8 Feb 2022
Ms Sun Xueling
Blk 308B Punggol Walk
#01-364
Waterway Terraces 1
Singapore 822308
Dear Ms Sun,
Family Conflict: Taking Care of an Elderly Parent
1. I thank you for your reply dated 22 Jan 22 and a reply dated 24 Jan 22 from the legal volunteer on the amendments under Courts (Civil and Criminal Justice) Reform Bill for amicable resolution.
The legal volunteer also referred me to the Mental Capacity Act but this will not directly address the problem. Deputyship under the Mental Capacity Act do not serve any of my purposes that cannot be achieved through a writ of summons. Besides, our mother is alert and able to communicate although living with my youngest sister under her control. The Mental Capacity Act is good only for my siblings and their backers because there is no need to go into the scheming and blocking shown in my email dated 19 Jan 22.
A similar position was taken by the two lawyers who I engaged in succession. Their insistence and delay led me to make a complaint to the Law Society of Singapore because it was clearly a dispute between siblings. A writ of summons is required when there is substantial dispute of fact whereas the Mental Capacity Act or the Vulnerable Adults Act are based on interpretation of the written law without much of a dispute.
2. I wrote to my siblings on WhatsApp Chat and to the authorities in my emails about our mother’s weakness as seen from my observations. But my siblings schemed to prevent me from bringing our mother for a medical assessment. The following are some examples. By changing the address in our mother's NRIC on 12 Jun 21 to allow them to make her medical appointments. By allowing our mother to see a doctor only under controlled conditions with Dr C on 3 Apr 21. By blocking an appointment made by Dr B with a doctor at FPC (Family Physician Clinic) on 1 Jun 21. By blocking an appointment for a second opinion with a doctor at the Polyclinic on 18 Jun 21. And, as noted in WhatsApp Chat, from bringing our mother to see a doctor when she was unable to do the exercises because of weakness. More details and incidents were listed in my email and notes.
3. My observations are our mother was able to do all the exercises asked of her at SACH (St Andrew Community Hospital) and ASH (All Saints Home) from 7 Oct 20 to 26 Jan 21 when she was not on the statin compared to exercises she is able to do when she was on the statin since 3 Mar 21. Her physical condition has deteriorated. Now she complains immediately with only 5 min of light exercises by the bed. A sharp contrast and side effects of the statin is a known factor.
4. The problem has been getting a medical assessment of our mother because of weakness. A psychiatric report may also be required because our mother could be easily influenced by my youngest sister due to diminished mental capacity.
There is an element of harm in my complaint because the medications that our mother was given over a long period of time, especially the statin, have weakened our mother. This was not acknowledged by my siblings and their backers even when there was evidence. They have no need to settle because they could depend on their connections to block me. The lawsuit that I wanted from the two lawyers was blocked by the use of connection although my siblings said they would contest it. It may require some form of alleviation for all the parties involved. The amendments to the Courts (Civil and Criminal Justice) Reform Bill that was passed recently will allow the court to “order any party to any proceedings to attempt to resolve any dispute by amicable resolution”.
5. It is likely my youngest sister/siblings will not contest the lawsuit. The following are some examples. My siblings overrode a doctor, collected the statin without proper authorisation from the Polyclinic against a doctor instruction, pre-selected a doctor, used their connections in incidents noted in my email and use of blocking to get the results they wanted noted in my email. There are many such incidents and evidence to the contrary.
6. The lawsuit if left uncontested would get the family back as before. There is no need for monetary compensation or other requirements. The lawsuit will be about the return of our mother's NRIC and, if required, a medical assessment of the statin that is given to our mother causing her to weaken. A psychiatric report may also be required to show our mother is still herself.
7. At the moment I cannot get a lawyer to represent me in the dispute because of the backing my siblings received. After the passing of the amendments to the Courts (Civil and Criminal Justice) Reform Bill on Jan 22, I have contacted a number of law firms big and small without getting any result. It reminded me of a similar situation where I cannot sell my 5-room HDB flat in 2013 where the estate agents I engaged had the intention to delay the sale past the stipulated period required in selling an HDB flat. I explained in my blog and it was with help from Meet-the People Sessions that the flat was sold.
8. As mentioned in Item 2 above, my siblings blocked me from bringing our mother for an appointment made at the Polyclinic to seek a second opinion from a doctor on 18 Jun 21. I had informed the NPC-Tampines East (Neighbourhood Police Centre) a day before and when I called two police officers, who came to my youngest sister’s house, spoke to us to prevent an altercation. One of the officers gave me a Case Card with a name of an officer to call should I require assistance and on the Case Card under Action Taken was ticked “Advised to seek assistance from State Courts” and “Advised to seek community mediation”.
In my first police report on 23 Jun 21, the investigation officer replied that I may seek legal advice and/or initiate civil action.
9. The record at the Polyclinic would show our mother has been continuously on the statin for 11 months since 3 Mar 21. She could only get weaker with the statin my siblings and their backers insisted on giving her. They wanted it for their own reasons. For the backers it is of past incidents pending and for my siblings it is of control or of convenience than for any reason that concerns the welfare of our mother.
I will need your assistance with lawyers to take up my case because our mother is in harm's way. I will take care of her if my youngest sister does not.
I will call up more law firms, but I expect the lawyers may be reluctant until the authority intervenes.
Yours Sincerely,
cc
President’s Office
Prime Minister’s Office
No comments:
Post a Comment