where being right is wrong

The other day I was at Clarke Quay there were this lovely string trio [?], in both looks and skills, performing to an oblivious audience, performing in spite of an oblivious audience, bravely soldiering on. The show must go on I suppose.

-

So I had a letter published in the ST today [big big somemore]:

NCSS should focus more on its clients

I REFER to Ms Ang Bee Lian's letter 'Govt benchmarking social workers' pay' on Sept 26.
I have been a social worker for almost two years. While I am not seeing the kind of salary that Ms Ang refers to, I acknowledge that there has been some positive movement in that regard.

However, I feel that the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) can do more for the people.

The biggest issue is the structural way NCSS divides the services of a population within distinct demographical categories, like age or physical condition. Each group is further divided into specific needs and services, like home nursing, meals delivery, family counselling and so on. Such a model is not comprehensive, as considering how diverse people are, there inadvertently will be needs an individual faces that existing formal services do not provide.

A corollary for such a framework is that social service organisations are set up around these services that NCSS has earmarked due to the funding. This inadvertently results in agencies becoming very specific and not going beyond a certain duty to fill up any possible service loophole, either because they lack the resources or, for whatever other reasons, because it is not 'in the service guideline'. While specificity often leads to specialisation and efficiency, the precursor is economies of scale, which most social service agencies are unable to achieve.

A third offshoot is a duplication of assessment that results from a client being referred from one agency to another. Each agency requires its own separate assessment. While a specific service will assess a client differently, there are common facets like financial and background information that can be better shared. For example, multiple financial testing requires multiple collection of financial documents from the client and the family.

While NCSS has gone some way to supporting social workers, I feel we can be better supported by focusing on the clients.

Chen Lingshen

As with all things online, there will always be idiots and as of now, here's the only idiotic comment:

I think the writer, being a rookie, does not understand how the sector works.

Such embarrassment, hearing these comments from these young social workers who are passionate but don't go deeper into what they see or hear on the surface.

My next question to these rookies are: so what are you going to do to facilitate change in your position?

The idiocy of this idiot screams so loudly I don't think I even need to speak for him.

Edit. Apparently someone replied that idiot:

what embarrassment about these comments? quite sensible perceptive observations made by Chen Lingshen.

(1)"the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) can do more for the people"
nothing embarrassing about this fact.

(2)"the structural way NCSS divides the services...inadvertently will be needs an individual faces that existing formal services do not provide". correct again. such rigid divisions means this is not in my service guideline, not my area, so results in multiple referrals which hamper the efficiency of the system.

(3) clients `referred from one agency to another. Each agency requires its own separate assessment' - waste of resources and hassle for people requiring fast help.
Rookies? - better than fossilised veterans who are moulded to the old rigid inflexible system. we need more such refrshing views.

I'm embarrassed actually; he says it much better than i could ever hope to.

-

On a relatively unrelated note,

The general consensus is that the letter was 'very well written', that I was very brave to have written it. My bosses were livid. [Edit. I have since been cleared cuz I didn't mention the company name] Tomorrow, all these will be forgotten until NCSS replies, which will go along these lines: they'll denounce me as a wet behind the ears rookie, full of passion but ultimately myopic and misguided, list down their accomplishments probably in terms of how many people have benefitted from their services and the high percentage of positive evaluations, and mention how NCSS strives to keep ahead and relevant and pretend it never happened.

I'm not actually say anything new or brilliant, or made up; these are things everyone has been saying but not to NCSS, or they're not listening, or something. [Edit. I've just been informed that Case Management communicates with NCSS directly and they're able to implement changes every 3 months. Power to Case Management I say; You can be a Case Management too if you're above 60, lack social support and have one chronic medical condition]. I'm just saying what alot of people are saying but not saying to NCSS. Which is what irks. Things didn't just suddenly become like that overnight; it should have taken a hell lot of indifference for things to become what they are today.

Abit of clarification: NCSS doesn't actually provide the service or set up the agencies that do; what they do is demarcate the specific services by deciding what gets funding and what not, divide it into geographic regions and you kinda tender for it; you're free to set up your own agency providing any service you want but obviously why do something for free when funding is just a soul's sale away. You get this nice groovy service manual to follow and are required to submit stats every once in awhile purporting to the efficacy of your service but actually meaning nothing; you also have to provide any other stats, colour coded in technicolour, that the great powers at NCSS needs to set policy. I must have missed the fine print somewhere because you are also required to get your comments and observations ignored and you can't speak to someone higher ranked [at NCSS] than you directly. [I don't know where this notion of rank came about actually: technically the politicians appoint the civil servants and the power of politicians comes from the people; therefore politicians are the lowest ranked and therefore civil servants, and psuedo civil servants aren't that far off too?]

Years ago, I attended a meeting where the SINDA-FSC director was present. He was rather quite disdainful of education and prided himself on his years of experience. He was particularly proud of his 'experienced' corp of volunteers in this service implemented, boasting that they were able to make thorough and complete assessments with just an hour. How this is related to the current mess I don't know but I just think that experience or education, neither one is more important than the other. You need a theoretical basis as a guide how to proceed; yet a guide will never cover every possible situation that you will encounter. Experience and education to me are just the same facets of probably-knowing something; I say probably-knowing because I don't think we can really ever know anything [and even this I don't know for sure]. I think the day I do know anything for sure is the day life ends.

Yet another common comment is so 'why am I not doing anything about it' or 'what solution do i have to offer'. I don't know? I wrote a letter didn't I? And I did give up the pursuit of a discipline [psychology] that I am thoroughly in love with for one [medicine/genetics] that is no doubt just as exciting but with a much longer, more uncertain and onerous journey because I believe it's for the best. I did design a database to store client records; I spent and am still spending droplets of time I manage to squeeze out from my laden schedule of work and school learning from scratch computer languages like MYSQL, PHP and HTML in the hopes that I can bridge at least a few services together. My system is not perfect, but it will be eventually. I really really would like to think I did and am still trying to do something about it. I actually don't quite understand the logic that when you criticize, you must have an answer. Afterall, I'm not the one that's being paid an obnoxious amount of money here.

But I actually do have an answer, and it doesn't involve raising taxes or implementing surcharges. I suggest, rather than a service-centric model, we should adopt a client or geography-centric model: that is a social worker is assigned to an area, and the entire gamut of needs of persons in that area is the responsibility of that social worker [TM]. When the social worker feels that the client requires services that the social worker is unable to render, he/she can refer to an organization providing that specific need.

One of the complaints in the social services is there's not enough resources, which is actually the same complaint in every other industry. I don't think there's not enough resources; it's just that everyone, every organization, every industry demands their own set of resources. I call this the Food Court Rice Theory [TM]. When I go to the food court near closing time, there's alot of stores who have run out of rice and have to close for the day yet there are also many other stores who still have lots of rice left. Or or or how mornings, the roads are practically jammed but if you look inside each car, you'll see there's most likely only one, at most two persons in each car that sits five people. Or you see the roads going towards the city is clogged yet the roads coming from the city is empty. Or you can never get a taxi when you need one yet taxi drivers spend a good part of their jobs waiting at taxi stands. Obviously resources are not being used all that well. And coming from my Food Court Rice Theory is the final piece of my solution: where possible, the social services should not set up a specialized service but utilize existing commercial sources [TM]. Why do we have to send food all the way from Henderson to Beach Road when there's so many eateries littering the area? Why can't we use taxi drivers who are free to send clients for medical appointments? Of course, my idealism requires alot of micro planning, coordination, and a quid of human kindness and initiative, which is the bit where it will all come apart.

-

Actually I don't know I struggle so much for what. If I just shut up and do my job, receive my [relatively] obnoxious pay, spend my pay, and live happily ever after, I would be living happily ever after instead of this mess I'm in: feeling pissed, feeling pissed that I'm pissed, career's in limbo, all plans derailed. Nothing's gonna change, moone else cares, and it doesn't matter that I care, and noone cares that I care.

-

I kinda think at the end of the day ideals are important. Sure, they don't put food on the table, and power to you if your ideal happens to be the same as putting food on the table, but ideals, even if you never meet them, make you you.

more general flaming

Damn, flaming sure is addictive. This time, on this article DPM Jayakumar urges S'poreans to keep perspective on Mas Selamat's escape that appeared on CNA.

Here we go:

'...Deputy Prime Minister S Jayakumar called on them [them being the sg public] not to overlook the other good work done by the agencies.'

Yeah. Other good work. Like the Huang Na killer escaping. Or the fine responses our Sg police never fail to give our fave opposition politician.

'After the attack, the IRA claimed responsibility for the attacks and issued a warning saying they only had to be lucky once whereas security agencies had to be lucky all of the time.

Recalling that incident, Professor Jayakumar who is also Co-ordinating Minister for National Security said that is something security agencies have to always bear in mind.'

It must've been Mas Selamat's lucky day. Very lucky day.

'While Professor Jayakumar had no conclusions yet from the inquiries taking place, he commended the thousands of officers involved in the efforts to locate the fugitive.'

Like noone commends me when I home visit my clients in their dank and dark quarters, talk to them, befriend them and offer them slight slight solace. Oh right. Cuz that's my job.

'He added that he was heartened by Singaporeans' efforts in coming together for the search.'

This weekend I'm organizing a Search Party for Mas Selamat. $25/person. First drink free. Email for details.

'Laurie Garrett, Senior Fellow for Global Health, Council on Foreign Relations, said: "There is no government on earth that will have enough money, enough personnel, enough organisational capacity to take care of everybody. It will literally come down to "Do you know your neighbours? Do you know who's needy? Are you there to help them? Do you know how to take care of your family?” And then when the dust is settled, we will see what's left of government."'

Noone is expecting the government to take care of everybody [i personally know my clients aren't at least]. We just expect them to take care of that one person in their prison.

Maybe the ISD should consider outsourcing. I hear the KKK is looking for employment. At least they don't let their targets go.

general flaming for the week

I don't generally comment on political/media stuff [yeah, right] because people generally only comment when things get really stupid [looking at you PAP] and I don't feel like posting 10 times a day. Besides my lecturer always says 'flame the argument, not the person' but you know how it is with me and fire; always out of hand.

Apparently, NUS magazine Ridge covers some silly political forum in their online portal about 2 months ago. At this point, we should all have already moved on and focus on bigger issues like blaming ourselves for Mas Selamat's escape and if there's leftover time, maybe fighting global warming. Apparently dengue this year is gonna be meaner so we should also be doing something about it since LKY says we shouldn't trust the government to get things done.

But no. Cuz 2 months later, SDP accuses the Ridge of censorship because apparently one of the Ridge's reporter had requested an interview with Chee Soon Juan, but the transcript of that interview was not published at all so that must be censorship because everyone else does it in Singapore. So maybe now we could all get a good laugh and move on since actually the interview was just to get a better understanding of the silly political forum which was what the article was about.

The Ridge replies recently and says so too. Mostly it was a good reply other than the very lack of expletives and vulgarities.

Of course the SDP must have the last say [as of now] and the plot thickens: the Ridge reporter who had asked for the interview promised it would be published, only for his editor to not want to use it. I particularly liked the reporter's email apology that the SDP produced saying that he was sorry to '...Mr Chee for having spent some of his personal time for an unpublished interview'. I'm sure Mr Chee has lots of personal time actually, when he is not behind bars.

Ok. Editors are always gonna have a final say in what appears and what doesn't, and when something doesn't appear, it doesn't necessarily mean censorship. I can think of so many reasons for an editor not to want to use an article, in this case, Chee's interview: the reporter did extra work, no more space le, not newsworthy, not auspicious etc etc. In this case, I think it was a matter of taste [has anyone read the interview? i can't believe the dude is a phd].

And like. Chee is so last century opposition? Now everyone is talking about JBJ lor.

-

And here's the bit my flames get really out of hand: this really is like a playground squabble: the bigger kid from the broken home with all his issues picking on the tiny tot happily minding his own business in the sand pit. Like all broken kids, they do their best work only in the playground.

singaporeans say the darnest things

If there is an award for figuring Life out, Singaporeans so deserve it.

-

So I was buying some shoes yesterday when this auntie came up to the nice salesperson and asked for US Size 3 shoes for her son because he was 3 years old.

Please lor. Americans are bigger than Asians; how can US size 3 be for 3 years old?

-

Amongst all the condolences for the 5 unfortunate dragonboaters, a friend came across this guy calling the dragonboaters typical Singaporeans: arrogant bastards who they we are Gods especially when we go overseas.

I am pissed. There is actually someone more offensive than I am.



According to Frederick from Singapore who writes in the condolences book for the millions the Khmer Rouge slaughtered, Cambodia is the abode of Satan, or at least his summer getaway.

I think so too.


How else are these children able to stay afloat in wash-basins in the river that killed 5 able-bodied swimmers in nothing more than a wash basin? This must be the work of the Devil.

Also, the Tonle Sap, the river the dragonboaters died in is the only river in the world that reverses its flow on a regularly basis. Paganic.

-

Moral: If you think you are God, don't go to the Devil's country.

I should get an award for this.

blerdy hell redux

"We regret to inform you that we are unable to assist Mr XXX in our meal delivery service.

According to our records, Mr XXX's wife was our client, and the food that the household was previously receiving was stopped upon her unfortunate passing in the June of 2007. The social worker then had also assessed Mr XXX of being in good health.

Upon receipt of your letter, we have extended our service to Mr XXX. I made three attempts to locate Mr XXX at his residence in order to re-assess his condition: on the 21st Nov Wedenesday in the afternoon, and subsequently on the mornings of Thursday and Friday. They were in vain. In addition, during the visit on Wednesday at 3 pm, I found the lunch we delivered still hanging upon his door [the picture is included].

As such, we are unable to assess Mr XXX and ascertain his eligiblity for Home Help Services.

As stipulated by the Home Help service model by the National Council of Social Services, Home Help service is extended only to home-bound in-ambulant elderly having difficulties with the activities of daily living [ADL-dependency]. Many elderly request for Home Help services because it supplements their meagre income but we need to draw such lines because we have limited resources.

We ask for your understanding and look forward to further co-operation with yourself and the Tanjong Pagar GRC."

-

I hate myself.

blerdy hell

I'm drafting a letter to turn down one of Indranne's referral for one of her resident. This is the version that won't ever make it to the final letter of course, but it needs to see the light of day:

"To Indranee Thurai Rajah, MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC, or whoever wrote the letter for you:

We regret to inform you that we are unable to assist Mr XXX in our meal delivery service.

Mr XXX's wife was our client, so the food delivery was stopped upon her unfortunate passing in the June of 2007.

We have extended our service to Mr XXX upon receipt of your letter out of goodwill. I made three attempts to locate Mr XXX at his residence: on Wednesday 21st Nov afternoon and Thursday and Friday morning. In addition, on one visit, the Wednesday one at 3 pm, the lunch we delivered to Mr XXX was hanging upon his door [a picture is included in Appendix 2].



As we are unable to assess Mr XXX and ascertain his eligibility for our service, we are unable to assist him.

As stipulated by the Home Help service model by the National Council of Social Services [the relevant pages are attached in Appendix 1], eligible clientele for Home Help extends only to home-bound in-ambulant elderly with difficulties in the activities of daily living. This precludes elderly folks who require our services to cut costs."

-

But I am still pissed.

I realized it doesn't matter what I write. Blerdy Indranee probably doesn't care about the outcome of the referral because MPs can't ever say no to their residents. It doesn't matter whether Mr XXX gets the service or not because blerdy Indranee still wins. She wins because she agreed to write the referral for Mr XXX so she looks good in his eyes. If we help the client, blerdy Indranee gets the credit in his eyes because she wrote the referral for him. Now I am turning him down. And the client will say: It's not blerdy Indranee who's turning him down.

Blerdy hell.

There is something disturbingly wrong with this country.

the sg police: the vigilant force

Videos of Chee Siok Chin and John Tan trying to walk towards Shangri-La recently. Basically the video goes something like this:

- CSC and JT wants to walk to Shangri-La.

- The police 'advises them to leave' because it is a protected area or they will be removed.

- CSC asks for a reason. She is just going to Shangri-La for a meal.

- Police says because the area is protected.

- CSC asks why is no-one else stopped.

- The police 'advises them to leave' because it is a protected area or they will be removed.

- CSC asks for a reason. She is just going to Shangri-La for a meal.

Seriously all CSC wants is a reason. Give her lor. Tell her that with all the lawsuits the PAP have and will slap on her, she's bankrupt liao or will be bankrupt liao so she obviously can't and shouldn't be eating at Shangri-La. Every cent counts.


Part 1


Part 2


Other interesting things:

• John Tan is my stats lecturer. He taught me all I knew about statistics and I would not be half the empiricist I was without him. He taught me that He taught me to see through all the lies that evil people in the country tell by abusing stats.

• 'You are advised to leave the area or you will be removed'. Apparently, 'advised' means different things to the police from Uncle Oxford. 'Removed' has a nice sound to it though: nicely threatening and sounds like a vaporizer will be involved.

• 'You are advised to leave the area or you will be removed'. Somehow it sounds better with an American accent. Or at least an accent which doesn't sound like you're really married to Chinese and English is the distant relative in the family you don't want to acknowledge because he's done some shameful things. The same applies to raising your voice.

• Police can't touch you if you haven't done anything wrong. But they do anyways.

• The higher you go, the smaller your balls. Must be the increased air pressure.

• CSC's HQ is in Sengkang. The food there is definitely alot cheaper than Shangri-La's. My HQ is in Woodlands. The food sucks here.

in defense of the selfish singaporean

Last week-ish, there was a letter in the ST forum. The writer's grandmother kanna attacked by their schizophrenic neighbour at a very public bus stop and noone helped at all. There were so many sensible things the writer could have lamented about. Probably her grandmother did or had something that triggered off something in their neighbour so she could have talked about the greater need for sensitivity towards mentally sick people. Maybe said neighbour didn't take his medication before leaving home; she could have talked about the challenges of caring for the mentally inept and caregiver's burdens. Or perhaps the neighbour's relapse was caused by the hot weather; she could highlight the challenges faced in combating global warming. Yet, the writer choose to accuse all the people at the bus stop, and by association, all Singaporeans, as apathetic.

In today's ST forum, a Adam Chen Zijian writes:

"I REFER to the letter, 'No one helped when old woman was attacked' (ST, Nov 5) by Ms June Koh Poh Kwan.
It is indeed sad and unfortunate to hear that not a single person bothered to help Mdm Tan when her attacker, a young man suffering from schizophrenia, verbally and physically attacked her.

It is common knowledge that the majority of Singaporeans would just stare and keep a distance whenever such situations arise.

Like all Singaporeans, we do not want trouble and, thus, our selfish nature.

This bad habit of ours is definitely one of the traits that make up the 'Ugly Singaporean'.

True, Singapore always gets praised in the international media for being clean and green, for being a safe country, for having the best airport but, when it comes to basic moral values and ethics, Singaporeans really fare badly.

We really should learn from the rest of the world, such as our American and Australian counterparts because chances are if the same scenario happened in either America or Australia, members of the public would get involved and promptly seize the attacker, before handing him over to the police.

Compare that to what happened to Mdm Tan, and you will know that Singaporeans are lagging very far behind and have a lot of catching up to do.

So, being clean and green, having the best airport, honestly, they all count for nothing if we continue to be so selfish and self-centred.

It is only when we learn to be more selfless and self-sacrificing that we can truly consider ourselves to be gracious citizens."

Generally, the stupidity in the ST forum is quite high, but Adam Chen Zijian brings it to PAP politician levels. Personally I like people who are called Adam, and this one shares my surname as well as having a nice Chinese name. Apparently such triply ideal naming goodness can only result in stupidity.

In his letter, Adam's only claim that Singaporeans are selfish is backed only by the previous letter and the 'common knowledge that the majority of Singaporeans would just stare..'. Where is the freakin falsifiability?

-

In America, the country which Adam lauds for her unselfish people, a Kitty Genovese was stabbed to death infront of 30 over people over a half hour period, where the attacker left and came back to continue stabbing her. No one lifted a finger. In another case, a woman was unaware she had been stabbed in the back and continued doing her normal marketing. She only realized she had been stabbed after she got home and her daughter pointed out there was a knife protruding from behind her.

As has been researched to death (Berkowitz, Latane & Darley, Bryan & Walbek, Bryan & Test, Grusec, Bastardi & Shafir etc), having other people around makes people alot less likely to help. People generally don't help around strangers cuz they don't wanna pai-seh.They don't generally help aroound strangers cuz they are afraid that the event might not be an emergency, and since noone else is helping, then it probably isn't an emergency. In other words, as clear as being stabbed to the victim might seem, the event is not so clear-cut to us by-standers.

When I was in HK, we came across a crowd.

Odie wastes no time in mingling within the crowd, and chatting up the early birds to find out what is going on. She tells me that this behaviour is not an Odie-thing, and based on observation with this crowd, I concur with her. It seems in HK, it is the culture for by-standers in a crowd to actually communicate with each which generally eliminates the ambiguity of the situation, or eliminates the possibility one will look like a fool for helping because everyone else is also doing so.

-

I think the most famous account of America's lack of unselfishness is how Americans, common and professionals alike, risk their lives during the September 11 attacks. I also think that there is nothing ambiguous about buildings collapsing and in flames, or planes being hijacked for suicide runs.

So it's really abit too far, and most unscientific and therefore really stupid, to call Singaporeans selfish and apathetic. Singaporeans are not selfish or apathetic. I think they just have a very generous leeway for what constitutes an emergency, a leeway which is not helped by the general tendency of Singaporeans to keep to themselves I suppose.

A man and woman fighting, never mind how much blood is flowing, is construed as a domestic struggle and therefore private business, albeit in a very public place.

A kid writhing about on the ground, and foaming at the mouth, is simply the playfulness of youth.

An adult savagely abusing a child is nothing more than discipline. Afterall, growing up, who hasn't been caned?

A knife sticking out of someone's back. A bad radio commercial?

As silly as it sounds, but the research shows it. If you want help, just ask for it. CLEARLY. In 4 different languages and 2 different dialects to be sure.