Untitled Document
    
    Contact Info Feedback Site Map
    
     
     
    I am @ Talk Abuzz » Your Feedback, Our Response Register  Login   03 Sep 2010    
 
 
 
 Article Details
Medifund for HIV patients

Feedback via Email

 

Dear Sir,

 

I write with regard to the issue of extending Medifund to HIV patients. I have a few concerns about this.

 

a) I would like to understand how HIV came about to be chosen for Medifund but not a disease like cancer. I feel that Ministry of Health cannot justify why cancer patients are being discriminated against. There are so many patients who cannot afford the expensive chemotherapy for their cancers. Every argument used in the subsidy of HIV patients also holds true for cancer patients.

 

b) What is the criteria for needy HIV patients?

 

I can understand the subsidy of those innocent patients who through no fault of theirs have contracted HIV like children, wives or through accidental blood contamination.

However I am strongly against Medifund being used for patients who through their promiscuous life-styles have contracted HIV. Why should our taxpayers money be used for this group of patients who through their irresponsible lifestyles have contacted HIV? Will this not send a message that it is alright to continue in their irresponsible lifestyles as if you contact HIV, your treatment will be paid by the taxpayers!

 

Reply from Ministry of Health

 

We have always subsidised cancer treatment (but not HIV treatment), in Class B2 and C wards. As healthcare providers, we try not to pass value judgement on our patients, just as we subsidise smokers for their lung cancer treatment. The recent announcement to extend Medifund assistance for HIV treatment is to correct the anomaly.

 

In fact, all first line cancer drugs are heavily subsidised as they are on the standard drug list. The recent media comment on cancer drugs under Medifund pertained to some secondary cancer drugs. As it is today, needy cancer patients are already assisted by Medifund. This covers both SDL drugs and other alternatives as prescribed by their doctors. The thinking is that with more targeted approach in assisting these needy patients through Medifund, we can better help these cancer patients.

 

Corporate Communications Division

Ministry of Health

 
 
Number of Views: 1427
Number of Comments: 15

Comments
Barr, Poindexter & Chang, DDS  
24 May 10 , 19:00 PM

I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. Barr, Poindexter & Chang, DDS



jpgtrnh;j;c/  
13 Apr 10 , 14:42 PM

i dont know why must people always go out of singapore for medical treatment i thought that singaporfe medical treatment is very advance?those poor singaporeans who get cancer could use my advice:it is better to suffer in your own country than in a foreign country.just to be frank;singaporeans waste too much money just for fun......
@@@111SECRET  
13 Apr 10 , 14:36 PM

i dont think the idea is good!govement should give each and everyone a discount card for expense every where we go we must wait like wating for the waiter,buying things......



sweetiest  
13 Apr 10 , 14:32 PM

i agree on the fact that people is in bad situetion!
chihkeong  
01 Apr 10 , 00:38 AM

The rants of the 'righteous' to deny extension of Medifund to cover HIV treatment have their roots in the selfish nature of human beings. I will suggest a re-reading of the parable of the prodigal son. It is the duty of a civilized government to provide means of affordable medical treatment for their citizens, judgments are the duties of the courts.



REACH Administrator  
08 Feb 10 , 18:51 PM

Response posted on behalf of Ministry of Health (MOH):

Thank you for your feedback to the ministry. In healthcare, we are mindful to not pass value judgement on our patients. For instance, we subsidise smokers for their lung cancer treatment. For your reference, Medifund is used to assist needy cancer patients who are unable to afford their essential cancer treatment. Minister’s recent remarks on cancer drugs pertains to additional assistance over and above what is already provided today.

On the other hand, the recent extension of Medifund to cover HIV treatment was to correct an anomaly where they were previously not assisted.

Do be reassured that patient and public education continues to be the key tool for MOH in the fight against HIV. We will continue our public education efforts to educate at-risk groups and the general public on HIV prevention.

Thank you.
jabbar  
29 Jan 10 , 21:01 PM

WITHOUT STRINGS??? (PG4) These irresponsible people seems to have been able to influence Govt policy? Why then did MOH Minister quoted them? Looks like we have not learnt our lessons from the past. The 2 kids is enough policy in the past is now haunting us. Do we want to allow a similar situation that will haunt us in the near future. Opening up a "Bottomless Pit" without the "Prospect of Accountability" by the recalcitrant and irresponsible? Worst, this 'Killer" is allowed free access to all sections of society. Compassion and sympathy has been used by these Homo Activists diligently from the beginning, knowing our soft S'porean hearts" to get what they wanted. Now, Action For Aids is asking Govt to release funds for middle class HIV sufferers. Will this be the next stage? The Homo Activists is lobbying & pushing hard in the corridors of power for funding their middle class sufferers. After health issues, what next? Pro-homo discriminatory laws imposed on society?



jabbar  
29 Jan 10 , 21:00 PM

WITHOUT STRINGS??? (PG3) Prostitution does not kill (generally) but, HIV/AIDS will. A one way ticket for you! More money and effort should be put in getting the "Family Movement & the Govt C.S.E." up and properly running in the hands of "CORRECT" people. If this is not done, our society is lost. Where to run in Little S'pore where there's no chance of getting infection of any kind? Mount Faber? Govt should wake up and better "micro-manage" these issues as I think this "public funds for HIV" thingey has been mishandled. Too much lobbying from VWOs that, if MOH care to list out the VWOs involved with providing the so-called research info, one will find that these VWOs are either fronts or infested and controlled by Homo Activists and their extreme liberal supporters.
jabbar  
29 Jan 10 , 20:59 PM

WITHOUT STRINGS??? (PG2) Funding "those infected unintentionally by no fault of their own such as spouses and children. These unfortunate people should receive the FULL support of the government and society. The public will not deny these people. These deceitful and bigotted Homo Activists have not given up on our children and in destroying our family and culture. Pity the individual homos who have been constantly informed wrongly that they cant change by these Homo Activists. Tens of thousands like them have left this lifestyle behind them and this truth has not been shared with the individual. Govt better wake up or else there WILL be an epidemic in our Little Red Dot because our Govt did not take aggressive preventive measures beforehand. Check out the internet and see for yourself how many Homo hotspots we have in this Little Red Dot? For a small minority, they are really very "Active".



jabbar  
29 Jan 10 , 20:58 PM

WITHOUT STRINGS??? (PG1) I belief that I speak for those against providing public funds "WITHOUT STRINGS". For those who got infected due to their irresponsible lifestyle, they should be held accountable for their actions in endangering the rest of society. These people who want public funds must allow themselves : a) to be registered and monitored indefinitely becos of their "Killer" infection. b) for those Homos, these people must also go through Counselling to show them that they have a 2nd "chance to change". (This will help remove them away from "PEER PRESSURE) c) ensure that they do not go back to their irresponsible ways again. If they are found out through "Spot checks", let the law take over. (Even prostitutes are registered and go for regular check-ups) Govt cant be dishing out "Blank Checks" without strings. There has to be accountability. Generally, S'poreans are not heartless. Saw how generous we were with NKF & Ren Ci? Its how the public funds willl be "utilized" and "disbursed" that's is a worry.
Too Concerned to Remain Silent!  
29 Jan 10 , 18:48 PM

Continues from below....

(4) As a start, perhaps the HIV subsidies should be given to women ,children and those who contracted HIV through accidental blood contamination. What is the budget for this category of HIV patients?

In fact, all first line cancer drugs are heavily subsidised (5) [kindly clarify by Medisave or Medifund?] as they are on the standard drug list

(1) What is meant by first line drugs? Public need to understand terms used, and
(2) Are the HIV drugs first line drugs ?

The recent media comment on cancer drugs under Medifund pertained to some secondary cancer drugs.
As it is today, needy cancer patients are already assisted by Medifund.

On an average, how much per cancer patient per year is funded by Medifund ?

This covers both SDL drugs and other alternatives as prescribed by their doctors. The thinking is that with more targeted approach in assisting these needy patients through Medifund, we can better help these cancer patients.

(1) This is conditional on the HIV drug programme being "effective" . What does MOH mean by "effective." ?

(6) Why should subsidies for non-HIV patients depend on the " effectiveness " of the HIV funding? It is a puzzle.

MOH had said earlier that it feared that if subsidies for expensive drugs are made available for cancer patients, they will all go to governemnt hospitals instead of private hospitals. This is an unfounded fear because MOH should have a means test - "Applications to Medifund are means tested to ensure taxpayers' money only subsidises those who are most in need."(CNA).

(7) Action for Aids has called for subsidised drugs for the middle class Singaporeans. Will MOH accede to its request in the near future?



Too Concerned to Remain Silent!  
29 Jan 10 , 18:44 PM

Dear Mr Khaw Boon Wan,

I now seek in addition, the Minister's clarification and response to the MOH statement posted in Reach.

Reply from Ministry of Health


We have always subsidised cancer treatment (but not HIV treatment), in Class B2 and C wards.

(1) Dear Mr Khaw, do you mean that HIV patients who are warded in Class B2 and C wards do not receive subsidised treatment ? Is the subsidy for cancer treatment for this group of patients from Medisave or Medifund?

As healthcare providers, we try not to pass value judgement on our patients,

(2) This is not an issue of passing value judgment. This is an issue of responsibility and accountability to others. We should not encourage a narcissistic lifestyle ( a point made by Dr. Lee Wei Ling , director of the National Neuroscience Institute in a ST Review article recently) and expect other taxpayers to pick up the tab to sponsor a high risk life style?

Should they not use their Medisave first? It is an issue of using scarce resources wisely and responsibly.

just as we subsidise smokers for their lung cancer treatment.

(3) On the assumption that the correlation between lung cancer and smoking is established, how many lung cancer smoker-patients are we subsidising out of Medifund and and what is the budget allocated for them?

Do we sponsor such cancer patient to the tune of $10,000 per person per year?

The recent announcement to extend Medifund assistance for HIV treatment is to correct the anomaly.

(4) Is this exercise one to correct anomalies ? If so, would MOH correct other anomalies? Surely, our health system must operate on other bases as well.

As taxpayers, we understand that our already good healthcare system cannot take care of every sickness and disease. What about kidney patients? Diabetics etc etc.

Continues above....
Too Concerned to Remain Silent!  
29 Jan 10 , 18:43 PM

Dear Mr Khaw Boon Wan,

I now seek in addition, the Minister's clarification and response to the MOH statement posted in Reach.

Reply from Ministry of Health


We have always subsidised cancer treatment (but not HIV treatment), in Class B2 and C wards.

(1) Dear Mr Khaw, do you mean that HIV patients who are warded in Class B2 and C wards do not receive subsidised treatment ? Is the subsidy for cancer treatment for this group of patients from Medisave or Medifund?

As healthcare providers, we try not to pass value judgement on our patients,

(2) This is not an issue of passing value judgment. This is an issue of responsibility and accountability to others. We should not encourage a narcissistic lifestyle ( a point made by Dr. Lee Wei Ling , director of the National Neuroscience Institute in a ST Review article recently) and expect other taxpayers to pick up the tab to sponsor a high risk life style?

Should they not use their Medisave first? It is an issue of using scarce resources wisely and responsibly.

just as we subsidise smokers for their lung cancer treatment.

(3) On the assumption that the correlation between lung cancer and smoking is established, how many lung cancer smoker-patients are we subsidising out of Medifund and and what is the budget allocated for them?

Do we sponsor such cancer patient to the tune of $10,000 per person per year?

The recent announcement to extend Medifund assistance for HIV treatment is to correct the anomaly.

(4) Is this exercise one to correct anomalies ? If so, would MOH correct other anomalies? Surely, our health system must operate on other bases as well.

As taxpayers, we understand that our already good healthcare system cannot take care of every sickness and disease. What about kidney patients? Diabetics etc etc.

Continues above....



Too Concerned to Remain Silent!  
29 Jan 10 , 18:25 PM

Page 2 of Letter - Continues from below...

The MOH policy has the effect of mainstreaming homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle. This is profoundly Disturbing and dangerously destructive to our society, our traditional Asian culture, our low birth rate, our upholding of Traditional Family Values and Sanctity of Marriage as One Man One Woman, and our Children and Children's Children. The subsidy should exclude the high risk group of HIV patients as they are prepared to take the risk of HIV attached to their lifestyle. The subsidy should go to the non high risk group, mainly women and children.

Dear Mr Khaw, we need to know which institutions receive Medifund so that citizens and taxpayers have a good understanding what is happening to its public health system and the direction Singapore is heading. There is also the larger issue of competing interests in allocation of funds for health and say, education.

I look forward to your prompt and positive reply and clarifications for a clearer and better understanding of our health system.

Mr Khaw, I now seek in addition, your clarification and response to the MOH statement posted in Reach. My questions below under "Feedback via Email", "Reply from Ministry of Health" are in red.

Thank you and Appreciate!
Too Concerned to Remain Silent!  
29 Jan 10 , 18:24 PM

Dear Esteemed Minister, Mr Khaw Boon Wan,

I am writing my second letter to your excellency, in response to the Reply from MOH posted on REACH "Feedback via Email".

Once again, as a loving, caring and engaging parent, and especially a very concerned citizen, I am all for and immensely supportive of our Government using Public Funds to Help the Unfortunate and the GENUINE Victims of HIV, like the spouses who are / were infected by their husbands or their wives, the babies and children who are / were infected by their mothers, and those who contracted HIV through accidental blood contamination.

These are Genuine Cases of Infections where it is by NO Fault of their own that these INNOCENT GENUINE Victims contracted the Deadly Disease.

However, the spouses who GAVE their husbands or wives HIV due to promiscuity, sex with prostitutes, strangers or casual sex, or infidelities should not be given "blank cheques" of Medifund (Taxpayers' Money) - WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY.

I believe Homosexuals (& Bisexuals), practising unnatural, unhealthy, abnormal, promiscuous, and high risk sex, behaviours and lifestyles, falls under this category.

Governmentt should be prudent on the use of such money to limit loose and irresponsible acts of those who get infected through immoral sexual activities. The numbers of those infected with HIV is on the rise, and by providing for their medical expenses, the amounts to be set aside will also have to increase over time.

This Medifund for HIV treatment will encourage people to Self-Indulge and continue to engage in behaviours, acts and lifestyles that are irresponsible, immoral, dangerous, destructive and extremely High-Risk Sexually, and then easily push the Responsibility to ALL the Majority people who have not done wrong and who have not gotten them into their dreadful situation.

Continues Above.....



You must be logged in to submit a comment.
Return
  

 
        Copyright@ 2009 REACH. All rights reserved.
  Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Rate This Site 		Your Say | Talk Abuzz | Youth Vibes | Consultation   
News & Events | Resources | eTownHall | About Us | Home   		     
     Best viewed at 1024*768 resolution with IE 7.0 or FireFox 3.0