HWZ Forums

Login Register FAQ Mark Forums Read

Medishield-life turns out to be a scam that exploits poor people in Singapore?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-03-2018, 04:29 AM   #1
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Smile Medishield-life turns out to be a scam that robs poor people in Singapore?

Medishield-life turns out to be a scam that robs poor people in Singapore?
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...co-pay-feature
Sadly, I read in the papers that the rich who can afford the highest level medical insurance plans are probably the biggest/ worst exploiters of the compulsory national healthcare insurance scheme in Singapore. As it is reported in 'New riders for IP plans will include co-pay feature' [ST, 08 March 2018]: "People with full riders have bills that are 60 per cent higher than those without riders." http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...co-pay-feature

As I understand, the 60% difference refers to the difference between already rich people: i.e. the rich (own just medishield-life integrated plans) vs the ultra rich (own insurance riders in ADDITION to the integrated plans). As compared to the poor (only have compulsory basic 'medishield-life'), the difference cannot be more stark since as the example highlighted by Mr Gilbert Goh (appended below or at https://www.facebook.com/goh.gilbert...75?pnref=story ) some poor Singaporeans skip medical treatments due to inability to afford transportation costs. Having more comfortable care at government and private hospitals may also mean that richer patients live longer and thus stand to benefit from the concept of 'pre-funding' since poor people finding it hard to physically transport themselves to medical care locations implicitly benefit less from the compulsory national healthcare insurance scheme since they will die earlier for reasons of transport costs difficulties and other obvious benefits ONLY available to private integrated medishield-life insurance coverage such as pre/post hospitalization care, cancer immunotherapy, prosthesis benefits, ability to port care benefits to other parts of the world (evacuation costs, overseas treatments) etc. 'Role of pre-funding' https://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_w...-funding-.html

I thus will not be surprised that based upon the concept of 'pre-funding', the shortened life expectancy of poor people, the ability of the rich to afford higher quality/ comfort care / greater options, medishield-life has inadvertently (?or by design?) become a means by which the poor are now implicitly if not explicitly funding the healthcare/ treatment costs for rich people.

My suggestion to this obviously obtuse, inhumane, unjust and untenable system of exploiting the poor is to stop any one subscribing to any integrated shield plan or worse still, insurance plan riders (conferring further medical fees waivers) from receiving any subsidies usually accruable to the basic medishield-life portion of the insurance plan. To provide subsidies to anyone who can afford to subscribe to integrated shield plans is a travesty of justice akin to funding private taxi fares (which is an obvious luxury as compared to public transport (bus/ MTR fares)), to fund people subscribing to any integrated medishield-life plan with an additional rider would be like providing subsidies for people who want to own their own automobiles (just because they under declare their income tax or report a small dwelling place as their residential address): an obvious squander of government funds and worse: complicity in the robbery/ exploitation of the poor since as earlier described, any person who gets a deliberate/ unfair 60% (upwards) upperhand in the nett 'access' to common pool medishield-life funds obtained under the communist/ socialist concept of compulsory 'pre-funding' reveals the gross injustice implicit in the design of medishield-life that blindly subsidises holders of private healthcare insurance plans; which obviously will erode national cohesion and trust in government in the long run.

Instead of disbursing medishield-life subsidies liberally (indiscriminately) like one distracts children with cheap candies, a more targeted carrot-stick based upon health consciousness can keep overall cohort medicals claims costs low: e.g. maintaining a low % body fat (below 15% for males and below 25% for females), performing well in fitness tests (modeled after universally used military fitness test like IPPT, with swimming/ cycling alternatives), non-smoking status are all very good (anti-diabetes) options to consider for substantive 'earned' waivers from the costs of premiums for compulsory medishield-life which can be implemented on a national level, as well as the total banning of the use of riders, would make the basic medishield-life scheme a more trusted medical insurance scheme whereby the concept of healthcare insurance returns to the original philosophy of insuring calamities which are unpreventable by doing everything within control to avoid the avoidable (e.g. type 2 diabetes due to sedentary lifestyle, high% body fat causing diabetes etc). Rather than a sneaky way for the rich to siphon $$$ from the poor to fund their own irresponsible and lavish lifestyles in the ultimate tragedy of the commons and let Singapore go bankrupt due to the lawless, free for all, self-serving buffet syndrom mentality, the result of an extremely poorly planned and executed national healthcare insurance policy.
=========================

From:
https://www.facebook.com/goh.gilbert...75?pnref=story
Visited a 50-year-old man who skips his medical appointment twice because he could not gather enough transport money to visit the doctor. He is suspected to have initial stage of cancer of the pancreas and liver. He lost about 30 kg from his previous weight and looks jaundiced.
He also owes a few months of utilities, rental and town council charges but feels most worried about the rental debts as HDB has dropped by already to check on him. He is afraid of losing the home though I assured him that so far HDB has not go hard on rental defaultors unlike purchased flat owners.
Surprisingly, SSO has rejected his welfare application citing that he still has a son who is now working as an intern earning $1200/month. His Malaysian wife is currently back in Malaysia undergoing dialysis for her diabetic condition. Of course, the SSO wants him to get back to work but his ill health and frail body are not helping him much.
He is currently awaiting approval from Comcare side after visiting his MP.
I left Jefri after leaving him with a small amount of cash for his meals and assured him that we will assist in one way or another.
A regular donor has pledged $500 to offset the $600-over rental default and someone has already paid $100 into the SP bill. At least he will have a roof over his head as he nurses his health slowly back to normal.
Apologise that the video is abit soft and last five minutes.
Poor People's Campaign: a ground-up community initiative to improve the living condition of the poor among us.
=======================
Everyone must compulsorily conform to the concept of 'pre-funding', however, ultimately, it is the poor who paradoxically subsidise the rich since the rich (leveraging upon insurance 'riders') get to claim 60% more (even after proration is considered):
Reply from MOH
27 Nov 2013, Straits Times
Role of pre-funding
WE THANK Mr David Boey ("Problems with pre-funding"; Nov 19), Ms Maria Loh Mun Foong ("Merits of pre-funding"; last Thursday) and Mr Tan Kin Lian ("Pre-funding not feasible for MediShield Life"; Forum Online, Monday) for sharing their views on the concept of pre-funding for MediShield.
The letters from Mr Boey and Ms Loh may have created the wrong impression that the proposed pre-funding concept will require the younger generation to cross-subsidise the current elderly.
For MediShield, the pre-funded amount contributed by each cohort is set aside for the future use of their own respective cohorts, and not used to cross-subsidise the current elderly.
To address concerns over affordability of premiums among the current cohort of elderly Singaporeans, the Government has indicated its plans to provide help for the older generation of Singaporeans.
As noted by Mr Tan, health-care costs tend to be higher for the elderly. This, plus the effects of medical advancements and changing expectations, will put further upward pressure on future premiums as we age.
For this reason, it will be even more important to set aside some premiums in advance, or pre-funding, to address concerns of premium affordability during old age.
With pre-funding, members pay higher premiums during their working ages and, in return, can receive rebates to offset their own future premiums when they grow old.
With the ongoing review and enhancement of MediShield to MediShield Life, one of the key issues the MediShield Life Review Committee hopes to engage the public on is increasing the role of pre-funding. The committee welcomes all Singaporeans to provide their feedback or sign up for upcoming discussion sessions through www.medishieldlife.sg
Philip Sim
Deputy Director
Corporate Communications
Ministry of Health
https://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_w...-funding-.html
__________________
As punctually as Sun rises, God's Love shines brightly over all Creation, at all times of a day.

Last edited by cherry6; 12-03-2018 at 04:44 AM..
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 10:26 AM   #2
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Medishield-life should not be a loophole for the rich to rob the poor.
Medishield-life should not be a loophole for the rich to rob the poor.

Only fair that PAP gahmen compensate all BASIC medishield-life premiums by 60%; Integrated Medishield-life RIDERS are Antithetical to concept of Pre-funding.

The concept of any form of insurance is about insuring against the unpreventable and the catastrophic: i.e. the damage must NOT be self inflicted due to negligence like the lack of exercise resulting in a low muscle mass and accordingly a low basal metabolic rate resulting in high body fat % (meaning that all fat cells are already so saturated with fat that they cannot accommodate any more energy absorption in the form of glucose): resulting in insulin resistance and high blood glucose: aka T2 Diabetes Mellitus. The purpose of the insurance deductible and copayment are thus blunt/ minimal forms of controls upon the abuse of these restrictions/ liabilities that ALL members of the national healthcare insurance scheme must adhere to without exception (just like national service (NS) or obeying laws and rules such as returning one's library books before their due date arrives).

The concept of pre-funding for medishield-life insurance means that certain STRICT rules must be in place to prevent unlawful withdrawals from the common fund pool for unmeritorious claims: e.g. on medical treatments which would have been avoidable but for the irresponsible lifestyle choices of the claimant (e.g. smoking, high % body fat).

Insurance riders which bypass the already minimal check and balances of the insurance deductible and copayment (which safeguard the common fund pool) and should thus either be outlawed, or else the per-capita claim quantum submitted by the cohort using such riders should not be allowed to exceed the per-capita claims value for the cohort subscribing to solely medishield-life basic so that the cohort of shamelessly greedy rich people may not use their wealth/ 'insurance' accounting tricks to grab and additional 60% more claims compensation out of the common cookie jar (at the expense of the middle class/ poor): just because loopholes/ the misuse of insurance riders allows them to.

Just as NS is compulsory/ managed upon the values of equitability, Medishield-life should not turn out to be another loophole for the rich to rob the poor.
----------------------------------
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...co-pay-feature 'New riders for IP plans will include co-pay feature' [ST, 08 March 2018]: "People with full riders have bills that are 60 per cent higher than those without riders." http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...co-pay-feature
------------------------------------
Reply from MOH
27 Nov 2013, Straits Times
Role of pre-funding
WE THANK Mr David Boey ("Problems with pre-funding"; Nov 19), Ms Maria Loh Mun Foong ("Merits of pre-funding"; last Thursday) and Mr Tan Kin Lian ("Pre-funding not feasible for MediShield Life"; Forum Online, Monday) for sharing their views on the concept of pre-funding for MediShield.
The letters from Mr Boey and Ms Loh may have created the wrong impression that the proposed pre-funding concept will require the younger generation to cross-subsidise the current elderly.
For MediShield, the pre-funded amount contributed by each cohort is set aside for the future use of their own respective cohorts, and not used to cross-subsidise the current elderly.
To address concerns over affordability of premiums among the current cohort of elderly Singaporeans, the Government has indicated its plans to provide help for the older generation of Singaporeans.
As noted by Mr Tan, health-care costs tend to be higher for the elderly. This, plus the effects of medical advancements and changing expectations, will put further upward pressure on future premiums as we age.
For this reason, it will be even more important to set aside some premiums in advance, or pre-funding, to address concerns of premium affordability during old age.
With pre-funding, members pay higher premiums during their working ages and, in return, can receive rebates to offset their own future premiums when they grow old.
With the ongoing review and enhancement of MediShield to MediShield Life, one of the key issues the MediShield Life Review Committee hopes to engage the public on is increasing the role of pre-funding. The committee welcomes all Singaporeans to provide their feedback or sign up for upcoming discussion sessions through www.medishieldlife.sg
Philip Sim
Deputy Director
Corporate Communications
Ministry of Health
https://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_w...-funding-.html
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 03:32 PM   #3
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 22,806
It is not Medishield Life that is bad la.
__________________
Ish ready to die jialat jialat
Carnage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 03:58 PM   #4
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
It is not Medishield Life that is bad la.
Medishield-life is as bad as its loopholes (allowing exploitation by the rich) are as big as an elephant.
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2018, 03:59 PM   #5
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
From another forum:
Insurance is something that you must be thankful that others make claims and not you even though you are paying premiums also...... :laughing
The problem with the Singapore design of medishield-life is that with rich people using riders to siphon $$$ from the public insurance pool for all kinds of unnecessary / un-meritorious claims, the system would either have to eventually charge indiscriminately exorbitant premiums, placing stress especially upon the poor (which can result in cancers and diabetes from bad lifestyle choices the consequence of struggling to make ends meet/pay insurance premiums) or else reveal itself to be the ultimate con job that seeks bankruptcy protection such that even those who have managed to survive by struggling hard to live healthy and do honest work find themselves in a bankrupt nation/ state because the leaders have been so corrupt and irresponsible that they used the savings of individuals (prefunding 'insurance' schemes) to buy votes and subsidise the treatment costs of rich people that the system is now bankrupt.

In such a desolate system run under an obviously corrupt pretense (allowing rich people to bypass essential check and balances), then even those left standing would eventually wish that they were already dead.

When loopholes as big as a 60% claims excess revealing themselves in the early years of the inception of our compulsory national healthcare insurance plan, such high hopes for the future remain a pipe dream at best.

You shall be in for a great disappointment if u do not view the current rampant exploitation and abuse plaguing the system with sufficient apprehension and concern.

Last edited by cherry6; 12-03-2018 at 04:07 PM..
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 12:32 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,419
Just to place on record that this thread was started by one person and the same person continues ranting without responses by others.

Fact-twisting much?
ah_cheng1882 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 12:57 PM   #7
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Just to place on record that this thread was started by one person and the same person continues ranting without responses by others.

Fact-twisting much?
Hello ah cheng, this thread is a record of the bullying/exploitation of the poor by the rich who 'steal' 60% more from the common insurance pool savings/ endowment just because they can afford to orchestrate the insurance 'tricks' (riders) to do so.

"Fact-twisting much?" Huh?
In any case, should there be any fact presented in the articles here which u are able to prove untrue, I shall be most happy to withdraw my conclusions based upon such facts if proven false.

Failing which, these articles shall remain a solemn reminder of the gross injustice that begs urgent correction if Singapore wishes to remain united till SG100.

Thanks for responding but i look forward to more fact based constructive responses rather than emotional appeals to mob rule.

Last edited by cherry6; 13-03-2018 at 02:28 PM..
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 07:51 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 10
Medishield-life is as bad as its loopholes (allowing exploitation by the rich) are as big as an elephant.
Definitely caused by poor planning by the govt. Scholars are definitely not doing their work properly.
BrianNicholas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 09:33 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 10
Private doctor will ask whether you have insurance plan then decide on what treatment you should be on.

Quite jialat. The scheme kena exploit.
ttys91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 11:32 PM   #10
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Private doctor will ask whether you have insurance plan then decide on what treatment you should be on.

Quite jialat. The scheme kena exploit.
Exactly like Sim Lim Sq computer shops. When I ask them whether their 'diy' computer can suit my needs, they say must reveal my budget, they will build PC based on budget, not based upon need.
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 11:41 PM   #11
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Definitely caused by poor planning by the govt. Scholars are definitely not doing their work properly.
Actually I think medishield-life is a con job for 2 reasons. Primarily it was to rob individual CPF medisave savings so as to relieve poor people (without even basic medishield) dependence on medifund for payment of their healthcare costs.

2ndly, it is meant to buy votes because gahmen hyped it up like godsend : no lifetime claims limits etc, $8 bypass, use rider becomes foc bypass etc. Thus encouraging buffet syndrome and race between doctor and insurance agent to see who is first to buy Ferrari ...

Also, preventive healthcare was thrown under the bus as more and more acute hospitals were built to create more well paying medical specialist jobs...
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2018, 03:52 PM   #12
Master Member
 
cherry6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,109
Medishield-life turns out to be a scam that robs poor people in Singapore?
...
Updated as follows :

PAP gahmen is SQUANDERING tax payers $$$ and IRRESPONSIBLE with Medishield-life funds.

Calculation: Medishield-life is a Swindle of Singaporean Poor.

Rich Singaporeans claim 2.03786x more then middle class, what more the poor?

According to MOH stats, "Nine per cent of full rider policyholders made claims in 2016, compared to 7 per cent of those without riders"

"According to MOH, the average bill claimed by a full rider policyholder cost S$9,093 in 2016, about 58.5 per cent higher than that of an average IP holder (S$5,738). Patients with riders were more likely to visit private hospitals than those without riders, contributing to a bulk of this differential. "


Calculation:
Since hospitalization claims rate for rider holder is 9% as opposed to 7% for non-rider holders and also 1.585X more for rider holders,
Increase payout value to rider holders= 9/7 X 1.585= 2.03786 times that of average IP holders.

Since private insurers selling IP plans make claims from (and basic premium payments) to MOH wrt medishield-life, it can be said that those with full riders make in excess of 2X claims from the common medishield-life insurance pool.

Pls note that the actual multiple may actually be even higher than 2.03786 times, since MOH own definition of the 'average IP' holder is likely to also include BOTH partial and full rider holders, the latter of whom make up 30% of the IP pool which in itself is constituted by the more wealthy 68% of Singaporeans.

It was also reported that poorer Singaporeans are unable to receive proper public healthcare cancer treatments because even the public transport costs to and from hospital may turn out to be a hindrance in itself.

It is also noted that the MOH is subsidising many wealthy Singaporeans indiscriminately just based on their declared household address and income levels even though by the fact that these Singaporeans can afford not just IP plans or worse, even very expensive full rider add-on plans, remains prima facie evidence that (MOH is squandering state funds to buy votes given that) by their expensive taste for expensive insurance products, these same wealthy folks are indeed very well to do.

In its inception, MOH explained the huge jump in compulsory medishield-life premiums over the old optional medishield plans by using 'prefunding' (with the option of future premium discounts and refunds) as the reason why basic medishield-life premiums for the young increased so much. Yet, short of doing IP plan insurance companies a business favour and helping them mediate amongst themselves an agreement to cease the sale of loss making full rider for medishield-life IP plans (and coincidentally reducing the population of (double value claims) full rider holders in the process), MOH is doing precious little independently to lead in reducing the raw deal that medishield-life especially gives to the poor ('prefunding') and the SQUANDERING OF STATE FUNDS, aka increase in GST. Perhaps, for a start, all basic medishield-life subsidies to anybody with an IP rider should be REMOVED with immediate effect and those with IPs, 1year later. Only those on BASIC medishield-life compulsory insurance (and no other hospitalization insurance plans) can qualify for medishield-life premium subsidies of any form.

In short, medishield-life and its subsidy structure is a raw deal for poorer Singaporeans and a big extravagance of government funds with the consequence that GST has to be unnecessarily raised for all.
cherry6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-08-2018, 12:38 AM   #13
Master Member
 
Trak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 2,739
Trak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On