In the dock

The case of the philandering professor
So Tey Tsun Hang’s case has been postponed to mid-December because the courts agreed that he needed time to prepare. Good for Tey. Seems to me he does need the stuff he asked for, like the transcripts of the students he was said to have “upgraded’’. And those medical reports on the day of his CPIB interrogation. Seems that the former district judge didn’t realise he had to apply to the district judge for the kind of information he wanted. Guess he will get it right this time. This case is too juicy for words. Who are the four other ex-students (including a man) besides the one in the case cited? And what about those allegations that he confessed under duress, in his hospital garb, while on psychoactive drugs and in a “mentally altered state’’? Doesn’t look good for the CPIB’s interrogation techniques. I mean, I know an interrogation isn’t supposed to be comfortable…but….?

The case of the woman in love
In love – or not? That’s what Cecilia Sue seemed to have told investigators of the CNB director’s case. But she also contradicted herself as well when she said Ng Boon Gay had helped her secure a contract. The whole case is puzzling with the prosecutor acknowledging that Ng didn’t interfere in the procurement process. So it seems a case of sexual harassment? That he forced her into having sex or she was “compelled’’to do so because she was afraid of pissing off this very important man? And she was compelled to do so only four times despite a relationship that stretched back to 2009? I tend to agree with defence lawyer Tan Chee Meng description of the prosecution taking a blunderbuss approach. How is Ng supposed to prove his innocence like this? Divorce his wife and marry the woman?

The case of the two other women
So the prosecution is proceeding with one charge and one woman first against the SCDF chief. I read ST and had to be wondering why the other two women who have been publicly named weren’t getting hauled up too. ST reported that the charges against them had been “stood down’’ – not withdrawn. I wish journalists would realised not all readers would understand what this phrase means and why this happened. Today reported that it was probably because they wanted to get the clearest cut charge out of the way first so things won’t get complicated. Then the other women would be grilled too. Phew! For a moment there, I thought everyone has done those women a big injustice – I mean they’ve been named and all that….

The case of the “biased’’ doctors
This was in The Sunday Times. It’s about how the courts ticked off the Singapore Medical Council for “picking on’’ (my words) one aesthetic doctor even though guidelines on aesthetic medicine hadn’t even been issued. What about the rest of the doctors who practise beauty medicine then? The interesting thing is that the charges against the doctor was brought to the SMC’s attention by the Ministry of Health. Sort of begs the question why MOH accused her, and only her, of practising non-evidence based medicine in November 2007, before those guidelines were introduced the following year. And the SMC sat in judgement only LAST YEAR. By the way, wasn’t the SMC supposed to have changed its disciplinary processes in the meantime? By getting a lawyer on board the panel or something? Didn’t work?

Nursing the doctors in SAF

Sometimes I think the men in this country forget that there are women here too. I am referring to ST Page 1 story on SAF to tap expertise of civilian doctors. If I was a mother with a son doing national service, I would be dead worried. Because nothing is said in the story about the “current” situation regarding medical treatment for our boys in green. In fact, I don’t even know how many guys there are in NS. Apparently, 40,000 NSFs, according to Today. But how many doctors or medical officers (what’s the difference)? What’s the ratio? All I have is six to eight doctors sign on each year. And the number is 20 per cent more today than 10 years ago. This has always been my beef with journalists. What in heaven’s name is 20 per cent more?? From 10 doctors to 12? From 100 doctors to 120?

Also, what is the current standard of medical care in the SAF? How many guys see doctors? For what ailments? And what if they need specialist help? What about number of doctors stationed at training exercises? For this, I have to read Today to find more, just a bit more. But at least more. So it seems there’s gonna be a Pilot Physician Partnership thing and the NS doctors are going to be rotated to the hospitals before they become full-time SAF doctors.

Of course, the papers went to town with the announcement of the new medical training facilities. TNP even had a very nice graphic. Well and good. But hey, can get answers to critical questions first before going rah-rah at yet another innovation by the G, which I don’t even know people need….?

A moral mess

What in heaven’s name is happening to our doctors, teachers, lawyers and civil servants? Everyday, we’re reading about these professionals being accused of or pleading guilty to a whole barrage of crimes: having sex with patients, underaged girls, students in return for doing favours or just for kicks; prescribing illegal stuff; favouring supposed friends; sleeping on the job; being loco etc. And I am not even talking  about religious leaders aka known as the City Harvest people who can afford high-priced Senior Counsels.

Okay, I don’t care who defends who – and some have yet to be proven guilty. And yes, they make for great reading and you start thinking, hey, maybe this is a sign that, never mind the Woffles Wu puzzle, the rich and famous do NOT get away with doing illegal stuff.

Except that, there seems to be too many of them….Or maybe it’s just a coincidence that everything is happening in a clump.

What has happened to the ethical codes that underpin all these professions? What are their leaders doing about imbueing them in the members? I don’t think it’s enough to say, we caught the bad hats, we weeded them out and you shouldn’t tar all of us with the same brush. Some introspection is surely expected.

Of course, there would need to be system changes, especially in the civil service. You’ve got a foreign service officer accused of fraud and now the NParks guy who bought expensive bikes. And every year, we’ve got to read reports from the Public Accounts Committee, Accountant-General etc lambasting some agency or other over its sloppy procurement procedures. I believe some suggestions were made to improve this process earlier this year. Has it been done? Is it an improvement over the Finance ministry’s explanation about how those Bromption bikes were bought?

With so much de-moral-ising news, I always find the Bouquet column in ST’s Forum Page a joy to read. It’s short, snappy – and grateful. People remembering to thank others for doing nice things. I wish there were more of them to read to balance the daily diet.

PS. ST named the NUS law professor for his supposed sex-for-grades stunt although he hasn’t been charged. I suppose this puts it one up on TNP which first broke the story? Can’t  be. I guess the stable of newspapers have different standards on naming people….Hmmm