Replace Women’s Charter with Family Charter
November 29th, 2010 | 
Author: 
The current surge in gang violence, that not only leads to injury but also death, amongst youths is something we have not witnessed before. Over the last five years, I have been hearing from friends who are police investigators who pointed out to a rising trend in youth gangs, youth violence and juvenile crime across a certain section of youths. My police friends explained that though it is unclear if overall youth crimes and violence is increasing, the rise within that section of youth is worrisome. One police friend shared with me about an incident in Far East Plaza about 5 years ago whereby a CID officer was chased by a group of youths armed with parang. My police friend said “when in the history of Singapore have we ever seen CID officers running and youths chasing and also with a weapon… CID officers always have had a fierce reputation whereby only others flee at their sight”. Another police friend told me that he has been seeing an increase in crimes involving youths as young as 17 years old carrying weapons and stealing or robbing. As I stated earlier, this thing has been a rising trend for last five years. Though the field police officers want to combat this, the police management basically takes the usual complacent Singapore civil service attitude of “lets not open a can of worms”.
Each time my police friends share these stories with me, I always asked them what they thought was the common root problem. They cited that these kids often come from divorced families or seperated parents. They shared that unlike in earlier decades where the divorce families were also often associated with other problems, lower literacy and lower socio-economic status, these kids often do come from families where their single parent having care rights and control rights over them are white coller, well educated and coming from good socio-economic background.
The police officers blamed how womens’ charter was radically implemented in Singapore and pointed out that the women’s charter though having empowered women have instead failed to put in place checks, create a balance or moderation in that empowerment process to allow a peaceful co-existance between seperated or divorced parents for the benefit of the children. When I went to review the women’s charter with friends from other countries who are trained legal experts, they pointed out there is absolutely no check, no balance to prevent even the worst abuses by women against their husbands or ex-husbands. They also pointed out that the womens’ charter has in place only weak, useless and superficial processes for amicable dispute resolution between the mother and father of the child. Instead what is in place is legal ballistic weaponry for full battle against the husband. Hence when the typical mechanisms in the womens’ charter are extremely hostile towards one gender, given seperations/divorces/custody disputes/alimony disputes/maintenance disputes are essentially domestic problems the dispute then only grows bigger and not smaller and drags for a longer period than concluding faster.
When the couple is facing stress in the marriage, the Womens’ Charter provides greater mechanisms for hostile take out than for peaceful reconciliation. The couple basically have just 2 to 3 opportunities at lame and weak counselling or mediating sessions with the least qualified social workers. If that fails, then what is available is operation ‘take out’. Lawyers whom the couple engage from the beginning aggravate the situation because their remuneration lies when the couple go to court and divorce/annul their marriage. The lawyers profit little in peaceful reconciliations.
After the divorce, during the next few decades when the parents are alive, when there is again dispute over maintenance whatsover there is absolutely no proper mechanisms for peaceful and amicable resolution of the issue. Instead they need to go to court again and courts are by nature not positive mechanisms for family issues. There again the womens’ charter provides another set of ballistic missiles for another operation ‘take out’.
In this whole process, the one who reaps no benefit nor even sadistic pleasure is the children. They face enormous mental pressures in such situations. Watching their parents tear each other apart in court itself is not a pleasant experience for them. It does not help their self-esteem at all when they see their friends having normal families doing families activities. Even when the parent remarries, the child cannot refer to that person as father or mother in the presence of his/her friends like how their friends do. The parents also try to make up for the situation through pampering.
I annaecdotally surveyed children from a 2-3 families in Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia where the parents divorced and the kids grew up in such a divorced family. I found that in those families in Malaysia and Indonesia where they had great extended family support or relative support or neighbours support on a daily basis, they turned out well in terms of completion of tertiary education, non-participation in crime or violence, non-participation in drugs/smoking/alcohol etc. On the other hand, in the Singapore case since there is no support on daily basis from extended family, neighbours or relatives, the kids tend to end up with the wrong company of friends and aimlessly search for a purpose and self-worth in life and try to achieve it through risk taking activities such as gangs, sex, alcohol, drugs, violence, smoking.
What is clear is that though Womens groups in Singapore, where lawyers are largely represented, may proclaim victories in being able to set up punitive legal mechanisms within the Womens’ charter, they need to claim resonsibility in creating hostile environment for divorced couples to sort out their families issues over their lifetimes and in that process affecting a generation of kids pushing them to resort to directions which society can ill afford to see them head into. They need to take responsiblity for destroying the destiny of a generation of divorced children in order to protect the well-being and rights of divorced women.
What is required now is action to replace the Womens’ charter with Family charter which creates not just checks but also balances and which ensures the lifelong well-being of the child is protected. The primary focus should not be about only the protection of women but instead women, children, men collectively. The reform of the Womens’ Charter to Family Charter need to be headed by non-lawyers and instead by social workers, psychologists and psychiatrists.
.
Singaporean Observor
Posted in 
No wonder so many spinsters in Singapore and dildos are selling so well…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hi Spore Folks,
We should take all benefits (upgrading, gst rebates etc) PAP is giving out to us in the coming GE to “BUY OUR VOTES” afterall these benefits come from us, taxpayers’ monies.
Folks, BE SMART VOTERS, put yourselves in a win-win situation in this GE, keep the last OPPOSITIONS card with you, to fight for you in the event that PAP retract or fail to deliver. The Oppositions will stand up and fight for you.
Don’t be DAFT to trust/ give all to PAP who has failed to deliver its 2006 election manifesto and POOR PERFORMANCE TRACK RECORD for the past 5 years.
When PAP become majority for the next 5 years they can do anything they want and NOBODY can stop them if there is not enough Oppositions in the parliament.
Remember hard,take all the benefits PAP offers and continue to VOTE FOR ALL OPPOSITIONS. You will be in a win-win situation all the way.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In order to break PAP dominance, at least 51% seats must go to all oppositions. Otherwise PAP still have the all/ last say of all policies they want to implement.
PAP being 49% will need to “consult” All Oppositions/ Native Citizens before any implementation of policies.This is what all Native Citizens want, have their says and be consulted. Not suka suka PAP can change policies, rules, gst, transport hikes etc so easily.
So my fellow men, remember we have to BREAK FREE from the iron fist of PAP once and for all so that all NATIVE CITIZENS will have a control of their lives and future starting from this coming GE!
Let everyone of us do our little part here by setting a target of reaching out to 5 persons a day. ie To tell at least 5 people/ strangers around us to read TR/ TOC or circulate below Detail Version article (more convincing and effective) every day. And assume 5 will multiply by another 5. That means 1 person everyday can reach out to 25 persons in Singapore. This will greatly increase the readership in a month and more Opposition Votes.
Folks, we need to reach out to as many Voters as possible in the coming months leading up to GE, convince them and get them ready to standby their Opposition Votes. We do not know if all wards will be contested this coming GE. But WE MUST ENSURE that we have majority ALL OPPOSITIONS VOTES to standby in all contested wards.
Assume 51% wards (seats) are contested, these 51% wards (seats) MUST WIN by ALL OPPOSITIONS which contest or ALL NATIVES WILL BE DOOMED if PAP Traitors dominate another 5 years. WE cannot afford to lose this coming GE.
So I urge all TR readers/ contributors here to do YOUR LITTLE PART every day to reach out to at least 5 people/ strangers around you.
Pls download this self explanatory and comprehensive article DETAIL VERSION and help to distribute to people / strangers around you to get more Opposition Votes
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/10/27/an-overview-of-the-current-sociao-political-situation-in-singapore/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A well thought out piece. Many men who had not known about the Women’s Charter had suffered from the hands of the women. The people who approved this charter are wimps and henpecked husbands that listened to their wives.
Look at LKY, LHL… all wimps that do whatever to women said. Singapore are ruled by women behind the scenes. No wonder Singaporean women said the men “cannot make it”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Great. What you are suggesting is another reason and provide the means for the state to interfere with families.
Sure, family dysfunction has disastrous effects — many times on the kids. It is tragic, but it is also life.
To “empower” the state to intervene is asking for “unintended consequences” — some could be nefarious. What if the charter got “hijacked” for political purposes?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Apart from the hasty draughtmanship, the Woman’s Charter also contradicts the NS Act. Rights come with responsibility. If women are to achieve true parity with men, then conscription should be universal as in Sweden or Israel.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
A strong Woman Charter had lead to most woman top choice destination to get married in Britian, because it favour them a lot
In Singapore, Uncles fear mongering on Woman Charter, in an event of a divored, a man stand to lose this amount of money.
This really frighten men to tie the knot
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
please, i have suffered under the women’s charter. my ex-bitch suck me dry every month. a high court judge even asked me to stay in a worker’s quarter’s to save money on rental so i can meet my monthly commitment. it’s a fucked up system.
our judges are really not expected to be very smart. they just have to apply the prescribed law blindly
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Another of Lee Kuan Yew’s “great” mindset achievements. As he had 6 woment lawyers against 2 men for changing the old
Women’s Charter to favour woment. So 6:2 GOT The new Women’s Charter “Over-Cooked” in favour of woment against men! And AS IT FREES disdvantage women and captured votes for PAP, it worked neatly in PAP’s favour of creating another kind of Social Mismeandemour that scheming daughters and their mother “wives” work in CAHOOTS for Financial and CASH gains too! Another very neat and shortsighted legislation PAP of Lee Kuan Yew’s “superb governance chip”!!!
Just like his other “Graduate Mother”, “Stop at 2″ followed by “The Less you have THE MORE they have” in Woody Goh PM years, “FTs” and “FTs & foreigners bring Singaporeans jobs”of his son PM years now still ongoing. Plus this guys 18% GDP as they have “Plans and the eCONomy is doing well” under his $20.4 BILLION GDP Priming of it in 2008/9 hor!!!
As GDP IS Domestic CONsumptions and COnsummerism lor!!! Did GDP go up due to GNP which is external trade under the current Financial Crisis in the Western World? Did not Woody Goh said some months back that they WERE concentrating on the eCONnomy? My foot and it IS LOL as he sure knows that $20.4 BILLIONS WILL Prime the GDP to higher “growth” hor!!!
Our GNP is only around $160-180B and much lower than Ireland’s with a 4 Million population! And Ireland’s debt crisis now was due to their chargeing too low Corporate Tax rates of only 15% for a decade to attract business investment!
PAP has lost it way and ARE now like “a herd of sheep lead by 1 or 2 wolves”? This IS REVERSED Pultarch! And the sheep then began to sound like wolves too for the money!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Singapoean Observer,
Wah, the socio-economic problems of women and children in family disputes can be solved with just a stroke of the pen in naming the Women’s Charter to Family Charter. The Singaporean Observer should proceed to draft the law and ask the opposition MPs to table it in Parliament and pass it as a law quickly. All Singaporeans should benefit and are grateful for your foresight.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
@Singapore Observer
This is an admirable article. You probably need a stronger gender analysis in your article. In portions of your article you yourself have subscribed to gender stereotyping thus defeating your cause. Please read Caroline Moser. Some of her stuff is online. Why Moser? I am reading her at the moment. But there should be good papers on the internet to develop a working gender analysis.
Sad to say that some readers have not been helpful in their gender biases.
Despite having ratified CEDAW or the Women’s Convention, I dont think PAP has actually met its obligations. There is not even a gender policy by this govt. And women are about half the workforce as per govt statistics.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is true the Woman Charter is a hopeless piece of legislation that create unhealthy youths in our society. After ex-NMP Sion Kanawalit amended the Charter it is even worst always pro-woman. Blame this lady and the PAP which made use of her to implement the worst politically motivated piece of legislation of the century. Just go to the Family Court it is more like woman court with the majority of admin staff and judges young and women.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“The Women’s Charter” was a product of the late Kwa Geok Choo nee Madam Lee Kuan Yew – which MM LKY had once said was a project that was implemented when he led the PAP in political victory !!!
Without the participation of the Law Society representing PUBLIC INTERESTS – and DELIBERATELY REMOVED from its PUBLIC ROLE to comment on Legislations proposed by the “Pro Alien Party” or any political party in office – can Singaporeans have a voice that will represent OUR INTERESTS on ILLEGITIMATE LEGISLATIONS proposed by the “Pro Alien Party” ???
Clearly, the selfish intentions of LKY and the “Pro Alien Party” must be questioned more vigorously, and the acts of neutering the Law Society must be reversed – for the INTERESTS of Singaporean and all Singaporeans !!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I can’t but get amused at this Women’s Charter topic as a PR myself since the early 90s, I’ve personally went through an amicable divorce with an ex-spouse Singaporean. We had 3 children all born in Singapore whom I agreed to hand over custody to my ex-spouse. Unfortunately, my ex-spouse passed away a few years ago and I thought that just like in Europe –where I come from–, the children would automatically be taken over as guardian by the surviving parent.
To my amazement, I had to go to the Singapore Court to seek custody back of my children and that was not helped by the fact that the family of my ex-spouse had created so much fuss and instigated my children against me that it took me 2 long years and successive court orders to only re-gain custody of a child who wanted to follow me while the Court ordered that the other 2 remaining children could not be “forced” to leave Singapore to be with me (as I have since migrated else where).
The Court Order placed my 2 children remaining in Singapore under my ex-spouse’s family care though the children are still living in my flat in Singapore. I had argued that it should be for the children’s sake to be with their surviving parent to give them at least a family environment but it was in vain.
By such order, now my 2 remaining children have ended up staying alone in Singapore as my ex-spouse relatives have not adhered to Court order to be fully responsible for them. They simply continued their life as usual and only drop by as and when to check on my 2 children who are teenagers.
I gave up going back to a Court that issued an order in the beginning with reasoning that went beyond my logical comprehension and that puts me now in such uncomfortable situation to deal with.
But well, I guess I have to live with such legal system in Singapore and so I rest my case.
But was the entire predicament due to the so-called Women’s Charter? Perhaps so, I leave the readers be the jury. But do not get me wrong, I am not seeking sympathy nor blaming anyone but myself for being caught in an odd system like in Singapore where the surviving parent had to go to court to seek custody back of the children. This is simply something I failed utterly to comprehend for a so-called “developed” country…
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@atobe
Was that right? I do remember in secondary school in a civics class, we were tutored on the miraculous Women’s Charter.
Off course today, after an experience of theory and practice on human rights and gender (outside of Singapore), the Women’s Charter pales in comparison with a gender policy and a gender mainstreaming strategy.
This is beyond law though I must say Atobe. And lawyers themselves may not be conversant with the subject matter. It is developmental theory.
But I do support the idea of giving back to the Singapore Law Society the right of comment to any bill (draft law to Parliament).
Ms Teo in her book, Beyond the Blue Gate, mentioned that after her experience on commenting on a bill for the Law Society, LKY got very personal. And it set the pace for series of events which included denying the right of comment by the SLS. At that time Frances Seow was the President of the Law Society.
I hope that once we revive this process for Singapore, the SLS would be rejuvenated and be the guardians of our civil liberties.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
SG pussies have a good life.
common looks, unladylike, small breasts, cannot cook at all, cannot wash, cannot iron, can’t operate microwave, can’t fuck well either. Marry them for what?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I am a woman and I completely agree with the writer as well as most of the comments on this piece. That, the Woman’s Charter is the worst piece of legislation the PAP could have come up with. I cannot stomach the fact it is extremely discriminatory against men and eventually a pitfall to social cohesion. I mean the Woman’s Charter actually gives incentives to woman to go ahead with divorce proceedings over fixing matrimonial problems. So to me, it encourages the breaking up of families as the Charter heavily favours one gender over the other in terms of financial (alimony) and emotional (custody of children) benefits. It is shameful for women like me that my gender is given such a free pass to abuse a system which was originally meant to protect women, because of a bunch of incompetent, sad excuses for lawmakers who couldn’t word a bill with the necessary checks and balances.
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
Good piece of article. Much greater foresight than our PAP. Our Law should work to protect both gender at a time when Men and Women are now equal in the society. Women are now abusing men more often than past and they can get away with it. What is our judges doing???
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yeah women today can earn more money than men. Why should men take the brunt for divorce? Is divorce always the fault of men?
I dun think so…. There is a statistic that 4/5 men in the USA do not know that they are bring up a kid who is fathered by someone else by mothered by his wife. In other words, the kid’s father is not you but the mother is your wife so that means your wife cheated.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I recall watching a TV program about a divorced jobless guy who quit his job to take care of his ailing brother. He had to pay alot of money to his wife even though she earns more than he does.
The news crew interviewed a few people and one women stated that “It doesn’t matter if she is earning more, the guy should pay!”
The problem I find is that a lot of women feels that it is within their birth-right to do this. They have the ‘victim’ mentality and always play the victim card.
I’m all for gender equality and I feel women has the right to equal opportunities as men. The ones who truly deserve more women’s right are those suffering in India, Bangladesh. Sold into prostitution at the age of 5 – 12 years old.
A lot of Singaporean women that complains lack of equality only wants the benefit gender equality brings but not the responsibilites that comes with it.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Indeed, women are just as likely as men to have an affair. It is a myth that men are always the cheaters & women are the faithful ones.
Traditionally men has always been the givers and women the recipients. But when women now have more rights and can earn more, they still in the mindset that men should be givers!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thanks for quoting me, Vane.
However we must distinguish the able educated wives who can work and earn and those traditional housewives who have decided to take role of full time mum/wife.
The new Family Charter must protect these housewives instead of those wives who can work and also those husbands who do not earn as much as their wives.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
LKY singlehandedly had interfered with Singapore legislation and produce a f**kup society of today. Curse be on LKY and his descendents forever and ever. May LHL cancer resurface and bring him death.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Yeah women today can earn more money than men. Why should men take the brunt for divorce? Is divorce always the fault of men?
I dun think so…. There is a statistic that 4/5 men in the USA do not know that they are bring up a kid who is fathered by someone else by mothered by his wife. In other words, the kid’s father is not you but the mother is your wife so that means your wife cheated.
wah lau eh! too cheem liao, like that children grow up very confused leh!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No offense, Singaporean men are PUSSIES!!! You should stand up and fight now. I have a friend who suffered severely due to this Women Charter shit. What the fuck are you boys doing? Get your ass up and start retaliating. This Women Charter shit has to stop or more children will suffer
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Sorry folks was rushing for a meeting and wrongly spelled “Social Misdemeanour” as “Social Mismeandemour”.
And to A Ang: December 1, 2010 at 12:23 am A Ang(Quote), The original Women’s Charter did not protect women sufficiently. Women were then compromised by their better incomes husbands when some philander lor! So they volley their MPs till PAP had to do somtething. And what’s bad is I repeat, they got 6 women lawyers with 2 men lawyers to revise and “craft’the present Women’s Charter. 6:2 how not to become men becoming compromised instead lor! Going by LKY’s way of maximising to limit by lowering his pappy GAGAmen’s “exposure” to any social responsiblities if possible hor! Is he then a “Socialist Republic” politician as Singapore once was. Are we now a Socialist Republic or a Republic only? Don’t believe these two things? Well let’s see…
As even SWD The Social Welfare Dept inherited from the British is now only a MCYS = Ministry of Community Youth and Sports right!!! Before this it was MCDS = Ministry Community Development Sports. And it was MCD – Ministry of Community Development! So from…
SWD -> MCD -> MCDS -> MCYS!!! Noticed that SW was dropped and changed to CD. Then S was added. Then D was dropped to get rid of Development of Community!
Wanna figure out LKY? This is the way BY TRACKING his change step by step to ëat”into OUR “Flesh”hor!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
PAP will NEVER revoke the Woman’s Charter, it is in their interest for the Women’s Charter and in many ways, PAP’s survival DEPENDS on the Woman’s Charter.
Its very simple mathematics, in a normal general population, women tend to outnumber men by 51% to 49%. Therefore, a charter specifically designed to protect the sex with naturally larger numbers will mean the party implementing it will ALWAYS win. Everybody only votes for self interest.
It goes to follow that the war between the sexes in Singapore is not due to education disparity, men not catching up etc etc. Its really a carefully constructed war by PAP to keep men and women divided. That division can only bring the most important yield to PAP, votes. So long men and women dont converge, political opinion will divide, with women voting for the party “protecting” them, PAP.
VOTE PAP OUT!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Agree as well.
The moment a person stops working for a prolong period of time, they are going to lack the experience and will need to make-up alot for it.
It is only fair that full-time caretakers of the family be properly compensated for their sacrifice if the marriage is no longer salvagable and divorce seems imminent.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In its attempt to consolidate its rule, the PAP regime had implemented many policies designed to keep the electorate poor, stressed out, divided and confused. At the same time, it monopolises all the available talent through a series of schemes such as scholarships, plump appointments, directorships, project contracts, fanciful titles, honorary awards, etc. A number of its ministers were thus successfully converted to serve Singapore’s Pengchiu (that hateful character in the Taiwanese melodrama “LOVE”)
The remaining people are deliberately kept on a leash so that they are able to assemble sufficient strength, support, funds, logistics and courage to mount any meaningful challange to their rule.
With the armed forces, the Executive (civil service), the Legislature (Parliament), the Treasury and the Grassroots organisations firmly in its grip, its rule is actually dictatorial in style. Democracy, Meritocracy, Dogmatism, and whatever other fanciful descriptions are mere excuses conveniently picked to suit the occasion of the day.
It is an animal instinct to preserve itself. Despite the so-called “first world” attainment, the PAP has not really progressed beyond its primal needs. Now that it has grown so large, it has become so busy in meeting to the needs, appetite and interests of its materialist lackeys.
I don’t wish to sound defeatist, but Singapore is apparently sliding into social ruins. Look at our youths — no goals, no heros, no direction in life. Their appeals are very base: ego, money, materialistic possessions, pride, anger. Adding on to such a misery context, the PAP has piled more catalyst to quicken the downfall of society with the promotion of gambling (2 IRs + 24/7 4Ds), by opening the floodgates to foreigners and by glorifying material wealth by enriching themselves openly.
Yet, they are some people who would idolise the PAP. In the years to come, History would surely make comparisions to both Marcos and Suharto.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0