1 Aug 1996
The ongoing effort to integrate disabled
Singaporeans into our society is handicapped by
its reliance on purely economic justifications
Your editorial of 25 July 1996 reckoned
that our limited human resources made integrating
disabled Singaporeans economically sensible.
Dr David Oon, a government psychologist and
chairman of this years educational project by
the Movement for the Intellectually Disabled of
Singapore, added confidently: 'With training,
these people can improve and contribute to society'
('Project to fight stereotyping of intellectually
disabled people', Sunday Times, 28 July 1996).
I note with unease the apparently unthinking
way in which Dr Oon and you judged human worth
according to economic criteria. Your argument that
a disabled Singaporean should have the chance to
'prove his worth, as a worker able to earn his
own keep' implicitly excludes the elderly and
severely disabled, whose potential economic
contributions are low or non-existent. It suggests
that our concern for disabled Singaporeans goes
only as far as they are able to work. Most
outrageously, your line of thinking denies the
concept of worth as inherent in a human being by
virtue of her humanity.
In making economic contribution the primary
measure of human worth, we debase our humanity.
The practical effect of this cheapening is manifest
in our lack of grace. Graciousness is the expression
of a love for all human beings regardless of their
economic worth. In this respect, we should not
confuse true graciousness with mere knowledge of
etiquette.
Disabled Singaporeans are a mirror to their
fellow citizens. Their plight and isolation is a
rebuke to our stunted humanity. We should welcome
our disabled fellow Singaporeans simply because
they are human beings. Why should we need any other
reason to bring them into our community?
Pua Yeow Cheong:
I too would make that same suggestion as Dr Oon and the editor if I were to be in their position, and judging a ID(intellectually disabled) by their economic value is the last thing I have on my mind. The sad fact is that there are many IDs out there who are rotting away at home when they are capable of more than just that. And there are many many Singaporeans who don't mind forking out money to let these IDs sit at home. Singaporeans are not as heartless and ungracious as you make them out to be. Call it misguided compassion, that I'm sure you'll agree, is not the proper way to treat our IDs. Yes, let's throw away that "money can cure all" mindset. So, we can all spend our weekends to bring these people out to Sentosa, or go for a bus ride or better still, (like what I'm doing now), organise weekly activities for them or best of all, become a social worker. But, but I believe the best way to integrate the IDs into society is for them to be economically independent(or at least less reliant on charity), to give them a chance to contribute economically to the society, for them to hold a regular paying job that requires them to go to work daily like the rest of us. To do that, we have to do what Dr Oon is doing, pointing out their potential economic contributions. Yes, it is a sad fact that our society judge its members so heavily on their economic contributions. It is very scary that the best way of integrating into society is to contribute economically to it. However, the fault lies with the society at large or if you want to, the people running the system. But I think it is most unfair to aim the bricks at those who are trying to help the IDs.
Francis:
I agree that it is necessary to point out their potential economic contribution. My objection was that the promotion of the integration of the disabled stopped there. I would accept that Dr Oon and the Editor are humane and caring persons, but isn't it a little odd that they didn't make at least an effort to refer to the economically unproductive disabled. I agree it's a social problem, rather than a character defect of Dr Oon or the Editor. I criticise ideas, rarely persons. I regret if the tone of my letter gave the impression that I was slamming Dr Oon or the Editor personally; that was not the intention. Still, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.