Wednesday, July 31, 2024

History, money and military: why the South China Sea is so important to ...

US admits it's trying to hobble China

【最新EP244】“中国热”让西方的反华宣传彻底破!对54国公民施行免签政策吸引了大量海外游客,听#张维为 分析何为“中国热”和“中国模式热”?...

What’s success? And what is it that gives meaning to our lives?

这才是人间清醒!老了该扔的旧物就自己扔掉,给子女留点财产就行


这才是人间清醒!老了该扔的旧物就自己扔掉,给子女留点财产就行

作者:努力的向阳花
关注
2024.7.11

我看到一个视频,心里特别不是滋味,自己也进行了一下反思,觉得老了就应该这样去做。

这才是人间清醒!老了该扔的旧物就自己扔掉,给子女留点财产就行

视频里,一位70多岁的老人,经常自己一个人生活,老人不想麻烦自己唯一的儿子,所以即使自己有点不舒服也选择扛着,后来实在是扛不住了,就让儿子带着去了医院,结果再也没回成家,没几天人就走了。

最让人心灵震撼的是,老人多年来积攒下来的心爱之物,多被儿子该卖的卖掉了,该扔的扔掉了。什么旧的家具,电器,做饭的工具,还有老人在的时候的衣物都扔了,老人当时珍藏下来的老物件和有纪念价值的照片,也都被收垃圾的拉走了。

孩子最后只留下了一些积蓄,首饰还有这个空空如也的房子。

这才是人间清醒!老了该扔的旧物就自己扔掉,给子女留点财产就行

有的人会说老人的儿子怎么就不留点念想,把所有的东西都扔了卖了。可是,人走了确实就像蜡烛熄灭了一样,生前这些念想对于子女来说,真的没有什么价值了。

现实生活中,我们有不少老人,喜欢捡废品,捡旧物。比如别人丢弃在垃圾桶里的玩具,破损的小家具,旧衣物,他们都觉得这都是很好的东西,怎么扔掉呢?太可惜了,捡回家,重新修理一下,还是可以使用的。

还有的老人,念旧,甚至四五十年前刚结婚那会的被子床单都保存完整,即便搬了几次家,甚至90年代的电视,电扇都要保存着。

我们可以理解他们的心情,这些东西要放在当时那个年代,都是花很多钱买的,而且质量也特别好。

这才是人间清醒!老了该扔的旧物就自己扔掉,给子女留点财产就行

但是,我们老了,还是得学会断,舍,离,否则将来这些东西对于咱们的孩子没有任何价值,他们也会扔掉。

我们把屋子的旧物清理了,剩下更多的活动空间,简简单单,这样生活不是更舒畅吗?

您说是不是呢?

热门评论
头像
7496阿莲
点赞73
不要等那么老了才开始扔,我今年50已经在开始扔了
3回复1周前
头像
皓哥嘎嘎
点赞7
越简单越好,
1回复1天前
云淡风轻142887409
点赞55
是的,我也在断舍离中,不买了,消耗完现有的东西,尽量简单生活,省的孩子以后收拾起来麻烦
7回复1周前
查看更多评论
相关推荐
关注
 全文
分享
181
413
收藏
关注
 全文
分享
2
42
收藏
关注
 全文
分享
88
670
收藏
评论
212
收藏
点赞
分享
评论 0
0 点赞0 转发
暂无评论

What’s success? And what is it that gives meaning to our lives?

What’s success? And what is it that gives meaning to our lives?

 https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/what-s-success-and-what-is-it-that-gives-meaning-to-our-lives?utm_campaign=STPicks&utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=addtoany

2024-07-31

By -- Tan Seow Hon is an associate professor at the Yong Pung How School of Law at Singapore Management University specialising in philosophy of law. She is currently working on a project on success and flourishing.

=======


For Subscribers

What’s success? And what is it that gives meaning to our lives?

Chasing material indicators of success can stop us from flourishing in the truest sense of the word.

Tan Seow Hon

A reset is necessary when we have moved past the inflexion point in our society where we are content with materialistically chasing the 5Cs, says the writer. ST PHOTO: KELVIN CHNG
Updated
 
Jul 31, 2024, 05:00 AM
Published
 
Jul 31, 2024, 05:00 AM

At a recent forum at the Singapore Management University, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong urged youth in Singapore to find meaning and purpose in what they do, and thrive and flourish in their own ways.

Before this, in the Motion on Advancing Mental Health in Parliament in February, the mental wellness of youth came under the spotlight. The Government recognised the need to change the narrow mindset of success. While hard work and excellence are good, Singaporeans “should not be unwittingly drawn into a rat race of hyper-competition and endless comparisons with one another, just to get ahead of others”, said Mr Wong, who was then Deputy Prime Minister.

Similar points were emphasised in the country’s vision for the future in the Forward Singapore Report 2023.

A reset is necessary when we have moved past the inflexion point in our society where we are content with materialistically chasing the 5Cs (condominium, cash, credit card, car and country club). Or, some might cynically jibe that some of these are unattainable to many in the next generation. Our materialism remains evident when we think in terms of the net worth of the successful.

But surely we all want to live examined lives – an almost trite idea attributed to Socrates.

The capacity to think about what confers meaning and purpose on the projects we undertake and decide what values we hold dear, and will spend the finite number of years of our lives on, distinguishes humans from animals.

It does not take the philosopher in me to recognise that my two adorable poodles, exceedingly smart in my view, do not spend their days grappling with metaphysical questions. Indeed, research suggests that “man’s best friend” is quite likely to be unaware of its very existence.

By chasing a narrow definition of success, however, many humans also risk going through life without asking these fundamental questions. The answers should guide our undertakings.

Chasing success

Chasing success is problematic because the markers of success are shaped by external forces. What causes an economy to boom and what “others” value tend to feature excessively in this calculus. We go unthinkingly with the flow when we could have found meaning in something else, if we had asked ourselves what we really want.

PM Wong encouraged all to thrive and flourish. But chasing success tends to diminish our capacities and desires to pursue what Aristotle calls eudaemonia, which can be translated as “living well” or “flourishing”.

Many interdisciplinary research centres have popped up all over the world to examine what constitutes flourishing, with a view to advancing the well-being of human beings, helping us to actualise our potential and live optimally.

The Human Flourishing Programme at Harvard’s Institute for Quantitative Social Science arrived at measures for human flourishing revolving around five areas: happiness and life satisfaction, physical and mental health, meaning and purpose, character and virtue, and close social relationships.

Emeritus Professor John Finnis at the University of Oxford posits that there are basic goods of human flourishing: life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience, sociability or friendship, practical reasonableness, and religion. Our actions make sense if we pursue these goods.

The national narrative

Human flourishing has not quite featured in our national narrative. Instead, our drive in the years of nation-building has been on how to stay ahead in the game given our lack of a hinterland, our geopolitics, and our dependence on outside sources for necessities such as food and water.

National pride has been built around how our airport, our container port, our national airline, the maths literacy of our schoolchildren, and our gardens have fared in world rankings.

Meritocracy is ingrained and not a bad thing: Rewarding the best and the brightest is better than nepotism. I, as with many in my generation from humble backgrounds such as PM Wong himself, was the beneficiary of meritocracy. I was the first graduate on the paternal side of my family – and made it all the way to doctoral level at Harvard Law School on scholarships.

However, the significance accorded to one’s performance in narrow terms, although serving the nation and blessing some of us with such aptitudes, can exact a price from a people who begin to hanker after the limited indicators of success. We think primarily efficiently and pragmatically.

Many Singaporeans are compassionate. But there is also a problematic drive to perform. Recognising this helps us to forge a more complete way of living and contribute to the national narrative to reshape our ethos. It requires a hard look at ourselves.

The pragmatic drive to be efficient and succeed is diametrically opposed to living an examined life in pursuit of human flourishing. Its prize tends to be materialistic acquisition rather than character building in virtues or moral growth that enables one to live wisely in accordance with reason.

Even the basic goods of human flourishing tend to be pursued instrumentally if we serve the hard master of success.

Let’s not diminish what matters

Play and aesthetic experience may be pursued, but instrumentally. Rest, recreation and inspiration enhance productivity. But we fail to reap the full benefits of the goods if we view them merely instrumentally.

Sociability or friendship may be sought as useful networks. Yet in treating people as means to our ends, we view them in terms of utility, and diminish them, acting contrary to the good of friendship.

As for the good of religion, which Prof Finnis defines as addressing higher order metaphysical questions such as the meaning of life, we are not known to be a philosophical people. Yet answering such questions enables us to realise what we truly value.

Knowledge is not viewed as enriching for its own sake, as seen in our preference for education on Stem (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects over the humanities.

Practical reasonableness is the good of being able to apply our intelligence practically to make ethical decisions, but utilitarian, pragmatic thinking can push us in a different direction.

Living an examined life in pursuit of flourishing, with the goods actualised in our individual lives differently according to our talents and inclinations, is partially a good antidote to the pressure of narrow ideas of success. But it requires a national reset. We must give serious thought to what constitutes human flourishing without dismissing it as an airy-fairy philosophical question.

  • Tan Seow Hon is an associate professor at the Yong Pung How School of Law at Singapore Management University specialising in philosophy of law. She is currently working on a project on success and flourishing.

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.




Tuesday, July 30, 2024

How to break the health insurance ‘vicious circle’ 2024-07-30

For subscribers 

How to break the health insurance ‘vicious circle’

 https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/how-to-break-the-health-insurance-vicious-circle?utm_campaign=STPicks&utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=addtoany

2024-07-30

Chua Mui Hoong
Senior Columnist
The Straits Times

When everyone is pedalling harder and harder to keep going, but no one is happy, you have to pause to ask yourself: Just what is wrong and what can break the cycle?

In essence, this was the message of Health Minister Ong Ye Kung, when he said health insurance was in a “vicious circle”.

Insurers are coming up with “overly generous” policies that pay the full hospital bill. 

Patients pay high premiums for this coverage. Some doctors order unnecessary tests and treatments that result in bigger bills and higher claims, fuelling a spiral of rising premiums that raises healthcare costs across the board. 

His diagnosis: “The Government is not happy, insurers are not making money, the patients and policyholders are facing increasing premiums. And yet, we are still doing this over and over again. It doesn’t do good to anyone.

“We are chasing after our own tail, and everyone is just getting worse off eventually,” he said bluntly.

What is being done

The Ministry of Health (MOH) is going about it methodically. 

Today, Singaporeans are covered by MediShield Life (MSL), with claims limits pegged to the costs of subsidised C and B2 wards in public hospitals. This isn’t enough for those who want private care, so two in three Singapore residents have an additional private insurance Integrated Shield Plan (IP) that pays out higher amounts to cover treatment in private wards. Some also add a “rider” that covers the co-payment or cash amounts that patients need to pay.

Given that so many people are buying private insurance cover, it is clear that many people view MSL coverage as not enough. Hence, one of MOH’s priorities is to expand MediShield Life coverage and increase its limits. 

It will also work with the three key groups of stakeholders – insurers, doctors, patients – to curb costs. Get insurers to go for more sustainable offerings, rather than offer high-priced policies promising total coverage that will just ratchet up claims. Go after doctors who make “egregious and inappropriate” claims to clamp down on overtreatment and overcharging. Get patients to feel more assured that existing health insurance is good enough, and they don’t need multiple layers of insurance, often duplicated.

We also need to ask the “why” questions. 

Why are so many Singaporeans over-insuring when it comes to their healthcare costs? Why are insurers increasing coverage when many have been losing money? And why are some doctors overcharging?

The situation today is one where no one is happy, as Mr Ong summed up pithily. 

One of MOH’s priorities is to review the current health insurance schemes, said Mr Ong, “to ensure that they are adequate in protecting Singaporeans against catastrophic health events, but at the same time to not feed this buffet syndrome too much and drive up healthcare costs unsustainably”.

Why we overinsure

So why do many Singaporeans fork out hundreds of dollars a year to buy private insurance they don’t use? About seven in 10 Singaporeans are covered by IPs. Yet, when they need hospitalisation, many choose not to max out their insurance benefits. Half of patients with IP-plus-rider protection still use subsidised public healthcare when hospitalised or receiving day surgery. In other words, many are paying for insurance they don’t need.

I think the instinct to over-protect themselves stems from Singaporeans’ experience of healthcare costs. MediShield, the precursor to the current MSL, was introduced only in 1990. Prior to that, Singaporeans had to rely on themselves, their cash and MediSave account to pay for healthcare. Lucky ones with good jobs could tap their employer’s medical benefits. Many of us thus grew up feeling insecure about medical bills, as huge bills could bankrupt an individual or a family. The sardonic saying that one can afford to die but not to be sick reflected the anxiety around medical costs back then.

So when health insurance came along with the introduction of MediShield, many people took up the highest coverage they could afford, just in case they needed it. They took up IPs. But an IP has limits and co-payments, so you have to pay cash for the rest. Add a “rider” that takes care of this. Never mind if you don’t need to use it for the next 20 years. The coverage is there, just in case, for peace of mind.

The trouble, as Mr Ong said, is that absolute peace of mind is very costly, but Singaporeans may not be aware of it.

Another odd behaviour is that many Singaporeans buy expensive private insurance when they are young, when they don’t need it. And those who already have company benefits may cough up money to add another layer of private insurance. Why?

While it sounds odd, such behaviour is easy to understand when you realise that insurers can deny coverage for existing medical conditions. Hence, smart Singaporeans don’t wait till middle age, when they are more likely to have medical conditions, to buy cover. They buy cover when they are young, and hold on to their private insurance as they age. Once they sign up with one insurer, they also find it practically impossible to switch, and are stuck with the same insurer.  

Fixing the problem

What would make Singaporeans avoid these behaviours of hoarding insurance?

In my view, MOH should be bold and make three key changes.

1. Get MediShield Life to cover B1 wards

To address concerns that MSL is inadequate, MOH should expand MediShield Life coverage and raise its claims limits. For example, it should include coverage up to the B1 level. When MediShield was introduced in 1990, claims limits were pegged to treatment costs for Class C and B2 subsidised wards. These wards are not air-conditioned. Today, many Singaporeans work, sleep and take public transport in air-conditioned comfort. It should not be considered extravagant for the national insurance scheme to permit Singaporeans to recover from illness in an air-conditioned room in hospital, rather than sweat it out in the hot, humid climate. This can be done by raising MSL coverage to include B1 wards, which are multi-bedded wards in an air-conditioned setting.

Today, MSL coverage stops at class C and B2 wards. Those who want B1 coverage can buy a standard B1 plan offered by private insurance. Like other private plans, these plans do not offer policyholders as much security as MediShield Life, as applicants can be rejected on medical grounds and the plans are not portable. To prevent such cherry-picking by insurers and increase Singaporeans’ sense of health security, it is better if B1 coverage is brought under the MSL umbrella. Singaporeans can be offered a choice: Pay standard MSL premiums for MSL coverage for Class C and B2, or pay higher premiums for Class B1 under MSL. 

2. Make health insurance policies portable

Next, MOH should address Singaporeans’ fear of losing health cover as they age or when they want to change insurer. This can be done by making health insurance policies that are pegged to MediShield Life portable, so you can switch between insurers.

To protect insurers, a waiting period can be imposed for new cover. This is the practice in Australia, where private insurance sits on top of the state-funded Medicare system. When you switch insurers, you typically wait 12 months before your existing condition can be covered. This deters patients from opportunistic shopping for the best coverage after a serious diagnosis, while allowing them a greater choice of insurer.

Making health insurance portable is highly complex, but other jurisdictions already offer this. There are some common workarounds to ensure all insurers compete on a level playing field, such as having a centralised database of claims and exclusions. Insurance should be based on community rating (risk pool across a big group of people), not individual rating (where you turn down an individual because of his medical history). A risk equalisation mechanism could smoothen the impact of very large claims on insurers, by pooling these separately and then sharing the burden and spreading the costs across the whole sector. It should not be beyond the capacity of Singapore’s health regulators to do the necessary to make IPs portable.

Making health insurance portable will rejuvenate the market and empower patients. It could, however, also spur excessive competition, to the detriment once again of all. 

3. Reinstate deductibles and co-payment for all IPs

This is where the third tranche of reforms is needed, to restore sustainability to the market. To rein in over-zealous competition, and make underwriting more predictable and sustainable, MOH should go back to the principles of co-payment in all IPs.

About 20 years ago, insurers started introducing “as-charged” plans that paid for the full hospital bills, doing away with claims limits and co-payments. This is like giving a blank cheque to doctors and patients. Claims went up. Today’s spiralling costs that drive up premiums are a direct result of allowing such policies.

MOH should do away with the blank cheque “as-charged” plans. Instead, subject all IPs to stricter deductibles and co-payment. To be fair, MOH has begun to do so, by requiring policies with riders to include a modest 5 per cent co-payment. 

It should go further. It should require deductibles of at least $1,000 or more, and co-payments of at least 10 per cent. After all, those who are buying the high-priced riders for as-charged plans are the ones best able to afford such out-of-pocket payments. 

Policyholders who have forked out large sums for as-charged plans may cry foul – but it can be pointed out to them that they will benefit from having portable plans and can switch insurers. Insurers may be persuaded to agree to portable plans, if they can reinstate co-payments, and set limits on claims. 

These three reforms can cut out the buffet syndrome and restore Singaporeans’ sense of health security.

It requires bold regulation and strong political will to reform the sector and will need the buy-in of insurers, doctors and the public.

It took the insurance sector some 20 years to slide down the slippery slope of excessive coverage, to the unsustainable “vicious circle”. Singaporeans shouldn’t have to wait that long to get their health insurance back into shape. 

Can CPF LIFE really last you for life?

Can CPF LIFE really last you for life? https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/cpf-life-payout-for-life-retirement?&utm_source=whatsapp&utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=addtoany

2024-07-30


BRANDED CONTENT

Can CPF LIFE really last you for life?

Will you get payouts for as long as you live and is interest earned haram? Here's a lowdown on how the national longevity insurance annuity scheme can benefit you

Click on the speech and thought bubbles in the interactive story below to dispel common myths about CPF LIFE. ILLUSTRATION: SPH MEDIA
Updated
 
Jul 30, 2024, 04:00 AM

Planning for retirement is top of mind among Singaporeans these days. 

With life expectancy on the rise and the cost of living steadily increasing, many are taking on a more proactive approach to planning their finances for retirement.

However, a recent study revealed that eight in 10 Singaporeans are still not on track with their retirement plans. 

While there are many ways to grow your nest egg, longevity insurance annuity schemes like the CPF Lifelong Income For the Elderly (CPF LIFE) can serve as a reliable foundation that provides you with a lifelong stream of payouts throughout your golden years.

Read on to learn how CPF LIFE works and dispel common myths about the scheme.

Click on the speech and thought bubbles below to uncover facts about CPF LIFE.

 

Myth: Planning for retirement is complicated

You’ve worked hard your whole life to save up for your golden years. But how much is enough? And what happens if you live past your projected lifespan and your savings have run dry?

With CPF LIFE, you can age with peace of mind as you will receive monthly payouts from the age of 65 for as long as you live.

You are automatically included in CPF LIFE if you are a Singapore citizen or permanent resident born in 1958 or after, with at least $60,000 in retirement savings when you wish to start your payout. Those who were born before 1958 can opt in to CPF LIFE if they are not older than 80 years old.

As soon as you join CPF LIFE, your premiums will be deducted from your Retirement Account. The interest earned on these premiums will continue to accrue and is factored into your monthly payouts, enabling you to receive higher payouts right from the start. 

A plan that provides payouts for life may sound too good to be true – but in this case, it is true. Lifelong payouts are possible under CPF LIFE because of its risk-pooling mechanism. Just like how healthcare insurance premiums are pooled to protect against unexpected medical costs, interest earned on CPF LIFE premiums are pooled to protect against unexpected longevity. 

With risk-pooling, the unused interest left behind after a member has passed on will go towards the monthly payouts of surviving CPF LIFE members. This enables members to continue receiving payouts, even after their own premium and interest have been used up. 

Every member has a chance of outliving their savings. According to a study by the Department of Statistics Singapore, one in twSingaporeans at age 65 may live beyond 85 years old. The pooled interest allows everyone to enjoy lifelong payouts.

As for the interest earned on your premiums, it will continue to accrue to you while you are alive. 

Myth: CPF interest is ‘haram’

There may be some concerns from the Muslim community that interest paid by CPF Board to members is “haram”. It isn’t. The interest paid from the scheme has been ruled by the Legal (Fatwa) Committee to be not riba – which refers to unjust, exploitative gains made in trade or business – and therefore, not "haram". This is because it is not a gain from a loan, debt, or pawn transaction. Instead, it is a form of gift with no conditions.

Click on the thought bubbles below to uncover facts about CPF LIFE.

 

Myth: CPF LIFE isn’t as good as other products in the market

CPF LIFE is an insurance product that protects individuals against longevity risk, with lifelong payouts as the main feature. Unlike investment products which are meant for wealth growing, insurance annuity products like CPF LIFE help to protect against life’s uncertainties.   

Annuity plans are not new and there are plenty of options in the market. However, CPF LIFE provides one of the highest payout for every dollar committed compared to other lifelong private annuities.

Furthermore, unlike private annuity plans, savings under the CPF LIFE scheme are guaranteed by the Singapore Government, which means they are risk-free. Returns from annuity plans offered by private companies, on the other hand, are subjected to market conditions. 

You may opt out of CPF LIFE with a private annuity that offers the same or a higher lifelong monthly payout, but no members have opted for this in recent years.

Myth: I lose my all CPF savings when I die

As long as you have made a valid CPF nomination, your CPF savings will be distributed to your nominees after you pass away.

For CPF LIFE members, unused CPF LIFE premium – which refers to the remaining premium after deducting all payouts – together with your remaining CPF savings, will be distributed to your nominees as well. This means that you will get back your CPF LIFE premium in full, either through payouts while you are alive or a lump sum distributed to your nominees upon your passing.

If you do not have a valid CPF nomination, your CPF savings will be transferred to the Public Trustee (PT) for distribution in accordance with the relevant intestacy laws. PT could take up to six months to distribute the CPF savings to your loved ones and a statutory fee will be charged.

The interest on your unused CPF LIFE premium that has not been paid to you will continue to be pooled after you pass on. This is key to ensuring that the scheme remains sustainable, and the remaining CPF LIFE members continue to get lifelong monthly payouts. CPF Board does not retain any of the interest earned from the CPF LIFE scheme, unused CPF LIFE premium or your CPF savings.

Click on the thought bubbles below to uncover facts about CPF LIFE.

 

Myth: I lose control of my money once I put it in CPF LIFE

Placing your savings in CPF LIFE does not mean you no longer get a say in how it is managed. Everyone has different lifestyle goals and needs, and CPF LIFE is created with that in mind. You can choose a plan that best supports your retirement lifestyle.

If you prefer to maintain your current lifestyle and would like to have a plan that helps you cope with inflation, the Escalating Plan offers payouts that start lower but increase by 2 per cent yearly, for life. 

If you can adopt a more prudent lifestyle as prices increase, choose the Standard Plan, which offers a steady monthly payout for life. If you plan to reduce your spendings as you age, consider the Basic Plan, which offers payouts that reduce over time. 

Regardless of the plan you choose, you will enjoy lifelong monthly payouts. Any unused CPF LIFE premium will also be distributed to your loved ones, along with your CPF savings. 

The different plans give you flexibility in tailoring your retirement income based on your lifestyle needs. When it comes to growing your life savings, there are ways to leverage the high interest rates and compounding effect as well.

If you have more savings in your Ordinary Account, whether it's from years of hard work or right-sizing to a smaller flat, consider transferring them to your Special or Retirement Account to enjoy the higher interest rates of 4 per cent to 6 per cent per annum. For those with idle cash savings, you may also consider making a top-up to your Retirement Account.

Being a part of the CPF LIFE scheme does not mean you have to stop working in order to receive the monthly payouts. The payouts can begin as early as at 65, but you can also start receiving them later, up to 70, if you plan to continue working after retirement.

Those who chose to take this route will enjoy an additional bonus – for every year you defer your payouts, your payouts will increase by up to 7 per cent. This means that by choosing to receive payouts after 65 and by 70, you might gain up to 35 per cent more than by choosing to receive them at 65.

Planning for retirement doesn’t have to be daunting. Use the CPF Planner to get started today.

Join ST's WhatsApp Channel and get the latest news and must-reads.



Monday, July 29, 2024

We need to act before an IP crisis knocks on our door. 2024-07-29

Westlife - When You Tell Me That You Love Me (Official Video) with Diana...

Integrated Shield Plans (IPs): We need to act before an IP crisis knocks on our door. 2024-07-29


For subscribers 

We need to act before an IP crisis knocks on our door
https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/we-need-to-act-before-an-ip-crisis-knocks-on-our-door

2024-07-29

Insurance companies are barely turning in profits on their health insurance products, said Health Minister Ong Ye Kung on July 12, as he urged the seven companies that offer Integrated Shield Plans (IPs) to take a cold, hard look at their business.

Many might be tempted to point out that insurance companies brought this upon themselves. In the race for customers, their benefits got more and more generous, and premiums soared to pay for them.

But if these private health plans become unsustainable, it could have dire repercussions for healthcare provision and its financing.

This is because IPs are integrated with the mandatory national health insurance MediShield Life to provide coverage for unsubsidised, or private, medical bills. About 2.9 million people, or more than 70 per cent of Singaporeans and permanent residents, depend on IPs for this.

The purchase of IPs was encouraged by the Government to help people pay for private care. Premiums for IPs were paid for with MediSave, the compulsory savings set aside for healthcare under the Central Provident Fund.

So while IPs are offered by for-profit private companies, they form an important part of Singapore’s overall healthcare financing. Soaring IP premiums are thus of concern, as they put plans out of people’s reach.

The attrition is already occurring. There was a 5 per cent drop between 2021 and 2023 of private hospital IPs being taken up; and 2.2 per cent of people over 60 years old gave up their IPs altogether, between 2020 and 2023.

If too many people turn to subsidised care as a result, it would put a heavy strain on public sector hospitals, which are already struggling with insufficient bed capacity.

Given the serious implications for the nation’s healthcare system, the Government may need to act even if the problem is caused by the insurers competing to lure policyholders with as-charged plans and riders that undermine efforts to rein in healthcare costs.

On July 13, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong said tough decisions and trade-offs are needed for the country to continue delivering high-quality, affordable healthcare to Singaporeans.

He warned: “There are too many examples elsewhere of healthcare services practically at breaking point.

“Populations suffer from poor healthcare delivery and long wait times, or exorbitant medical bills and high insurance premiums. And it shows in the outcomes – population health deteriorates, and so does the quality of life, even life expectancy.”

In his speech on July 12, Mr Ong spoke of the need to rein in the current unhealthy “buffet syndrome” brought about by overly generous insurance coverage.

When a third party foots the bill, doctors and patients tend not to hold back on tests and treatments, even if they may not be needed.

The Health Minister urged insurance companies to take a hard, realistic look at their product design because they risk “a race to the bottom” with the intense competition.

The crux of the problem are IPs pegged at private hospitals, which account for about 60 per cent of all IPs.

Why premiums are soaring

The problem with IPs did not happen overnight. It was at least a couple of decades in the making. The two major drivers are the “as-charged” schemes and riders that left patients with nothing to pay.

Aviva (the IP is now under Singlife) introduced the as-charged model in 2005 which pays any bill submitted by healthcare providers.

Prior to that, the insurance schemes imposed limits on claims.

The as-charged model was essentially a blank cheque – often up to a yearly limit of $1 million – resulting in higher claims than would have otherwise been made.

The model proved popular and, today, all seven insurers have as-charged plans.

The only thing that reined in runaway costs was the compulsory deductible and co-payment element mandated by the Government.

This was to prevent the “buffet” syndrome Mr Ong spoke of.

But those safeguards went out the window when riders were introduced in 2006 that covered the entire bill, leaving patients with zero payment.

There are anecdotes of blatant over-consumption such as a patient in his 60s with stomach pains getting a full heart check-up before any treatment was given, because of its risk, given his age.

Some in the healthcare industry also took advantage of the generous payouts. Insurers saw prices charged for a simple cataract lens marked up between 500 per cent and 1,000 per cent, while mark-ups for drugs ranged from 7 per cent to 800 per cent.

What’s been done

The Government stepped in several times to correct the excesses resulting from the competition for IP accounts. But mostly it exercised a light touch, preferring the industry to sort out its problems itself.

In 2015, it imposed an age-based cap on the amounts that could be paid for with MediSave to no more than $300, $600 or $900 above the MediShield Life premium. The rest would have to be paid for in cash.

With IP premiums crossing $10,000 a year at the upper range, allowing them to be paid for entirely with MediSave would have depleted many MediSave accounts.

In 2018, at the collective request of the insurance companies facing ever higher claims, the Ministry of Health (MOH) stepped in and ruled that new riders could no longer fully pay for the patient’s portion of bills.

So today, patients with riders must pay at least 5 per cent of their bills, but this can be capped at $3,000 a year. This satisfies the original need for co-payment, but not for the deductible.

MOH stepped in because riders were distorting claims.

Then Health Minister Gan Kim Yong, who is now Deputy Prime Minister, revealed that people with full riders had bills that were 60 per cent higher than those without riders.

MOH also set up a Claims Management Office in 2022 to arbitrate claims disputes between insurers and healthcare providers. 

Mr Ong said that the great majority of doctors are good people, but some are not doing right. So MOH will strengthen its enforcement against errant doctors who overcharge.

Another move by MOH was to set up a Cancer Drug List (CDL) of proven treatments that insurance is allowed to cover. Treatments not on the list are not covered by insurance. The cost of cancer treatment has been going up 20 per cent a year.

Insurers, too, have tried to tackle high claims.

Following recommendations from the Health Insurance Task Force in 2016, they now have panels of several hundred specialists each whose charges they cover.

Policyholders getting treatment from non-panel doctors may not get full reimbursement. One way to ensure coverage is to get a pre-approval letter from the insurer, where treatment and costs are spelt out.

AIA, the largest IP insurer, has a fully digital pre-authorisation service across all private hospitals and healthcare providers.

Its chief marketing and proposition officer, Ms Irma Hadikusuma, said: “This is important to curb overtreatment and overcharging, given the significant knowledge asymmetry between medical professionals and patients.”

Several insurers, including AIA, have also introduced claims-based premiums for their riders that support private hospital IPs.

AIA policyholders can get up to 25 per cent taken off their rider premiums if no claims are made, or have their rider premiums at double the minimum amount if heavy bills are incurred. Premiums are adjusted annually.

Prudential and Great Eastern also have variations of claims-based pricing.

While this approach encourages people to be prudent, some worry that it may discourage patients from seeking early treatment so as not to pay higher premiums.

It could also make patients turn to public hospitals, adding to their load. Many such patients actually seek subsidised care at public hospitals.

Mr Ong said: “About half of patients with IP plus rider protection still end up using subsidised public healthcare when hospitalised or receiving day surgery.”

Government needs to step in

Both the Government and insurers have implemented schemes to try to correct the situation. But given the recent calls by SM Lee and Mr Ong, more still needs to be done. The question is what, and by whom.

Insurers cannot and should not control what healthcare providers charge. On the other hand, reimbursing them with whatever they feel like charging is a dangerous road to take and could see costs and premiums spiralling out of control.

As commercial entities, insurance companies will continue to fight for market share. The Competition Act also stops them from getting together to discuss how to improve the situation.

This means the Government will have to step in to mandate any changes.

The IP benefits most open to abuse are the as-charged model and the coverage for pre- and post-hospital treatments.

By offering pre- and post-hospital cover, IPs have deviated from their original purpose, which was to cover large hospital bills, not outpatient treatments.

If insurers are covering outpatient treatment under the guise of pre- and post-care, then it is a loophole that needs to be plugged.

Doing away with the as-charged model alone won’t fix the problem unless reasonable caps are put in place. While these limits need to take into account the higher charges in the private sector, the Government has to curb insurers from competing with ridiculously high claims limits. This is especially true given how high some private hospital charges are.

According to MOH, the typical bill for expanding a blocked artery for a private A-class patient in a public hospital is $26,265, while private hospitals charge more than double that at $55,258. Similarly, ultrasound removal of kidney stones done as day surgery costs a private patient at a public hospital $3,838, while the typical bill for a patient in the private sector is $10,294.

A review should look at whether the huge difference is justified, and adjust claims caps accordingly.

Any review should also include riders.

With the mandated change in cancer treatment coverage that separates the reimbursement of drugs from cancer services, IPs now pay up to five times the cover provided by MediShield Life.

Oncologists in the private sector say this coverage is not enough. Patients need to have riders to pay for the costs not picked up by the IP.

Competition for market share has insurers offering riders that add triple the coverage provided by the IP, and include treatments not allowed under the CDL. This undermines the Government’s efforts to curb high costs and excessive and unproven treatments.

Even though premiums for riders are paid for in cash, the fact that two in three IP policyholders also have riders means they impact overall healthcare costs significantly. Sensible parameters for IP-linked riders would address this.

When you are cocky and self-confident, you invite detractors: Kishore Ma...

2024-07-29 Loneliness and social isolation: A public health threat for societies

Loneliness and social isolation: A public health threat for societies


For subscribers 

Loneliness and social isolation: A public health threat for societies  
https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/loneliness-and-social-isolation-a-public-health-threat-for-societies

=====
This is the eleventh of a series of 12 primers on current affairs and issues in the news, and what they mean for Singapore.
=====

SINGAPORE – A 20-something Gen Zer who laughs with colleagues, meets friends for drinks and sees family for dinner every weekend may seem to have a rich network of interpersonal connections.

In reality, he may be lonelier than his widowed grandmother alone at home with only a domestic helper except when relatives visit on some Sundays.

Though they are similar, loneliness and social isolation are not always related. Loneliness is a subject sense of distress that occurs when a person perceives that their need for meaningful connections is unmet, even if they are surrounded by people.

While social isolation – and loneliness – has been building up for decades as family and community structures change, governments are increasingly recognising it now as a crisis.

In November 2023, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared loneliness as a pressing global health threat.

The same year, United States surgeon-general Vivek Murthy issued an 82-page public health advisory titled Our Epidemic Of Loneliness And Isolation.

The surgeon-general said that far more than a bad feeling, loneliness and social isolation are detrimental to individual and societal health. They increase the risk of premature death by 26 per cent and 29 per cent respectively, he said.

Dr Murthy warned: “The mortality impact of being socially disconnected is similar to that caused by smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day, and even greater than that associated with obesity and physical inactivity.”

Singapore, too, is concerned about the health impact of social isolation, particularly among elderly people.

It has earmarked $800 million for improving active ageing centres supporting seniors in their communities. At the launch of Age Well SG in November 2023, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung said: “For many seniors, their biggest enemy is social isolation and loneliness. That’s when your health really deteriorates. We want them to be socially connected.”

Researchers in Singapore say that seniors who live with their children and grandchildren can feel as lonely as someone living alone, if they are ignored by their loved ones going about their own busy lives.

Data collected from the Singapore Chinese Health Study, which recruited participants between April 1993 and December 1998, found almost four in five elderly people who are socially isolated lived with their families, compared with the three in 20 living on their own.

Young people feel lonely even with social media connections

While the stereotype is that an older person with dwindling social connections is at the greatest risk of loneliness, multiple studies show that it is in fact younger people who are more likely to feel socially isolated.

According to a Gallup poll of more than 140,000 people in 2023, 27 per cent of young adults aged 19 to 29 reported feeling very or fairly lonely, compared with 17 per cent of older adults aged 65 and older.

The 2023 Gallup poll of 142 countries also found that nearly one in four people in the world feels fairly or very lonely, and that rates are about even between men and women.

A 2020 report by insurance giant Cigna based on a questionnaire answered by more than 10,400 people found that 79 per cent of Gen Zers (born between the late 1990s and early 2010s) and 71 per cent of millennials (born between 1981 and 1996) considered themselves lonely, compared with 50 per cent of baby boomers, who are now aged 60 to their late 70s.

In Singapore, a 2023 survey by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) had similar findings.

The straw poll, carried out between November and December 2023, surveyed 2,356 Singaporeans and permanent residents aged 21 to 64. It found that people between the ages of 21 and 34 had the highest mean score for loneliness.

In contrast, people between 51 and 64 had the lowest mean score for loneliness.

It is not surprising that young people should experience feelings of abandonment and lack of support, said psychologists. Young adults are at a transitional stage of their lives, navigating uncertainties in finding partners, establishing their careers and carving out an existence for themselves apart from their parents.

Social media too often provides connections that are only fleeting and superficial.

Dr Olivia Remes, a mental health researcher at the University of Cambridge, told CNN humans need social connections to thrive, “and being embedded in strong supportive networks can protect our well-being when we’re faced with difficulties in life”.

She said social media can do more harm than good, especially when users are stuck in “passive scrolling”.

It can heighten feelings of loneliness to compare one’s own life with the seemingly rosy lives of others, said Dr Remes, though engaging more on social media can also come with the risk of opening one to negative feedback and ostracism.

In fact, fingers have been pointed at social media as a culprit for why loneliness is higher in teens and young people.

Research shows that feelings of isolation are more common among heavy social media users, said Dr Murthy.

A 2023 study led by Professor Tore Bonsaksen from the Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, also found that the more time spent on social media, the higher the levels of loneliness, especially if social media was the main source of relationships for users.

While social media may facilitate social contact to a degree, they may not facilitate the type of contact necessary for meaningful relationships, said Prof Bonsaksen.

This was borne out during the Covid-19 pandemic, when online interactions spiked across all platforms, and feelings of isolation increased at the same time.

A 2020 Harvard study on loneliness found that slightly over two in five young adults (43 per cent) reported increases in loneliness following the outbreak of the pandemic. About half reported that no one in the past few weeks had “taken more than just a few minutes” to ask how they were doing in a way that made them feel like the person “genuinely cared”.

Dr Chew Han Ei, an adjunct senior research fellow at IPS, said a reason that higher levels of loneliness were reported during the pandemic could have been that young people missed out on many social opportunities they would normally have had.

He said: “They don’t go for orientations, they don’t go for their immersion programmes overseas, and there are no water-cooler conversations at the workplace or physical orientations where they go around to meet people.”

One German review of 34 studies from four continents found a 5 per cent increase in the prevalence of loneliness during the pandemic. The researchers said more research was needed on the long-term impact of the pandemic on feelings of social isolation.

Communities’ bulwark against loneliness

Research shows the experience of loneliness across the lifespan follows a U-shaped curve – high during the turbulent adolescent years, decreasing somewhat during middle adulthood when families and social networks are established and solidified, and then increasing again in old age.

Social isolation does not just hurt individuals.

The US surgeon-general says communities with higher levels of social connection typically have better health outcomes than communities with lower levels of social connection.

One study using data from 39 states found that a 10 per cent increase in the proportion of residents who felt that other people could be trusted was associated with an 8 per cent decrease in overall mortality.

Communities with high levels of social connection are more likely to adopt health-protective behaviour, like complying with vaccination regimes. They are more resilient against natural disasters, have lower levels of violence, and experience higher economic growth.

In his advisory, Dr Murthy outlined a national strategy for tackling this “epidemic of loneliness” that includes designing neighbourhoods and creating social infrastructure to promote connectedness, developing pro-connection policies at the governmental level, mobilising the healthcare sector to identify, treat and support vulnerable individuals, funding research on the subject, and cultivating a culture of respect and kindness in the community.

The US’ Suicide Prevention Resource Centre says: “Positive and supportive social relationships and community connections can help buffer the effects of risk factors in people’s lives.”

It advises a whole of society approach towards battling loneliness, in which teachers and counsellors, community organisations such as clubs and faith-based organisations, and peer-led groups create opportunities for meaningful and sustaining connections and relationships to be formed.

The importance of social connections is also being emphasised in Singapore’s preventive health programme, Healthier SG, its key health strategy for the coming years.

Healthier SG aims to increase the years of good health for Singaporeans by helping them make good choices regarding nutrition, habits, exercise and mental well-being. Each person will have a care plan drawn up by a primary care doctor, with whom they will maintain a long-term relationship.

In these care plans, doctors will also have to make “social prescriptions”.

In a speech in 2022, Minister-in-charge of Social Services Integration and Minister for National Development Desmond Lee said social prescription plays a key role in sustaining good health.

He said: “Social prescribing complements healthcare in institutional settings by connecting residents to local, non-clinical social programmes such as group exercise programmes, community gardening or smoking cessation programmes.

“This helps them lead a healthier lifestyle and benefit from stronger community support and addresses social issues early on before they lead to worsening health.”

There is no magic pill one can take as a treatment for loneliness or shortcut to dispelling feelings of isolation. It takes being intentional in building social connections in one’s life.

Psychologists advise people to be open to making friends at any age, be engaged in their neighbourhoods, be active by joining a club like a book club or exercise group, and, yes, spend less time on social media.

Struggling with loneliness does not mean that someone is broken or that there is something fundamentally wrong with them because they cannot cope with what life throws at them, said Dr Murthy.

“We can’t take on a lot of these challenges alone. We need to be together. We need to be connected,” he said. “That’s what strengthening the social fabric in our lives and communities is all about.”


The Singapore Perspective

Contrary to what many people believe, loneliness and being isolated from the community are not a normal part of ageing.

Yet, they are what many older people experience.

While the World Health Organisation (WHO) said in 2021 that social isolation affects around one in four older adults worldwide, this number is higher in Singapore.

A 2015 study by Duke-NUS Medical School’s Centre for Ageing Research and Education found two in five Singaporeans aged 62 years and older to be lonely.

A more recent study from 2021 that used data from the large-scale, long-running Singapore Chinese Health Study also found that older Chinese adults today are at higher risk of social disconnection than before.

This is because family sizes have shrunk, reducing the number of people seniors can turn to for support. And as they become more frail, their social relationships also become more limited.

The feeling of isolation was worsened by the Covid-19 pandemic, which reduced social interactions even further among the elderly.

By 2030, more than 900,000 Singaporeans will be aged 65 and above, and many will face loneliness if more is not done now.

While loneliness represents a person’s perception of feeling isolated, social isolation or disconnection refers to the lack of social, emotional and physical engagement with other people.

In her study with Associate Professor Feng Qiushi from the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the National University of Singapore, Professor Koh Woon Puay found that the most socially disconnected individuals actually live with family members.

Using data from her long-term Singapore Chinese Health Study of a cohort of 63,257 middle-aged and elderly Chinese Singaporeans, Prof Koh found almost four in five elderly people who are socially isolated lived with their families, compared with the three in 20 living on their own.

Among those living alone, men were about twice more likely to be disconnected than women.

Their traditional role as wage earners results in men having smaller social networks and fewer social interactions than women, the study said. The transition from employment to retirement further curtails their social networks, worsening the disconnect.

To help seniors keep active, access better care options and live more independently in the community, the Singapore Government is pumping a total of $3.5 billion into initiatives for a new programme called Age Well SG, over the next 10 years.

Age Well SG focuses on preventive care through measures that keep seniors active and social, allowing them to go about their daily activities with greater ease.

One goal is for four in five seniors to have access to active ageing centres near their homes, by 2025. These activities include communal meals and exercise programmes.

To achieve this, volunteers will reach out to seniors near each centre, especially those who live alone.

More senior care centres, which provide custodial day care and rehabilitation services, will be built, alongside more home care options for those who need more help.

The Government aims to improve care coordination by having one provider coordinate a bundle of key services in each region to ensure seniors have a single touchpoint for their care needs.

In addition, “silver upgrades” to residential estates will provide amenities such as therapeutic gardens, barrier-free ramps and senior-friendly home fittings such as wider toilet entrances and shower seats.

Commuter infrastructure will also be improved, including building more sheltered linkways and senior-friendly bus stops and roads.

About The Straits Times-Ministry of Education News Outreach Programme

For 12 Mondays between March 18 and Aug 5, this paper’s journalists will examine different contemporary topics in the Opinion section. The primers broach subjects as wide-ranging as trust in the digital age, the future of transport, and the modern definition of success. Each primer includes a local perspective to help students draw links to the issues’ implications for Singapore. The primer articles are part of The Straits Times-Ministry of Education News Outreach Programme, which aims to promote an understanding of local and global issues among pre-university students.