Singapore not giving free treatment to anti-vaxxers

[Whose]

stops paying for Covid treatment for people who are unvaccinated by choice | The Independent" www.independent.co.uk/asia/southeast-asia/singapore-free-covid-treatment-unvaccinated-b1954077.html?amp

AIBU to think this fair enough?

Currently, unvaccinated persons make up a sizeable majority of those who require intensive inpatient care, and disproportionately contribute to the strain on our healthcare resources,

(Those who haven't had the vaccine because they medically can't are excluded from this)

@Djifunrsn

I don't agree with this at all.

The unvaccinated are generally worried about the effects of the jab. That doesn't make them undeserving of treatment.

Would people not be treated for other avoidable stuff?

eg
Broke leg skiing - shouldn't have gone skiing, it's dangerous.
Car accident - shouldn't have driven, should have taken bus.
Contact sports injury - shouldn't have done that, should have done a safer sport
Trampolining injury - see above for skiing.
Medical care for pregnancy - well that was your choice so you can pay.

I mean where does it end?!

In Singapore, all of those things are paid for. The government does not provide free at the point of access healthcare.

People should not be manipulated into having any kind of medical treatment and this is manipulation. I am a double vaxxed but sorry ...i think they are wrong. Not happy with Covid passports either.

100% this.

@malificent7 in singapore, you can't even eat at restaurants without being vaccinated. You can't even enter the mall. Anyone has ever been to singapore knows that life in singapore is very mall-centric and the two favourite pastimes of singaporeans are shopping and eating (mainly out because the food is cheap and good). It is very hot (over 30 degree celsius daily) so people escape the heat by spending all their time in air conditioned malls. There are also walkways from the subway station which are part of a larger shopping mall. There was an article in the straits times about a man who refused to be vaccinated and has to have a letter from his child's daycare centre in order to be admitted to the mall where his children's enrichment centre is located. He even has to make a giant detour when taking public transport because he is not allowed to walk in the air conditioned walkway (as it is part of the shopping mall)

Here in Mexico, there has been no coercion whatsoever and there is a very high uptake of vaccines and nearly everyone uses facemasks.

I think the very coercion itself creates resistance.

It's an excellent rule.

I wonder what proportion of those utilising most intensive care resources in the uk are vaccinated vs non vax.

Coyoacan

Theres been little coercion in the uk. Yet there's a clear core of people resistant to the vaccine.

@DeepaBeesKit

Coyoacan

Theres been little coercion in the uk. Yet there's a clear core of people resistant to the vaccine.

The take-up rate has been far higher in the UK than was ever expected.

Well I mean

They are a different country.

Their laws include

Homosexuality being illegal
Chewing gum is banned
Extremely punitive drug laws. Including death penalty

I mean I've been there and it's very nice BUT it's a totally different country.

Lots of countries have laws that you disagree with I'd imagine OP?

We're just used to the fact that people who suffer chronic illness due to lifestyle factors (diabetes, heart disease, certain cancers, respiratory disease, alcohol related disease etc) cost the NHS billions. There's no slack in the system - so the unvaccinated are to blame. It's only unvaccinated people in hospital beds that are the problem - all other occupants are 'value neutral.'

@skeptile

We're just used to the fact that people who suffer chronic illness due to lifestyle factors (diabetes, heart disease, certain cancers, respiratory disease, alcohol related disease etc) cost the NHS billions. There's no slack in the system - so the unvaccinated are to blame. It's only unvaccinated people in hospital beds that are the problem - all other occupants are 'value neutral.'

There's a vaccine available for free, which takes what, a few seconds to administer which lowers the risk. What actual support of value is there to address the underlying causes of many lifestyle factors such as social inequality, physical and mental health issues etc? If the government actually addressed the causes and supported people then perhaps it would be comparable, as is, nope.

Let's not give any free healthcare or treatment for cancers, heart diseases, liver diseases, diabetes, etc, to...
smokers, drinkers, or people who eat processed meat and sugar. The obese, underweight, or overweight. Anyone who doesn't get the recommeded amount of exercise per week. Anyone who doesn't eat the perfect diet.

While we're at it, we probably shouldn't treat people in car accidents (they chose to get in the car), people who are drowning (they chose to get in the water), or people who are attacked (they chose to go where they did). If there's a fire and we suspect it might have been caused by any kind of human failure, let's leave them to burn, or charge them for our help.

This is about Singapore though isn't it?

Not the NHS.

It's a totally different country.

They also have other laws which I am pretty sure many would disagree with.

Just wondering-

If anyone knows anything keen to hear-

Singapore has loads of low paid workers iirc many immigrants think many illegal. Who have a pretty rubbish time. Can't remember details.

Not sure how their healthcare is set up but given a society I'm sure I've seen described as two tier.

Could this be about that really? I might have a Google.

Singapore is a pretty restrictive place. There's a lot happens there that wouldn't fly elsewhere.

Hmm not sure will keep looking.

How many disagree with this punishment?

'Singapore is an attractive destination due to its high living standards and wages.[1] The punishment for illegal immigration in the country are a mandatory caning sentence of not less than 3 strokes and a prison sentence'

@ColinTheKoala

And even if you pay for everything else in Singapore, they are still coercing people into having medical treatment - ie the vaccine. The vaccine can and has killed people - and so it should always be a choice whether to have it.

This is not quite true. If you are medically exempt, you do not need to have the vaccination.

The big cultural difference is that a "for the greater good" attitude prevails, which I agree with, and that ICU resources need to be prioritised. That is why the SG government has, quite rightly, pushed so hard for everyone to be vaccinated.

They have also supported citizens and all residents with regular access to free, high quality face masks, antibacterial gel (no shortages) and ART kits throughout the pandemic, as well as a state-of-the art contact tracing system. They have also been open to moving to a "living with Covid" mentality, so things can open up. I think they have been a model example.

I think it’s fine. The world’s healthcare systems and economies have been devastated by this. If you choose not to protect yourself to the best of your ability, despite the fact there plenty is evidence out there to prove vaccine efficacy, then if you get severely unwell, why should the country then have to pay many times more money to make you well/keep you alive?

You can argue all you like about alcohol and cigarettes but I don’t think they are comparable as although they might be choices, they cause addictions which are illnesses within themselves.

Plus alcohol and cigarettes are taxed and alcohol poisoning or smoking are not contagious!

@Clumsyvolcano

I think it’s fine. The world’s healthcare systems and economies have been devastated by this. If you choose not to protect yourself to the best of your ability, despite the fact there plenty is evidence out there to prove vaccine efficacy, then if you get severely unwell, why should the country then have to pay many times more money to make you well/keep you alive?

You can argue all you like about alcohol and cigarettes but I don’t think they are comparable as although they might be choices, they cause addictions which are illnesses within themselves.

👏👏

Everything Clumsy said.

Googling also told me-

Singapore has massive ageing population.

Articles also saying healthcare access a big issue for the large number of immigrant workers who are often v low paid.

There is no minimum wage.

This is a totally different country.

I just don't understand why it's being discussed the way it is!

Loads of countries have all sorts of laws. This is being discussed I'm guessing most posters aren't intimately familiar with Singapore society legal system etc in general?

What about their other laws which are pretty harsh?

Homosexuality illegal.
Death penalty
Etc etc

AIBU to think this fair enough?

Yes, yabu. Completely and utterly unreasonable. People who are very harsh, unethical and vindictive a) have serious emotional problems that they would benefit from getting help with, and b) would destroy what makes human society work by being cruel to anyone they judge as unworthy.

I think it's fine in principle, but it should be applied evenly to all voluntarily-assumed risks (e.g., smokers and lung cancer). I don't know whether Singapore paid for treatments for those other conditions in the first place, though. If they didn't, then fair enough.

And before anyone gets too smug, I'd include pregnancy on the list of voluntarily-assumed risks.