Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Singapore's Eugenic's Sterilisation Programme

Expand Messages
  • Mellanie Hewlitt
    Comments: Mellanie Hewlitt Singapore Review 14 June 2005 Ever wonder how whether a human life can be measured in dollars and cents? Well you can wonder no
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 13, 2005
      Comments: Mellanie Hewlitt
      Singapore Review
      14 June 2005

      Ever wonder how whether a human life can be measured in dollars and
      cents? Well you can wonder no more, as Singapore's very own Hitler
      has it all wrapped up.

      If you are not a graduate, you are not fit to bear children. The
      right of child birth only accrues with graduates.

      Below is an extract of an article from Harvard. Read on and find out
      more about the Singapore's despot and his demented perversions.

      It is inhumane policies like this that has resulted in the stunted
      population growth faced by Singapore today. Singaporeans are
      suffering for the past mistakes of a despot who attempted to play
      GOD.

      http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/healthnet/WoC/reproductive/trombley2.html

      Singapore
      Singapore presently has one of the most Coercive state sponsored
      eugenic sterilization programmes in operation anywhere in the world.
      By 1977, 21 per cent of women of child-bearing age in Singapore had
      been sterilized. The figure for men was one per cent.

      The origins of Singapore's sterilization programme lie, as with
      India, in a visit from Margaret Sanger. In February 1936 she
      advocated that family planning should be an essential part of the
      state's public health programme. In 1944 the Singapore Family
      Planning Association (SFPA) was founded. In February 1959, Professor
      B. H. Sheares told Sanger's IPPF congress in New Delhi that
      sterilization rather than birth control was the way forward for
      Singapore. Sheares published his views in Singapore in June when
      Sanger happened to be in the country to lend support. These events
      coincided with the election of the People's Action Party (PAP)
      government, which proclaimed its support in July. By 1965 the
      Ministry of Health had taken over all responsibility for family
      planning from the SFPA. It became the sole executive agency for
      family planning, and had the power to take over the functions and
      seize the assets of any other family planning agencies. The State
      became the sole authority with control over fertility.

      The Government published a white paper on family planning in 1965, at
      a time when there were only 5,000 sterilization 'acceptors' per
      annum. By 1969 Prime minister Lee Kuan Yew had pushed through bills
      legalizing abortion in 'voluntary' sterilization. The sterilization
      bill became increasingly liberalized. At first it applied to women
      with six or more children. By 1972 it applied to women with two
      children, or to women with only one child if there were sufficient
      medical, therapeutic or environmental grounds. From 1974 the law was
      amended to include any woman who was either married or over twenty-
      one.

      In a speech in support of the 1969 acts, Lee expressed the
      degenerationist's support for eugenic policies, both in terms of
      raising the quality of racial stock and in reducing public
      expenditure on welfare programmes:

      One of the crucial yardsticks by which we shall have to judge the
      results of the new abortion law combined with the voluntary
      sterilization law will be whether it tends to raise or lower the
      total quality of our population. We must encourage those who earn
      less than $200 per month and cannot afford to nurture and educate
      many children never to have more than two. Intelligent application of
      these laws can help reduce the distortion that has already set in ...
      we will regret the time lost, if we do not now take the first
      tentative step towards correcting a trend which can leave our society
      with a large number of the physically, intellectually and culturally
      anaemic.
      The 1969 sterilization act set up a five-man Eugenics Board to
      authorize sterilizations. While it included two doctors, a social
      worker and one 'other', it was chaired by a district judge. With the
      final liberalization of the law in 1974, the Eugenics Board was
      disbanded, and authority for all sterilization decisions was vested
      in individual doctors.

      In 1969, there were 14,000 sterilizations in Singapore. In 1970 this
      increased to 24,000. The numbers increased steadily and by 1973 the
      annual figure was 93,000. This trend continued to a peak in 1976 of
      99,000 sterilizations. Saw Swee-Hock describes the typical profile of
      sterilized women in 1976: ' 86 per cent were Singapore citizens and
      85 percent were not working, presumably performing home housework.
      About 81 percent had practiced birth control either at the time of
      sterilization or previous to that, and almost all of them, 97
      percent, were being sterilized for socioeconomic reasons such
      as "financial difficulties" and "family completed". As high as 70
      percent had their sterilization performed during the postpartum
      period and another 19 percent during the post-abortal period... Some
      92 per cent of all sterilization operations were performed in
      government institutions.'

      The financial elements of Lee's eugenic plan are reflected in
      Singapore's policies of incentives and disincentives. These are
      designed to motivate people 'voluntarily' to limit their families to
      two children or less. Each is, in reality, a coercive policy designed
      to motivate sterilization 'acceptance'. (1) Maternity leave. In 1973
      the government withdrew the right to paid maternity leave for the
      delivery of third and subsequent children. Within the Civil Service,
      the conditions are modified so that maternity leave for third and
      subsequent children is paid, provided the woman agrees to be
      sterilized at delivery. Alternatively, seven days un-recorded paid
      leave is offered to male and female civil servants for the purpose of
      accepting a sterilization operation.

      (2) Accouchement fees. From 1969 these had been progressively raised
      for second and subsequent children. In July 1975 they were raised as
      follows:

      Birth order Class of hospital ward
      A B C
      1rst child $300 $120 $60
      2nd child $360 $180 $90
      3rd child $420 $240 $120
      4th child $480 $300 $240
      Subsequent $480 $360 $300

      The significance of these figures is that the proportionate increase
      is highest in class C wards, i.e. those used by the poorest patients
      who are least able to afford the increase. The ' stick' of
      increasingly higher fees is matched by the 'carrot' of sterilization.
      Ward fees for classes Band C are waived if either husband or wife
      agrees to sterilization within six months of delivery. Ward charges
      for class C patients are reimbursed upon application after
      sterilization. Another aspect of this policy is that women expecting
      their third or subsequent children are not entitled to free antenatal
      care, but are charged $10 per visit.

      (3) Income tax. In 1973 the government announced that $750 tax relief
      would be granted for the first and second children, with $500 relief
      for the third. Fourth or subsequent children do not qualify for any
      tax relief. As Saw notes, 'By comparison with the measures
      incorporated in maternity leave and accouchement fee, the tax relief
      measure has a wider and more lasting influence because it applies to
      all payers with children and penalizes those affected every year in
      their tax returns instead of just once.'

      (4) Housing. Prior to 1973 housing was allocated on a points system,
      with higher priority given to those with larger families. Deciding
      that this policy encouraged fertility, the government modified the
      rules so that families regardless of size had equal priority in
      housing. Rules regarding sub-letting were also revised, so that only
      families with three or fewer children were allowed to sub-let rooms
      and earn extra income. This policy had the effect, again, of
      penalizing most those who could least afford the penalty.

      (5) Education. Prime Minister Lee places a very high value on an
      educated élite. A keen supporter of the British class-based system of
      public schools and admission to the universities of Oxford and
      Cambridge, Lee created model schools in Singapore during his first
      years as Prime Minister. In 1973 his government introduced new rules
      for admission to the superior ' Primary One' places in certain
      schools. The first three children were to be eligible, but the fourth
      would not be eligible unless one of the parents 'agreed' to be
      sterilized. A series of complex amendments were made to this rule,
      some of which resulted in arbitrary inequalities, quite apart from
      being coercive.

      Saw noted that the measure penalizes parents retrospectively since it
      applies to parents who had their children many years ago when such a
      rule did not exist. Parents affected by this measure have to send
      their fourth and subsequent children to less desired schools, apart
      from the daily trouble of sending them to different schools from
      their first three children. Among all the measures, this measure
      appears to be the only one that imposes a penalty on the children
      directly by depriving them of being with their brothers/sisters in
      the same school, and all the inconveniences that go with it. But the
      measure does act as a deterrent to some couples thinking of having a
      fourth or higher parity children.
      The immediate outcome of giving priority to children whose parents
      were sterilized was that in 1975 there was a conspicuous rush by
      parents, more often than not the mother, to undergo sterilization in
      order to take advantage of this new ruling.

      ...In the 1975 registration exercise many children of old boys or
      girls, staff and parents who had direct connections with the schools
      were not given places in the good schools of their choice. Instead,
      these schools, particularly the mission schools, found they had a
      sizeable number of pupils who were complete 'strangers' to the
      schools but were admitted on the basis of their parents having been
      sterilized.

      (6) Work permits. Foreigners who earn less than $750 in Singapore are
      obliged to register with the ministry of labour for a work permit.
      Since 1973 guest workers wanting to marry a Singapore citizen and
      take up permanent residence were required to obtain the permission of
      the Commissioner of Employment. Many applications in the 1970s were
      rejected, and thousands of guest workers were expecting children out
      of wedlock. In 1976 the government introduced a rule where by
      permission to marry (and, importantly, access to social services like
      health care) would be granted provided one member of the couple
      agreed to be sterilized at the birth of the Second child. Failure to
      comply could result in the withdrawal of all of all benefits,
      including the work permit. The family would also be denied access to
      housing, education and health services.

      Lee's eugenic programme has probably been one of the most effective
      ever undertaken. The birth rate in Singapore dropped from 6.5 per
      woman in 1957 to 1.9 per woman in 1977. Within twenty years his
      programme has put the country on course to exceed zero population
      growth and achieve negative population growth. One figure that the
      government does not like to quote is that a 1973 survey revealed that
      more than 46 per cent of married women between the ages of fifteen
      and forty-four disagreed with Lee's two-child policy, believing that
      they should be allowed to have more than two children if they wished
      to.

      Meanwhile, new incentives are introduced, such as Lee's scheme to pay
      the dinner bills of courting- couples of the right social and
      intellectual attainment - a positive eugenic policy to help create
      a 'superior' race.

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------

      By: Mellanie Hewlitt
      Singapore Review
      Date: Mon Feb 24, 2003 6:00 pm
      An amusing perception of the Singapore Procreation Process;

      Everything runs like clockwork in squeaky clean, efficient little
      Singapore. Well, almost everything at least. And what does the Ruling
      Elite do if there is a problem in their neat tidy backyard? They
      address it by way of laws, fines, taxes, imprisonments and law
      suites, this after all is the PAP way. It has worked in the past and
      it will always work in the future. But then again perhaps not.

      The tiny city state and its ever paternalistic government have a
      problem which cannot be solved by the usual cocktail of laws, fines,
      litigation and campaigns. This problem is a highly personal one which
      extends into the private bedrooms of its citizens. How does a well
      meaning parent tell its usually compliant and obedient children
      to "get on with it", to "make hay whilst the sun shines" and more
      directly put, to "go forth, procreate, multiply and reproduce."?

      Along with the status of a developed nation, Singapore has also
      inherited its trade mark problems. Its population (particularly the
      better educated and wealthier Chinese majority) is not replacing
      itself and birth rates have been declining continously over the
      years. And this is a problem which the paternalistic government
      cannot address in its usual draconian style. No, you cannot impose a
      fine, and neither can you pass a law to solve this sensitive issue.
      And if left unaddressed, there is every potential that the little
      city-state with its population of 4 million people will "develop"
      itself to extinction.

      The task is growing more urgent because the birth rate among
      Singapore's four million people is falling steadily and now
      languishes at 1.4 children per woman. That's below the 2.1
      demographers say is necessary for a population to replace itself.

      In the past, Singapore's ruling elite have approached the problem
      with their usual efficiency and diligence, by way of campaigns and
      policy implementations. Indeed, their attempt to play cupid had not
      gone unnoticed and has been the source of much amusement (see
      previous article attached below; "Government Promotes Unions Of Its
      Best and Brightest; Soul Mates in 7 Minutes?", The Wallstreet
      Journal).

      After several failed attempts, the "Powers that be" finally realized
      that (at least for matters of the heart, and bedroom type activities)
      they cannot point a gun to a person's head and mandate him/her to
      kick start the domestic baby making factory. No Mr Lee, it does not
      work this way, that's not how Adam and Eve started out, and that's
      certainly not how the Good Lord created the universe.

      Perhaps one reason for the government's dismal failures is the
      overwhelming emphasis on academic qualifications and other "hard
      factors". The government set-up two different social units to
      encourage marriage amongst the younger generation. One for graduates
      (SDU, Singapore's best and brightest?) and one for non-graduates
      (SDS). The underlying message of cause was that new generation of
      Singaporeans should choose their partners and marry within the
      confines of their own designated Academic Caste System. Hence, it is
      small wonder why many younger and more liberal minded Singaporeans
      find this archaic medieval academic caste system highly objectionable
      and terribly unromantic.

      Many may also remember the infamous "Graduate Mother Scheme" which
      the government tried to implement a decade ago. For those who are
      unfamiliar, it would be best described as the PAP's way to implement
      their version of the Laws of Un-Natural Selection, and propagate the
      ruling elite's own twisted version of the theory of evolution.
      Graduate couples were then given huge financial incentives and
      support to have more children. The rationale being that children from
      graduate couples were more likely to be intelligent and gifted. Of
      cause the flip side of the equation logically implied that children
      of non-graduate parents were total misfits and genetically inferior!

      This measure of the worth of a human life (accessed solely on
      academic merits) raised many questioning eyebrows, from graduates and
      non-graduates alike. And it came as no surprise that the scheme was a
      colossal failure, a heartening reflection that the Singapore
      population still retained some semblance of independent thought and
      dignity when it comes to matters of the heart at least

      But aside from the colossal failures of the government sponsored
      match making programs, a host of other factors account for the
      declining birth rates. "Go forth and multiply" you say? Well that's
      more easily said then done for the average couple in Singapore with
      an average household income of approximately SGD3-4000/-. Unless you
      are part of the ruling elite who take home a minimum net income of
      SGD150,000/- per month (or SGD1.6 million per year), (the average pay
      packet for a PAP minister), life is not easy in expensive little
      Singapore.

      The start-up costs for a new family can be staggering, with big
      ticket items like a car and a house. Even a 1.6 Litre Japanese car
      will cost at least SGD80,000/-, which is the equivalent of a decent 3
      bedroom house in some countries. And a small 1,200 Sq Ft apartment
      can set you back SGD1,000,000.- and more, depending on the locality
      and tenor. What about government "subsidised" housing?
      Well, "subsidised" housing here takes the form of HDB (Housing
      Development Board) flats which will cost between SGD200,000 to
      SGD400,000/-, the equivalent of a decent size house in Australia or
      New Zealand.

      And the costs and expenses do not stop here. The government has also
      imposed compulsory savings in the form of CPF (Central Provident
      Fund), which is mandatory and ties up approx 20% of the monthly pay
      of the citizens. There is no access to these funds until you reach
      the retirement age of 55 years. And if you fall ill or need a
      operation before this age, good luck matey you are on your own. Then
      there are the other daily expenses like ERP (Electronic Road
      Pricing), maid levies, GST, all of which is imposed in a city state
      which is conspicuously bereft of any public welfare or unemployment
      benefits.

      In short, staggering initial capital outlay required in starting a
      family here, as well as increasing costs of living, have paved the
      way for dual income households where both husband and wife typically
      work 12 hour days just to make ends meet. And after a hectic work
      day, there is little time left over for other more "romantic"
      pastimes, let alone raising a child.

      Even when there is an increase in marriage rates, there is no sure
      sign that this would reverse the declining birth rates as the vast
      majority of couples either opt not to have children, or in the event
      they do, the wealthy and affluent class (which are most targeted by
      the Singapore Government) have instead chosen to have children
      abroad. One such individual was a banker (who requested to remain
      anonymous) who stated that he would want his child to have a normal
      and happy childhood, as opposed to the rigid, oppressive and highly
      competitive pressure-cooked education system in Singapore. He took a
      3 week holiday and arranged for his wife to give birth to their
      bouncing baby boy in New York, so that the child had the rights and
      benefits of US citizenship. And theirs is not an isolated case as
      there are many who have opted for a better and easier life for their
      children via this route.

      Far from encouraging increasing birth-rates, a combination
      of dismal government policies and "social engineering", and
      unfavourable work and living conditions (for the locals) have
      resulted in an exodus of the more affluent segments of the
      population, further worsening an already bad situation.

      At the end of the day, the act of procreation is highly intimate and
      individualistic, very personal in nature. One really wonders if years
      of repressive indoctrination have robbed the native populace of the
      free will, independence and ability to rise to the occasion,
      instilling an over-dependent, compliant and submissive culture which
      is anti-thesis to the aggressive survival instinct that is crucial
      for reproduction.

      But not withstanding the difficult and oppressive social and
      financial environment moulded by the government, surely our fore
      fathers and distant ancestors have faced greater challenges in the
      past, and still managed to sow their royal oats and ensured the
      continued existence of their bloodlines? So what's really missing in
      Singapore's Procreation Equation? A liberal dose of good old
      fashioned love.

      One can almost picture the look of uncomprehending horror on the
      faces of the Ruling Elite. How preposterous, marry and procreate in
      the name of love? But that would mean breaching the Academic Caste
      System! GOOD HAVENS NO! We cant' have people running all over the
      place, haphazardly falling in love and procreating, that's wrong!
      That's not within the prescribed framework of the nicely laid out
      plans Singapore's Ruling Elite had crafted for Singapore Inc.

      But some would argue that "letting nature take its own natural
      course" is a formulae that has worked for humanity in the last two to
      five thousand years. Perhaps its high time some brave hearted martyr
      ventures forth and informs the "Powers that be in Singapore" that
      they should try a little bit of good old fashioned love (and throw in
      the obligatory bouquet of roses) and compassion, if they wished to
      play cupid.

      Perhaps its also time for the overzealous parent to leave the
      children some slack, they are all grown up and they have to figure
      this one out for themselves. Alternatively, does anyone have the
      recipe for Love Potion No 9. If you do, please mark it URGENT and
      forward it to the PAP.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.