Speeches from 12th Parliament in Year 2015

By MP for Aljunied GRC, Sylvia Lim
[Delivered in Committee of Supply on 13 March 2015]

The number of citizens with dementia is expected to grow from 28,000 in 2013 to 80,000 by 2030.[1] It is important to ensure that the interests of our aging population are protected.

The Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) scheme is very useful, but I have some concerns. First, there is a real risk that elderly persons are subject to the undue influence of persons they depend on. Secondly, a resident related his worry about the ease of the scheme, as his brother had made an LPA in favour of a stranger to the family, without anyone else knowing of it. Thirdly, I noted a big grassroots initiative to get residents to sign LPAs, leading to masses of LPAs being issued by certificate issuers without personal knowledge of the donors.

Our current LPA scheme requires the certificate issuer to be a doctor or a lawyer. It is a safeguard, but limited if the doctor or lawyer has no prior knowledge of the donor. In the few minutes spent with the donor, it may not be possible to determine if the donor’s mental state is stable or if the LPA arrangements accord with the donor’s well-being and interests.

I have two enhancements to suggest.

First, re-instituting a safeguard that was removed – putting into the standard form of LPA the question of whether the donor wishes to inform another person of it and giving that person the right to object to the LPA. Although Minister had previously replied in the House that the donor could still inform someone, the safeguard is precisely for those who may be less aware of the risks. By requiring the certificate issuer to ask the donor specifically whether he wants someone to be informed, the donor can respond to the certificate issuer on this, without the donee’s influence.

My second suggestion is to require the certificate issuer to indicate in the LPA how long he has known the donor or how he forms the opinion that the LPA is reliable.
Finally, I refer to the regime for court-appointed deputies. Being someone who recently went through the process to be appointed deputy, I appreciate the need for rigour, especially when one is appointed deputy to handle someone else’s assets. However, parents of adults with mental disabilities are also required to be appointed deputies in order to make decisions about their children’s personal welfare. Recently, I met a resident with an adult son with severe cerebral palsy. As he could not give valid consent for a medical procedure, she was asked to get a court order to be his deputy. Law firms quoted her legal costs at $6,000 to $7,000. In such cases, she and other parents would be caring for their disabled adult children for the rest of their lives, with or without the Act. Will the Ministry institute a more streamlined and cheaper procedure for such cases?