Confucian Healthcare System in Singapore

Abstract

Healthcare issues form the core of any government’s agenda, and a good government is expected to take care of its people and keep them healthy. However, the burden of healthcare is a much contested point and politicians remain divided on the amount the people have to pay for healthcare out of their own pockets. On the one hand, the government must allocate healthcare resources to ensure that each person gets an adequate and appropriate amount of healthcare. On the other hand, measures must be taken to prevent an over reliance on the government and possible abuse of healthcare facilities. In places where the population is aging at a fast pace, effective healthcare policies become even more pressing and governments have to come up with manageable solutions in the long-run that are both of high quality and cost effective. There are three main parties involved in the determination of healthcare responsibility – the government, the people and the healthcare provider. Some common healthcare schemes are mandatory healthcare funds, healthcare insurance and welfare schemes. Governments generally choose a combination of any of the above schemes. In this paper, the healthcare systems of Singapore and Hong Kong are chosen as cases for comparison because both places have similar historical and geographical backgrounds but very different policies on healthcare. While the Hong Kong government provides highly subsidized or free1 healthcare to its people, the Singapore government has adopted a mandatory healthcare savings plan for individuals, transferable among immediate family members. This paper shall first attempt to exposit the Hong Kong and Singapore healthcare systems by tracing their historical backgrounds that have shaped current healthcare policies. The Hong Kong and Singapore healthcare systems then will be compared from an