undue influence. Clauses 7 and 10 will, therefore, allow MSF to apply for a Court order to assess and commit a vulnerable adult to a care facility, where a vulnerable adult with mental capacity refuses assistance. Let me explain our considerations for this. First, during our consultations, some stakeholders highlighted actual cases where they were unable to help a vulnerable adult, because he refused to accept their assistance. Some of these adults were abused or neglected until the day they died. Second, we looked at other countries which have longer experience with vulnerable adult legislation. Some of these jurisdictions have laws that allow a vulnerable adult’s stated wishes to be overridden. For example, in Scotland, the Adult Support and Protection Act permits the state to intervene despite a vulnerable adult’s refusal to consent, if there is evidence that the adult is unduly pressurised, and there are no other reasonable steps that can be taken to prevent further harm to that adult.”
“So, Part 2, Division 1 of the Bill empowers MSF to enter private premises, to assess a person whom we suspect to be a vulnerable adult, if we have reason to believe that the individual has suffered from, is suffering or is at risk of abuse, neglect or self-neglect. In severe cases, the vulnerable adult may no longer be safe within his place of residence or home. Under clauses 10 and 11, MSF may remove vulnerable adults from their residence and commit them to gazetted care facilities, or to the care of a fit person. This allows swift assistance to be rendered to the vulnerable adult while other care arrangements are worked out. MSF must apply for a Court order within 14 working days after the removal, unless the vulnerable adult is earlier permitted to return to his residence. This requirement was included because we recognise that placement can significantly impact the vulnerable adult’s way of life. I wish to assure Members that committals to these care facilities will only be done as a last resort, for an appropriate duration, until the vulnerable adult can be safely reunited with his family. To ensure the vulnerable adult’s well-being and safeguard his health, MSF may require him to be treated by a registered medical practitioner or registered dentist before or during his stay in these care facilities. Once committed to a care facility, the vulnerable adults must be protected from further harm. So, clause 19 requires the care facilities to undertake security measures to ensure the safety and protection of the vulnerable adults residing within their premises, while clause 20 empowers MSF to establish a Review Board to ensure that proper care plans are in place for the vulnerable adult.”
“Second, we recognise that a vulnerable adult with mental capacity is generally best placed to decide how he wishes to live, and whether or not to accept any assistance. The Bill does not seek to override an individual’s freedom of choice nor coerce individuals to behave in a certain manner. MSF will seek an individual’s consent before intervening. Having said that, there may be circumstances where we should intervene, even though the vulnerable adult has mental capacity and refuses to accept protection. Such intervention will only take place in extreme cases involving the safety and protection of the vulnerable adult. Third, we must consider the previously expressed views, wishes, feelings, values and beliefs of a vulnerable adult who lacks mental capacity, where reasonably ascertainable. MSF will, as far as possible, respect an individual’s choices and beliefs when we intervene. Fourth, we must intervene and assist in a manner that is less restrictive of the vulnerable adult’s rights and freedom of action. In order to do this, MSF will work closely with the vulnerable adult and involve his family and caregivers, where possible. Fifth, the welfare and best interests of the vulnerable adult must be the paramount and first consideration. Sir, I will now move on to MSF's ability to intervene and protect vulnerable adults. The next category of provisions sets out the state’s powers. Cases, such as Mr Wong, which I referred to earlier, illustrate why it is crucial for MSF to have powers to enter private premises, assess and, if necessary, remove a vulnerable adult. The Bill will only be effective if it allows us to intervene quickly to prevent further harm to the vulnerable adult.”
“Cases like Mr Wong's highlight the need for adult protection legislation that will provide Government social services with powers to better support these vulnerable adults. When drafting the proposed definitions, we wanted to ensure that the Bill complements, but does not supplant, existing laws and support networks. Certain scenarios are, therefore, not covered. For example, an individual who is physically abused by a family member, but who is capable of protecting himself – in other words, he does not meet the vulnerability threshold under the Bill – may instead apply for a personal protection order (PPO) under the Women’s Charter. Individuals with suspected mental illness, who are not vulnerable adults, may also be assisted under the Mental Health Care and Treatment Act (MHCTA), if their behaviour places them at risk of harm. Next, clause 4 of the Bill sets out the five key principles that guide how we will exercise and carry out the duties or exercise the powers under this Bill. The powers of the Bill are intrusive into the family and, hence, must be exercised within limits and with the right intent. We have, therefore, embedded these key principles in the Bill, to balance the need to protect a vulnerable adult with his right to autonomy and self-determination. So, what are these principles? First, when we exercise the powers or perform the duties under the Bill, it must be to protect vulnerable adults from abuse, neglect and self-neglect. The Bill is not intended to solve community disputes, nor remove persons from their homes just because they may be perceived by their family members or by neighbours to be a nuisance. We will intervene if we assess that doing so is the only way to protect the vulnerable adult. That is first.”
“Vulnerable adults may, as a result of self-neglect, live in grossly unsanitary or hazardous conditions, suffer from malnutrition or dehydration, or suffer from untreated physical or mental illness or injury. Since 2015, APS has seen close to 50 cases of such self-neglect. Many do not have families to care for them. Take Mr Wong, for example. Mr Wong, again, not his real name, is an 85-year-old elderly man who lives alone. He has diabetes and has developed diabetic-related wounds on his feet. When community workers found him, he had not bathed for months. He did not keep his medical appointments despite running out of medication and was not able to take care of the wounds on his feet. As a result, maggots had infested the wounds on his leg and he required urgent hospitalisation. But despite repeated engagements by community workers and by our social workers, Mr Wong refused to be admitted to a nursing home or a hospital. MSF persisted, and found his step-daughter. Together, they persuaded him to accept medical care in his home, after getting assurances that his leg would not be amputated. APS also managed to get help for Mr Wong to manage his swollen legs and to monitor his condition. As of today, nursing staff from a social service agency visit Mr Wong weekly to clean his wound and this has reduced the stench of rotting flesh from his right leg. Three meals are delivered daily to him. Each week, staff from our Senior Activity Centre visit him. They also arrange for a doctor to see him whenever necessary. Mr Wong’s step-daughter also plays her part, dividing her time between work, her own family and children, and looking after Mr Wong. We are supporting her with caregiver support to help her cope.”
“Clause 2 of the Bill defines a vulnerable adult as an individual, aged 18 or older, who because of mental or physical infirmity, disability or incapacity, is incapable of protecting himself from abuse, neglect or self-neglect. For individuals above the age of 16 but below 18, we are looking to amend the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA) to extend statutory protection under the realm of the Child Protective Services, which is the sister agency of the Adult Protection Service (APS). Since its formation in 2015, MSF’s APS has seen a range of vulnerable adult cases involving abuse and neglect. “Abuse”, under the Vulnerable Adults Bill, refers to physical, emotional or psychological abuse. “Abuse” also includes any conduct or behaviour which causes an individual to fear for his safety or well-being, or unreasonably deprives, or threatens to unreasonably deprive, him of his liberty of movement or well-being. Hence, an individual who excessively controls another individual’s day-to-day life and social relationships and, as a result, causes the individual to suffer adverse emotional health effects, may be regarded as having abused that individual. A vulnerable adult may also require protection if he has been neglected. “Neglect” refers to the lack of provision of essential care to an individual, to the extent of causing or being reasonably likely to cause injury or pain. Not providing food, clothing, medical aid, lodging, supervision and other necessities of life are examples of neglect. A vulnerable adult may also neglect himself. “Self-neglect” refers to the failure of an individual to perform essential tasks of daily living, such as eating, drinking and seeking medical aid.”
“I would like to thank all stakeholders who provided valuable insights. We have studied these views carefully and incorporated them into the Bill where appropriate. Before I go into the main provisions of the Bill, I would like to assure Members that the Bill does not and must not replace the social work that supports vulnerable adults and their caregivers. Social work intervention is, and remains, the main form of external intervention in such cases. This Bill, if passed by Members, should be a law of last resort; state intervention through the exercise of statutory power into the family for family matters will be applied judiciously and only when necessary. This is because personal care arrangements are largely matters for individuals and families to decide on. This Bill does not seek to supplant or diminish the role of the family and community. Sir, let me now bring the House through the main features of the Bill, which fall broadly into four categories. Members can refer to the sheet that I passed around which gives a broad summary of the rest of my presentation, so I hope it is useful. So, four categories: first, the scope of the Bill and the guiding principles that underlie our intervention; second, MSF's ability to intervene and protect vulnerable adults; third, I will talk about Court orders that will enhance the protection and support for vulnerable adults and their caregivers; and, fourth, I will talk about community involvement in protecting vulnerable adults. I will start with the first, which is the scope of the Bill. First, the Bill protects vulnerable adults and explicitly sets out the guiding principles underlying state intervention.”
“Sam’s father refused assistance and therapy for himself and his son, insisting that Sam be medicated to control his behaviour. Given the high risk of Sam being hurt again, Sam was placed at a facility that was equipped to address his care needs. In cases like this, the Government must take a proactive approach and intervene early, as any delays may lead to further harm, or worse. Sir, I am, therefore, putting the Vulnerable Adults Bill before the Members of this House to seek their support to strengthen the existing adult protective framework. The Bill will allow the Government social services to intervene, assist and protect vulnerable adults when social work-based family and community interventions are inadequate. It will complement other existing laws that protect vulnerable individuals, such as the Women’s Charter and the Mental Capacity Act. We hope to achieve two objectives. First, we want to ensure that we have the ability to move quickly to protect and support vulnerable adults as well as their caregivers, when the need arises; and second, we want the protection for vulnerable adults to be effective. In drawing up the Bill, we consulted our community partners and public agencies. Together, we reviewed cases where vulnerable adults were abused, neglected or self-neglected themselves, and discussed how best to calibrate the powers that the Bill should give. This was an important exercise that we did not want to rush, as we should not be excessively intruding into the sanctity of the home and eroding the autonomy and responsibility of the family. During our consultations, we received strong support for the Bill. I met our community partners earlier this year and the draft Bill was finalised, and I was encouraged by their continued strong support.”
“Some of these vulnerable individuals may not be able to depend on their families to provide adequate care for them; others may not even have family members or friends to rely on. While our adult protection framework has functioned well, there are instances where family and community interventions may not be effective. Since MSF’s Adult Protective Service (APS) was established in 2015, the number of referrals to MSF has increased. On average, we have handled about 110 cases annually involving vulnerable adults 18 years and above, though not all of these cases eventually required our intervention. Our experience, validated by feedback from our stakeholders, indicates that family matters are never clear-cut, never black and white. Caregivers who abuse vulnerable adults may themselves be victims of difficult circumstances and be under tremendous stress. They are sometimes unable to control their emotions, which may cause them to hurt vulnerable adults or other family members. One of the cases where MSF had to intervene involves “Sam”, again not his real name. Sam is a 29-year-old young man with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), autism and an intellectual disability. Sam is an only child and lived with his elderly parents. However, his parents were not able to understand his condition and, hence, care for Sam. Sam’s father would hit him to try and control his behaviour. This resulted in severe cuts and bruises on Sam, all of which required medical attention. But Sam’s behaviour also caused his father a lot of stress. When MSF spoke with Sam’s family members, they mentioned that Sam’s father had entertained thoughts of killing his son and then ending his own life.”
“When neighbours spotted Mdm Chua wandering around the estate with bruises on her arms and around her left eye, they alerted the Family Service Centre (FSC). The FSC found out that Mdm Chua’s daughter would beat her mother every time Mdm Chua soiled herself or left the stove on. When social workers contacted the daughter, she expressed remorse for using force against her mother. We found out that the daughter’s anger stemmed from her frustration and stress. Not only was she coping badly with her mother’s failing health, she also needed to care for her own son who has special needs. The daughter agreed to participate in counselling and assistance programmes to help her manage Mdm Chua’s failing mental and physical health. To provide the daughter with caregiver respite, the FSC also persuaded another of Mdm Chua’s daughters to step in to care for Mdm Chua on weekdays. Assistance was also given to help her care for her son, who had special needs. Since our involvement, there have not been further incidents of violence reported to date. Cases, such as this, remind us of the complexity of family relationships, and the crucial role that family and community intervention plays in helping vulnerable individuals. But Singapore’s population is rapidly ageing. Today, more than 450,000 Singaporeans are 65 and above. In 12 years, by 2030, one in four will be aged 65 and above; that is more than 900,000 elderly individuals. The number of residents living alone is also projected to increase to more than 80,000 in 2030. Our changing demographics impact our household structures. And this can complicate family dynamics. In our midst are vulnerable Singaporeans who may not be able to care for themselves, as they have physical or mental infirmities or disabilities.”
“Thank you. Sir, this Bill seeks to protect individuals, 18 years and older, who cannot protect themselves from abuse, neglect or self-neglect, because of a mental or physical infirmity, disability or incapacity. In the course of our work as Members of Parliament, we would have come across households seeking help and assistance, as they juggle the many roles expected of a family: breadwinner, caregiver to elderly parents, and parents to young or teenage children. It gets harder when elderly parents lose mental capacity because of dementia or become bedridden because of illness. Double the challenge if they have children with disability or special needs to provide for. Through various schemes and programmes, we want to better enable our families as they carry out their caregiving roles as the first line of care and protection for their vulnerable members. Indeed, one of the key priorities for the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) and the Ministry of Health (MOH), both now and in the years ahead, is to enhance support for the elderly and people with disability and special needs, and to better enable their family members and loved ones to carry out their roles as caregivers. From time to time, we hear about sad cases where elderly persons or persons with disability or special needs are abused or neglected. Currently, we have in place a network of community and social service agencies which support families through social intervention, such as counselling, case management and case monitoring. Take the case of "Mdm Chua". It is not her real name; we will not use any real names in this Chamber on this topic. Mdm Chua is a 68-year-old lady with early-stage dementia.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute an A4 copy of an infographic on the Vulnerable Adults Bill?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent to move that the debate be now adjourned? Deputy Speaker: I give my consent. [(proc text) Resolved, that the debate be now adjourned. ─ [Mr Desmond Lee.] (proc text)] Deputy Speaker: Miss Cheryl Chan, when would you wish to resume debate?”
“NCSS will work with VWOs to build the volunteer management capabilities of our VWOs and better shape volunteer roles and opportunities so that volunteers can contribute meaningfully. We will also champion social innovation and enterprise and enable more consistent and sustainable giving by individuals and corporates. These efforts will actualise and amplify the goodwill in society. Creating a more cohesive society is a continuous endeavour over the long term. We invite all Singaporeans to partner us in this journey to strengthen our society and improve the lives of others, as we work towards a better future together.”
“For those who have lost mental capacity, and have no family to help, we will empower credible and trustworthy members of the community to step in to support. In doing so, we hope that Singaporeans can enter their silver years with confidence and peace of mind. We will continue to enhance comprehensive support for children who experience abuse and neglect. This includes intervention to support families to make the home environment safer for children, and expanding foster care so that children who cannot be with their biological families can still grow up in a family environment. We will also explore how to further enhance kinship care arrangements, where children are cared for by relatives, and thus are able to remain more closely connected with their families. We will introduce legislation to protect vulnerable adults who are suffering from abuse, neglect or self-neglect in their homes. Along with changes to the law, we will strengthen linkages across agencies and the community to support vulnerable adults and their families. Through the National Council of Social Service (NCSS), we will continue to develop the social service sector, as they are vital partners in our mission to uplift and protect vulnerable individuals and families. We will groom leaders and professionals, deepen skills and capabilities, and create more developmental pathways. We will also continue to strengthen the organisational capabilities of voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) through initiatives, such as the VWOs-Charities Capability Fund. Over the years, VWOs, corporates, community organisations, social service professionals and many Singaporeans have stepped forward to extend a helping hand to people in need. In line with the SG Cares movement, we will further nurture this spirit of giving.”
“The National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recidivism, comprising Government agencies and community partners, will review the effectiveness of our approaches, identify new strategies and drive greater coordination across the public, private and people sectors. Through our new Integrated Service Providers, we will provide youths-at-risk and youth offenders with programmes that are better tailored to their needs and delivered with greater consistency. This will raise the quality of youth programmes and better help our youths achieve positive outcomes in life. With SG Enable, we will continue to implement the Third Enabling Masterplan to empower persons with disabilities to live their lives to their fullest potential. For children with developmental needs, we will intervene early and tailor support services to best help them in their growing years. As persons with disabilities progress through different stages of life, we will provide more seamless support, such as by easing the transition from school to work. To enhance opportunities for employment and lifelong learning, we will prepare and equip persons with disabilities to be effective at the workplace, and work closely with employers to build an inclusive company culture. We will also support caregivers to ensure their well-being and peace of mind, with regard to the care of their loved ones. We will care for our seniors, who continue to enrich our society with their wisdom and experience. We will support and encourage Singaporeans to plan ahead to safeguard and unlock their assets with a Lasting Power of Attorney, in the event that they lose mental capacity.”
“We will provide marriage preparation and support programmes through our community partners, so that couples and families are equipped to build strong relationships. We will also continue to provide resources to support parents in caring for and bonding with their children. Even as we pursue these, we recognise that some marriages may not work out. Through the work of the newly-formed Committee to Review and Enhance Reforms in the Family Justice System, we will enhance the therapeutic and restorative approach in the family justice system, so as to reduce the negative impact on children arising from family break-up and divorce. Our network of Social Service Offices (SSOs) has brought help closer to those in need. We will continue to tackle our social challenges by enhancing social service delivery on the ground. Through the SSOs, we will strengthen our partnerships and processes across agencies and community partners to provide more holistic, client-centric support. We aim to help clients receive assistance and apply for multiple help schemes more conveniently, no matter which agency they first approach. We will also channel Government, private sector and community resources to yield greater and more long-lasting impact. By significantly tightening processes and improving coordination, we will ease the burden on clients, and better help them to get back on their feet. We will support youths-at-risk with opportunities to succeed in life, by intervening more aggressively upstream, and adopting a more preventive, rehabilitative and integrative approach towards youths-at-risk, youth offenders and their families.”
“In the coming years, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will continue to strengthen our partnership with the community in order to nurture resilient individuals, strong families and a caring society. To give every child a good start in life, we will press on with the transformation of the early childhood sector, so that more families can benefit from accessible, affordable and good quality early childhood services. We will expand full-day preschool places to provide a place for every child who needs one. Two out of every three preschoolers will have a place in Government or Government-supported preschools by 2023, in centres run by Anchor Operators and Partner Operators, as well as Ministry of Education (MOE) Kindergartens. To build a strong foundation for bilingual learning, we will also double the number of Anchor Operator preschools which offer Malay or Tamil as Mother Tongue Languages, in addition to Chinese. To support sustainable growth of this sector, the Early Childhood Development Agency will work closely with industry partners and the National Institute of Early Childhood Development to ensure that our early childhood educators have meaningful and rewarding careers. We will also make good use of training and technology to raise standards and productivity. For children from low-income families, we will develop a strong ecosystem of support through the KidSTART pilot. We will partner parents to enable their children to develop holistically in the familiar settings of their home and preschool. We must continue to make Singapore one of the best places to build strong families and bring up children. Together with our community partners, we will foster a family-friendly environment and share the joys of marriage and parenthood.”
“Respite care services are currently provided by seven Adult Disability Homes and three Children Disability Homes. These services are offered to families of Persons with Disabilities who, for various reasons, may need short-term assistance in providing care for their loved ones. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the median daily respite care service fee was $74.40. Respite care fees range up to $107, but 62% (23 families) paid less than $10 per day after Government subsidies. Another 14% (five needy families) had their fees waived by the Voluntary Welfare Organisations. The capacity for respite care has been assessed to be sufficient to meet the projected demand over the next five years. As at December 2017, 80 respite care service spaces were available across the 10 homes and the average utilisation rate was less than 10% in the fourth quarter of 2017.”