Straits Times columnist Lydia Lim makes several important points about the care sector in Singapore (Re-imagine Singapore as a care economy, Aug 9).
Given that there is going to be a dramatic increase in the need for professional caregivers as Singapore's population ages, especially for home care, why do Singaporeans undervalue them?
Perhaps it's because, for some kinds of care, it is often carried out by a family member or by foreign domestic helpers. Maybe the logic is "if I can do it myself, then why pay for a professional?".
The answer to that question lies in the word "professional" - it implies a standard of knowledge, skill, training and formal qualification that goes beyond what an everyday person would possess.
As someone who was a part-time caregiver for many years, I can attest to the stress and emotional burden that caregivers experience.
This is going to increase as caregiving moves more from the physical to the emotional well-being of the recipients - which will happen because of the increase in dementia cases, as well as the side effects of age-related physical illnesses.
What can be done?
Affordability is an issue even in Singapore. While there are government grants, they are means tested and limited in applicability. As for private medical care, perhaps a part of Central Provident Fund savings can be unlocked for recurring care needs filled by private care providers, especially for home care.
Employers, whether individuals or companies, need to understand the burden and value of caregiving.
For professional employers, they are limited in how much they can pay by how much they can charge, but automation can help reduce overheads.
However, there are other actions employers can take. At present, most caregivers are either employed full time or work for platform providers where they are in effect self-employed contractors.
This means a choice between security with little flexibility, and flexibility with little security.
There is a middle way, which is to provide flexible work arrangements that guarantee a certain number of hours and level of pay, while allowing flexibility in when those hours are worked.
The Ministry of Manpower's guidelines do provide for this, but they are not clear, and more incentives should be provided for employers and employees to adopt such schemes.
Ian Selbie
