May 20, 2010

Title:    WORKGROUP TO SEEK VIEWS OF THE PUBLIC ON AMENDMENTS TO MAINTENANCE OF PARENTS ACT
Source:    Press Release (May 30, 2010)

The Workgroup on Maintenance of Parents (Amendment) Bill led by Mr Seah Kian Peng, MP for Marine Parade GRC will hold a public consultation exercise in May and June 2010 to gather views of the public on what aspects they would like to see amended in the Maintenance of Parents Act (MPA).

With the support of REACH, the consultations will involve 7 focus groups comprising members of the public and key stakeholders including nursing homes, self help groups, voluntary welfare organizations, family service centres and community development councils. The sessions with the public will be conducted separately in English, Mandarin, Malay and Tamil to allow maximum participation.

Members of the public who are unable to participate in the focus groups can share their views through a dedicated website, www.mpa.sg. They can also participate in the discussion thread via the REACH platform at www.reach.gov.sg.

Mr Seah, chair of the workgroup, reiterated that “Family ties are an important part of Singapore society. It has been the bastion of our social policies. The way we organize our pension and welfare schemes is unique in the world because we know that we can count on members of the family, and of the larger community to care for one another. We need to continue to raise the awareness and reinforce these values in our children, in our society. Yet times are changing, and we need to adjust to new realities. Reviewing and improving on existing regulation is one way that this adjustment can be made. Without widespread consultation, we will not know the empirical realities on the ground. We also deny ourselves the opportunity to hear the many good ideas for coping with new realities. Our workgroup strongly believes in the value and need for a public consultation exercise. I urge everyone with a good idea, or a good case in point, to come forward and share.”

Mr Viswa Sadasivan (NMP) added that "Dealing with the parent-child space is always delicate - legislation must facilitate decisive action while ensuring fairness (to all parties) is not compromised in the process. This is why it's imperative that we hear the concerns and views of the public."


Why the need to amend the Act

Concerned about the rising number of parents filing maintenance applications in recent years (199 cases in 2009 compared to 127 in 2008 and 109 in 2007), Mr Seah said that it is timely to review how the Act can be improved upon to meet the needs of elderly parents.

A fair and equitable law for parents and children

Mr Seah stressed that the Act is not a law to legislate filial piety. Neither is it a legal mechanism for undeserving parents to claim maintenance from their children. Parents who have abandoned, abused or neglected their children should not expect the law to provide for their maintenance as a legal entitlement. Family history, as well as the financial needs and circumstances of the parent and child are important factors that the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents considers when deciding what is fair and equitable. Said Madam Halimah Yacob (MP for Jurong GRC) – “Legislation by itself will not be able to completely tackle the problem of children who neglect their parents. This is something that must come from our own sense of responsibility and love for our parents but a more effective law can try to ensure that neglected parents receive the minimum financial support to meet their basic needs."

Instead, the MPA supports the principle that family remains the first line of support. It encourages amicable settlements within the family. Stressing that legal action should be a last resort, Ms Ellen Lee Geck Hoon (Sembawang GRC) said that "Families are important to everyone of us, whether original or extended. We cannot choose our parents, just as our parents cannot choose us. If we are destined to be in a parent-child relationship, then we should play our role and honour our obligations. Parents and children alike are not perfect but we can, if we so desire, try to make good the imperfection and with the aid of the MPA as a last resort against the recalcitrant minority."

For the small minority of vulnerable elderly, the Act is a safety net to provide a legal avenue for them to seek maintenance from children who are financially able to but neglect their responsibility of caring for their parents. Mr Sam Tan (MP for Tanjong Pagar GRC) said that ‘’There are no perfect relations in all the families and there are no perfect solutions to all their problems. For needy parents who fall through the cracks due to the neglect of their children, the MPA may well be their final hope and last resort. This is why we need to work together to ensure that our parents are taken care of by our hearts and not by our laws.’’

The workgroup also shared cases to illustrate how the MPA has been put into practice.


Case summaries

Case 1 – To illustrate principle of reciprocity of care

1. The Applicant was a 63 year old father who filed for $500 maintenance a month against his 2 children (the Respondents). He divorced the Respondents’ mother and stopped providing maintenance to the family when the 2nd Respondent was 15 years old. At the time of application, he was unemployed, living with his female friend in a one-room HDB rented flat. He claimed that he was a stroke patient and needed treatment at polyclinic.

2. The Tribunal received written statements from the Respondents, describing the Applicant as an irresponsible man who did not provide sufficient household maintenance to the family when the Respondents were very young. The Respondents also claimed that the Applicant’s extra marital affairs had affected them emotionally.

3. Before the Tribunal, the Applicant did not deny: - a. the allegations Respondents made against him; b. the photos the Respondents showed of the Applicant with foreign

women; and c. entries in his passport evidencing his frequent trips to Batam.

4. Section 5(3) of the Maintenance of Parents Act provides that if the Tribunal is satisfied upon due proof that the applicant abandoned, abused or neglected the respondent, it may dismiss the application or reduce the quantum of maintenance ordered by such amount as may be just.

5 In this case, the Tribunal was satisfied that this was a case where even a reduced sum of maintenance should not be ordered. The Applicant’s case was dismissed.


Case 2 – To illustrate maintenance application filed by an approved organisation

1 Mdm A, aged 76, was a resident of a private nursing home. Her husband before leaving to China left a lump sum to his friend for the payment of Mdm A’s fees at the nursing home. The amount had been exhausted and the nursing home fees were in arrears. Her elder child when contacted by the Welfare Officer, agreed to pay half of Mdm A’s nursing home bill but the younger child failed to respond to the Welfare Officer’s calls to discuss the maintenance issue.

2 Section 3(2) of the Maintenance of Parents Act provides that an approved person or organization in whose care a parent resides may apply to the Tribunal for an order that one or more of his children pay the approved person or organization a monthly allowance or any other periodical payment or a lump sum for the purpose of defraying the costs and expenses of maintaining the parent. The nursing home thus applied to the Minister for approval as an approved organization to claim for the nursing home fees against her younger child. Upon written approval granted by the Minister, the nursing home proceeded to file for maintenance of $800 against Mdm A’s younger child as Respondent. The Respondent failed to respond to the Notices served on him to appear for the mediation as well as the Tribunal hearing.

3 The Tribunal was satisfied that the Notices were effectively served on the Respondent by registered mail to his last known NRIC address in accordance to Section 14(5) of the Maintenance of Parents Act. The Tribunal thus ordered the Respondent to pay $700 per month to the Approved Organisation in the absence of the Respondent.


Case 3 - To illustrate how mediation brought about a settlement

1 The elderly parent, aged 64, was a retired businessman. He had 3 children. After his divorce in 2002, he sold his flat and gave $80K as maintenance to his ex-wife. As he could not buy or rent a flat from HDB because of HDB regulations, he rented a room in a terrace house for $300 per month. He also received $490 per month from his CPF retirement fund. He claimed that only his youngest son gave him a monthly maintenance of $300 and wanted maintenance of $500 each from his other 2 children.

2 CMP’s Office managed to contact the youngest son in an attempt to reconcile the issue. The youngest son clarified that the $300 monthly maintenance was in fact jointly contributed by his 2 siblings and him. They were willing to increase the amount to $500 per month. But the father refused to accept the amount of $500 as he found it insufficient. He rationalized that he had spent a lot of money on their education and added that his children were high income earners and could afford to give him more.

3 The children however countered that he had made limited contributions to the family. They also alleged him to be a gambler who could have gambled away his inheritance of about $400K from their paternal grandfather. Nevertheless, the 3 children were willing to increase the amount to $600, and subsequently to $900. The father responded that he had the right to spend his inheritance in any way he wanted. He insisted that $900 was too little and refused to accept an amount different from what he demanded ($1,300). He proceeded to file his claim at the Tribunal.

4 A mediation session was arranged before the hearing by the Tribunal. Through mediation, a settlement was reached whereby the 3 children agreed to pay $1,200 to the father who also agreed to accept the amount.


Case 4 – To illustrate just and equitable maintenance order

1 Mdm B was an elderly mother who stayed with and had been taken care of by her eldest son. The eldest son made an application at the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents on Mdm B’s behalf, against his 3 other younger siblings. Mdm B requested for a maintenance amount of $1,500 from her children. The maintenance would assist Mdm B – who had been diagnosed with kidney failure, heart problems and hypertension, and was wheelchair-bound – with her medical expenses.

2 Mdm B and her children went through mediation at the premises of the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents but were unable to reach resolution. They then proceeded to hearing by the Tribunal. The three siblings had low incomes, earning less than $1,500 per month each, and had families to support. The eldest son, too, had a family to support.

3 By Section 5(2) of the Maintenance of Parents Act, the Tribunal for the Maintenance of Parents shall have regard to all circumstances of the case, including the financial resources of the respondents and their expenses incurred in supporting their spouse or children. The Tribunal thus ordered each of the three Respondents to pay $75 per month to Mdm B. The eldest son also agreed to provide Mdm B with lodging. The Tribunal also referred Mdm B to a medical social worker for further assistance.



.