Not your typical property-related post...

By The Folks @PropTalk - August 3, 2015 1 Comment

The wife and I do not typically post our thoughts on non-property related stuff here. But a letter that we came across this morning in TODAY "Voices" had gotten us pretty riled up.

We are referring to the letter entitled "Unequal benefits for single unwed mums a matter of deterrence". Some of you may have also read it in the papers or already seen it and its related comments on Facebook.

While the writer did not specify his stand on unequal benefits as a deterrence against single unwed mums, to associate them with criminals, loan sharks, kidnappers and even terrorists is absurd and way out of context irrespective of one's view on the subject matter.  

And regardless of whether the decision is made by choice or circumstances, the wife and I believe that single unwed mums, despite their supposed going against the "acceptable" societal and religious norms and beliefs, should be accorded with benefits similar to those of dual parents. This is not only a matter of social equality but the necessary support structure may also ensue a greater chance for the baby to be born and eventually grow up to become someone worthy of his/her existence rather than being just another digit in the statistics for unwanted pregnancy.

And if we truly believe in inadequate support for a child born out of the wedlock as a form of deterrence against single unwed moms, why stop there?  Maybe we should also leave those aged destitute who had chosen to squander away all their monies on gambling or drugs out in the streets to die as a deterrent against gambling and drugs. So where exactly do we draw the line?

Unequal benefits for single unwed mums is not the correct form of deterrence. Education is and will remain so. And by according similar benefits to them may not necessarily mean an affirmation of their choice and decision, rather the sign of a matured inclusive society that Singapore has been striving towards... at least that's our humble opinion anyway.

Click on link to read the letter: Unequal benefits for single unwed mums a matter of deterrence

1 comment to ''Not your typical property-related post..."

  1. If a mother made a mistake, her child don't have to pay for it.