Parliamentary Elections Act, particularly Section 78A

I'll be keeping mum for a while. Better to get into the groove of being quiet rather than have a sudden silence.

I'll be posting more stuff on football, movies etc for a while

To understand why please visit http://www.newsintercom.org/index.php?itemid=402 for more clarification on the PEA and how it impacts the online community.

Cheers and Happy Lunar New Year!

Waiting for lecture on HR....

Dear Anonymous HR person from angrydoc's blog,

I'm waiting for you long lecture on HR.

Personally I'm interested to learn more about what HR is about. My experiences with HR both as an employee discussing employee terms as well as on behalf of patients' medical matters has given me an extremely poor impression of HR people.

To me they are nothing more than guardians of the company and existing to put on a facade of equality and protocol which in actuality does not exist.

I do hope my experiences have been totally biased for the sake of the common man.

Please enlighten me.

Ahh....relieved

I've finally figured it out. Stupid loser idiotic me!

The ah pek and ah sum don't want me to practise good medicine. They want me to practise what they like!

Ah wah chai ya liao! Ming bak liao!

Ah nee yong yee, cheh!

Eh sai liao, lu ai si mi hor wah gong, wah hor lu lah!

Hwui Gwee? Ai jiak yiok? Ok LAH!

Tee jio? Ai jiak yiok? OK LAH!

Mian gia mian gia wuu jiak yiok eh sai liao mian gia, buay si eh.

"Lu un chua chai yah?!"

"Wah si lokun mah!"

"Ah si hor. Lu si lokun. Wu jiak yiok eh sai liao lor hor? Yiok hor wah Kar pi HOR!"

"Ok eh sai eh sai"

I'm sorry

I would like to say sorry to everyone.

Singapore is the best place in the world. It is safe. It has good governance.

I'm the biggest loser in life there is. I don't even deserve to live.

I hope you will give me another chance to show that I can still contribute.

Regards

Me.

PR NS dodgers get free return subsequently

Read this over at a forum.

(From the Straits Times: "How will Singapore treat permanent residents (PRs) liable for NS who renounce their PR status and then want to return later?"

Each year, we recognise that some PRs may decide not to do NS and renounce their PR.
But each year, a substantial number of PRs answer the call and do serve NS. If we freely allow the return of those who have chosen not to do NS, we would also be unfair to those PRs who have answered the call of duty when they were asked to do so.

But they are freely allowing these c***s to freely return and take up residency and even citizenship.

They are doing nothing about this. This loophole is being used to the fullest.

I know almost 3 PR's who went to school here, enjoyed life here for 14 years and then siam NS.
Went overseas, studied and came back on Employment pass and then PR and citizenship.)

And another person posted this :

"hi i am one of these PRs, i came to singapore at 2 as PR, at 17 i renouce my PR and went abroad to study.after that i came back at 21 got a employment pass for 5 years, than i apply for PR again. i was accepted and did not have to do NS because the law says that if i work for 5 years in singapore under a employement pass, my NS requirement are relinquished.so clearly NS are for dum stinkees and not us superior FTs.what a wonderful country.i think i am the only guy in school who did not go NS.
thank you PAP.PR is better than citizenship.over my dead body will i be a citizen."

I think it goes to show the true problem with regard to NS. NS confers no benefit or advantage to the individual. As such nobody wants to serve. The PRs who do have an option clearly would choose not to serve AND they get away with it. AND they can return later and be CITIZENS!

I've asked this question before. Can I be Singapore PR instead of a citizen? The answer was never given but I was warned that I will have no passport and thus cannot travel internationally.

The NS issue goes much much deeper than we all realize.

My view on Melvyn Tan's case

Reading a little more about Mr Tan's case has made me change my view about him. He obtained a scholarship from the Royal College of Music at age 17 and applied for NS deferrment since the course would take him past 18 which is the enlistment age. He was granted the deferrment by MINDEF. He then wanted to pursue his Masters degree and appealed for an extension of the deferrment but was rejected, and thus began his default story.

Now I can understand why he did what he did. He was a pianist. It was natural in his personal development for excellence to pursue his Masters immediately after his basic degree. Coming back to serve NS and staying away from the piano for most of the 2.5 years would clearly be a major disruption and hindrance to his personal development. I am sure there might be even more to the story. Perhaps he had a mentor who might not have been there come 2.5 years later?

Now I am all for having stiff penalties for defaulters, because it sends a message to people and the world that we are serious about National Service and maintaining a defence force.

However I also acknowledge that NS can be a disruption and hindrance to the development of talent. One example would be sportsmen. What if a Singaporean golfer was a young prodigy and was touring the PGA at 17 winning his first title. And then come 18, he disappears from the circuit for 2.5 years and returns at age 21. Now I have no doubt it could wreck his future as a golfer. But with the current rules about to take effect, Singapore says, that if he chooses his individual concerns above the states (ie non confucian) then he is not wanted by the state anymore, or face severe punishment. In other words we are also saying that if you are a world class talent at age 18, and choose to continue being one and default NS, then we do not want such world class talents anymore. Is that really ideal?

NS is always going to be a controversial one because people want others to be treated the same. I suffered, you also have to suffer etc. If you don't suffer, then you were treated "special" and that is unfair etc.

Now it's clear to me at the moment that NS is a LIABILITY. And as with all things, there must be balance. With this LIABILITY as a Singaporean male, what then are the ADVANTAGES and BENEFITS of being a Singaporean male?

I am very sure that if the ADVANTAGES AND BENEFITS were to be attractive enough, most would gladly accept the NS LIABILITY. In fact in some cases, people would be clamoring to serve their NS in order not to lose out on the ADVANTAGES AND BENEFITS that come after serving NS.

There are 2 ways to go about it. Improve the advantages and benefits (at the moment there seems to be none) of serving NS or improve the prevailling patriotism in Singapore (at the moment it appears that it is not high).

To me the former option seems easier to do and more practical in being able to influence directly.

The REAL problem with NS

The recent debate about NS seems to prove something which MINDEF does not want to acknowledge and neither do the politicians.

Now there was a recent ruckus regarding the Melvyn Tan case. The prevailing sentiment is that Mr Tan got away too lightly. People said that for those who served 2.5 years of NSF and subsequent in camp trainings, it was unfair for Mr Tan to just pay a $3000 fine and get away virutally scott free.

So it's more of a case of punishing severely those who chose to default to please those who served their NS "LIABILITIES".

To me the REAL problem is NS still being viewed and referred to as LIABILITIES. What does that tell us about the state of minds of our NSmen and citizens?

I'll give you an analogy. As a doctor in the public hospitals, we used to propose having less 24-36 hour call duties, allowing doctors on call for the past 24 hours to go on post call day offs etc. The comment coming from the senior doctors was always "We had to do it, we did it and so YOU MUST DO IT too." So again similar to that of the NS issue. We have suffered and so you must suffer too.

However if we look at say university degrees, the duration of the medical undergraduate course is longer than one in the arts and social sciences faculty.

Medical undergraduates could argue that they have to study for 5 years as an undergrad versus 3 years for an arts undergraduate and thus it's unfair etc. But they don't. Why? It appears to be a privelege to be a medical student. And of course there are paybacks when you enter the workforce, eg readily available jobs, higher starting pay etc. So nobody complains about the longer course, the shorter holidays, the higher school fees etc.

Perhaps the REAL problem with NS is that people don't see NS as a privelege and honor to serve the country. Perhaps they don't even see NS as being necessary at all. Perhaps they don't even care about Singapore. Perhaps NS in reality is a LIABILITY (MINDEF calls it that anyway) which confers no advantages or benefits to the Singaporean who does it.

Come on, in truth, do the 700,000 NS actually feel happy that the sentences will become heftier for defaulters? Or does it merely keep the angry 700,000 quiet?

"I've never done this operation before"

I heard this on a trailer for Grey's Anatomy. Deja vu!

Trust me every surgical trainee would have said this either out loud or in his mind at some stage of his career when he's told by the senior resident or consultant to "Start the case first" or "Carry on and call me if you have any problems".

Usually when things get too busy or the consultant has overlisted cases on that day or split theatres etc.

It happens all the time. Not very reassuring right? But unfortunately that's the truth. If you go to private hospitals that is much less likely to happen since you don't get trainees running around there. But then surgeons need to be trained somewhere right? My beef is not with trainees (I was one before). My beef is with the training system, the trainers (ie surgeons) and over zealous, gung ho trainees who overestimate their abilities with misplaced self confidence.

There was once a case where a surgical trainee started and continued a thyroidectomy operation. The trainee was doing the operation for the first time alone. The recurrent laryngeal nerve was cut and the patient had voice problems subsequently. The operation was supposed to have been done by the very senior surgeon that the patient had asked for. Well when you're under general anaesthesia you won't know a thing ( in most cases).

Anyway the senior surgeon protected the trainee and told the department that he always quotes to patients undergoing thyroidectomy that their is a risk of recurrent laryngeal nerve damage. He would give them his percentage risk.

Now I felt that it was totally unethical. Although the risk is quoted, the figure applies to the risk in the hands of a well trained surgeon. Not the risk in the hands of a trainee doing the operation for the first time! Is there negligience? Sure there is!

The best way to train surgeons in my opinion is for each surgeon to take on a disciple who assists all the way and progresses subsequently with the master overseeing his development. One master for one disciple. That's how it started, but it doesn't work this way at the moment.

Frankly such instances contributed to my decision that I did not want to become a surgeon. I was never the gung ho trainee that people encouraged me to be. I only did stuff if I was confident. When in doubt I consulted. It was never a case where I was lazy or indecisive and incompetent. It was more that I was unwilling to participate in "helping" the consultant "clear his overlisted cases in another OR so everyone could go home earlier". People told me you learn best from mistakes, so it's "ok" to make them and you should be more "brave" to do more on your own. Excuse me, the mistakes impact on people's lives and their quality of life! It's not a game!

Nevertheless I understand that the training of surgeons is always going to be difficult which is why people pay top dollar for trained surgeons. But sometimes we forget that the price paid by some mistakes is never repaid.

I can't live with that. And as someone told me, "You'd never make a good surgeon then"

Well so be it.

Housecalls anyone?

I wonder how other doctors handle requests for housecalls.

When you give your personal contact number to patients, it's inevitable that they might call you during the weekends on when you are on leave and ask for advice. Now that's fine with me, I'm happy to assist as far as I can over the phone.

But when they imply that they want YOU to come over to see them and give the advice in person. That's a different matter to me altogether. For one, it's my off day and I have a life, I don't want to be working. But yes I have a duty to the patients since I am a doctor.

But then, most patients who ask for you to come and give advice aren't expecting that they should be paying for your services as a housecall. It's like a social visit to them.

Well I'm sorry, but it isn't a social visit to me. It's work. It's basically an unwelcome disruption to my personal life which I accept because of the nature of my work. I want to be professional as a doctor and serve my patients well. But I also expect that the standard charges be applied to me as a professional.

How much does a housecall cost? http://www.sma.org.sg/guidelines/fees.html In short about $150.

Patients don't want to pay. You tell them go to the hospital then, they say it's too far, too long a wait at the A&E blah blah. (By the way it costs about $70-80 flat for all investigations and medications at the A&E)

In a few cases, I know there is little I can do even if I did the housecall, but they insist I come, I end up going and writing referral letters to the A&E and asking them to go there. Should I be charging patients like that? I think I have the right to. But look at their faces when you tell them it costs $150! Man you've never seen black faces man!

I think this is an Asian cultural problem. My experience doing housecalls for hotel guests showed me that. The caucasians have no problems thanking you profusely even AFTER they have paid the fees with a big smile of gratitude. They would usually go "Thanks for coming at this godforsaken hour! In my country it would be impossible to get a doctor come for a housecall even if I lived next to the clinic or hospital!"

For Asians, they would baulk at the "high fees" and some refuse to pay totally even after the service is rendered. This includes relatively affluent indonesian businessmen staying in the deluxe rooms calling for a doctor for their mistress!

Frankly, I have no problems being a professional. But the problem is that patients in Singapore don't treat the professional as one when it comes to remunerating him/her.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

Having said that, I look at my boss, and find that he is the one going around doing all these free housecalls (he charges only for the medicine usually about $30) for his patients. As such he gets like 4-5 housecalls EVERYDAY!

Man I don't want to end up like him. The best way may be to actually refuse to give my personal contact number to any patient.

Incidentally I had a call yesterday and I told the patient that if her condition worsened to go to A&E (amid lots of complains). Strangely even though my wife told me not to bother about the patient I couldn't get it out of my mind. I called the patient back an hour later to check on the status and it was improving after taking the medicine I advised her to consume. And by the evening the patient was normal. It just worries me and I can't continue in peace.

Sigh.

It's all dynamic and fluid.

Angry Doc's recent post inspired me to write an entry. http://angrydr.blogspot.com/

In particular the part about a doctor diagnosing appendicitis reminded me of a problem which many patients and people in Singapore take some explaining to in order for them to understand.

Most Singaporeans think of the doctor as a "God" or "deity". They ask pretty impossible to answer questions. Now I totally understand this, because as a child and as a teenager I used to think doctors would know the answers to those questions too. And believe me after entering and exiting medical school I was a tad bit disappointed that there is still so much mystery with regard to the human body and disease in general. There is much more we DO NOT know than what we DO KNOW.

Anyway let's talk about appendicitis first. The reason why appendicitis is difficult to diagnose and treat is because of 2 main reasons. In my opinion the first reason is that the treatment is surgery - an appendicectomy. Now it's not the operation is difficult and dangerous, in fact it is pretty straightfoward 90% of the time (and I have done many myself as a surgical trainee), but really that hey it's a FREAKING OPERATION! You get a tummy ache and the doctor says you need to be admitted, stay in hospital and have a surgeon put you to sleep and cut open your abdomen and cut out a piece of your gut! Come on, it can't be that bad right?

Well, you're wrong, a ruptured inflamed appendix can kill you. Dead, finished and buried.

But how does an appendicitis present? And this is the second reason; that the disease progresses from an initial mild presentation to a mroe serious one later and thus it depends on when the doctor is checking you for him to make his decision that you need surgery. Well in the early stages, just like any tummy ache, pain in the abdomen. It could be really quite mild at the start and indistinguishable from other milder causes eg constipation colic, gastritis, urinary tract infection etc.

Are there any investigations to confirm or exclude it? Well the closest is probably a CT scan. But you won't find those in a GP clinic and neither do they come cheap. And even then they can be inconclusive.

Face it, many patients who have "classical" signs of appendicitis get admitted, stay for 24-48 hours and sometimes get better! Then the surgeon discharges them. And these patients would go "What the heck was all that for?"

But you see, the disease is dynamic. At the start you have maybe just some slight central abdominal pain, and then it may get more severe and localize to the right lower abdomen. But it doesn't always happen in all cases after a specific set time. Some progress faster, some slower, some rupture earlier making you a lot more sick and dangerously ill and some are just damn resilient and don't rupture, thus buying you more time.

Which is why patients are still admitted for observation and regular checks by the doctor to see if symptoms and signs have progressed and then make decisions for surgery.

The key word here is regular checks by the doctor. We garner far more information regarding the trends and changes in parameters about ANY disease than at just one single consultation.

Eg Fever trends. Those that go up and up and up vs those that go up and down and then up and down. Blood pressure is the same. So is blood glucose (diabetes) readings. Think which gives you more information, a photograph of an event or a video recording?

But our system and culture in Singapore doesn't work like that. Doctors are expected to make one single "definitive" decision when you see them. Think making a big decision like cutting you open based on a photograph or a very very short video.

Which is why we tell patients to come back when if they are not better, or to go to the A&E if certain symptoms develop etc. It's a very important part of the consult when the doctor tells you that.

It's not that the doctor is lousy because he is unsure, inexperienced or too young but that he is being professional and honest with his patients. Unfortunately most Singaporeans would think of the former. Hence many doctors have developed a "minimalistic-communicative" style of consult. You go in, the doctors checks you and out you go with the medication or referral letter to the A&E.

Personally I feel communication is the key between patient and doctor for things to be clarified. Mutual trust and respect is also important. Patients and their relatives have to take some role in the care of the disease at least in monitoring it. Personally if I find patients or their relatives extremely anxious and repeatedly asking if they should take their loved one to the hospital, I'd recommend they go to the A&E straight away no matter how unlikely the condition is deemed to be dangerous or how sure I am of it.

Most of the time, that's what they want to do anyway, they just want a doctor to reaffirm that it's the right thing to do. And why isn't it the right thing to do? It's always good to be safe than sorry right? Then you have those who are serious and don't want to go to hospital, but that's a whole different story.

I recently had a patient come see me and then complained that there was another GP who had seen his uncle twice and never recommended that he go to the hospital, even when they asked him. He thought that they needed the GP's "permission" to take the uncle to the A&E. They subsequently did bring him to the A&E on their own, where he was admitted and subsequently died in the ICU after a week.

The patient could not tell me very much details (aside from a lot of cursing of the GP). I gathered that the uncle had been weak, later jaundiced and died of multiple complications and was found at the hospital to also have TB (dunno which organ site).

Now I dunno about other doctors out there, but it sure does not sound like it was a simple straight foward case, what with TB being mentioned in there. (For lay men : TB does not always present as people coughing coughing and then cough blood. It can affects various systems and is a very slowly progressing disease)

Anyway I told the patient that I could not really comment on the doctor's medical decisions but I would say that he should have been more communicative and discussed more with him rather than as he claimed "kept quiet". I also told this patient that in future, if he comes across a doctor (including me) who he disagrees with, please question and express his views. If the doctor (including me) is dismissive and uncommunicative, then change doctors, and seek a second opinion. If he feels he wants his relative to be admitted or seen at the A&E, just go directly (there is no need for a doctor to refer you to the A&E, you can walk right in) regardless of what the doctor says.

As a parting shot, I once had the head of emergency medicine in a hospital tell me that many times in his career he has made decisions based solely on "gut feeling" and found to be right. In most of those cases, if he had failed to do so, the patient would have died.

There is a joke : "Your doctor may claim he is God. But God has never claimed he is your doctor"

That could not be more true!

The man and the flood

Uglybaldie put a question to me although I don't know why he brings up religion again in a discussion that had nothing to do with it.

"Supposing you were thrown into a den full of lions. Would you pray to God to save you or would you get your brain and your body in first gear to get out of the situation?"

Well I'm sure any sensible Christian out there would know the answer to that. The answer : BOTH.

Anyway it reminds me of a story that best illustrates this problem that is often posed to Christians by Aetheists. I'll share it with you here.

A flood threatens a town, forcing everyone to evacuate, But Joe thinks, "I'm a devout man, God will save me," and stays put.

As the waters rise, Joe's neighbour comes by and says, "Joe come with me, we've got to go." Joe declines, "I'm a devout man, God will save me."

The waters keep rising, Joe scrambles to his second floor. A firefighter in a rowboat comes by. "Get in the boat or you'll drown," he says. Joe again declines, saying, "God will save me."

Finally , the flood waters force Joe to his roof. A police helicopter comes by and throws down a rope. "This is your last chance, climb up or you'll drown," the policeman yells. "No, I'm a devout man, God will save me," Joe replies.

Joe drowns and arrives in heaven and challenges God. "Why didn't you save me? I had so much faith that you would!"

"What do you mean?" God says. "I did try. I sent a neighbour, a firefighter and a helicopter."

The main issue is that most aestheist think of God "helping" as in miracles and great acts. I personally don't believe that it works that way most of the time.

Anyway I'm not trying to evangelize here. I'm just answering a question about my faith.

Rights and Responsibilities

After reading the blog entry "Big Doctor is watching you" at http://angrydr.blogspot.com/
it reminded me of something that I came across during my study.

In Australia, diabetic patients are given brochures that list out their Rights and Responsibilities :

"As a person with diabetes, you have rights to...

Professional health services and treatment with access to diabetes educators, dietitians, podiatrists, eye specialists and diabetes specialists plus confidentiality of your personal health care records.

Easily accessible diabetes information, educational support and appropriate medical supplies.

Free syringes and pen needles, and significant savings on testing strips through the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS).

A clear explanation of your condition and ongoing health professional support with access to an interpreter service if required.

A second medical opinion about your diabetes treatment if so desired.

A career of your choice, appropriate job training, life and health insurance cover and most civil licenses and permits. If these are denied, contact Diabetes Australia or your doctor to check whether the exclusion is justified. (Some restrictions apply in certain lines of work that may place you and others in danger in the case of hypoglycemia).

Specialized diabetes care when in hospital for other health problems and when medical or surgical procedures are planned or performed. In such an event, ask to see a diabetes specialist and a diabetes educator.

Be responsible for your own insulin injections and blood glucose monitoring when in hospital, with supervision or assistance if required.

Make the final decision to accept recommended treatment from a health professional.

Your responsibilities are to . . .

Take charge of your own diabetes management with the assistance of your health care team at those times when you have concerns or need advice.

To register with the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS) through Diabetes Australia to be eligible to receive free syringes ,pen needles and savings on the purchase of testing strips.

Record and remind your general practitioner when your follow-up visits for regular checkups are due (listed above).

Declare your diabetes when applying for insurance, licenses and permits. Failure to do so may render your insurance policy or driving license invalid.

Declare your diabetes to your employer. Failure to do so may render you ineligible for workers’ compensation.

Dispose of sharps (syringes, needles and lancets) responsibly and safely. Contact Diabetes Australia, your local council or pharmacy about free services now available in many localities and more information about sharps disposal. "

You would never find such things in Singapore. Singaporeans are just not mature enough to take any responsibility for themselves.

I went home and told my daughter that at home she has rights eg the right to go to the toilet unrestricted, the right to go to her room whenever she wants, etc, but she also has responsibilities eg to prevent things from being damaged, to keep the house clean etc. My 4 year old daughter predictably replied "I don't understand what you are saying Dad." But at least she was willing to listen to me explain further.

Most grown men and women that consult me, would go "I am a layman I don't understand such things" and then refuse to learn further.

And then they are the ones who would complain that they have no rights and that the doctor dictates what they do, what medicine they take. But yet when it comes to taking responsibilities, they respond like a 4 year old.

Looks like we can't win em all.

Laenrt smoteinhg new

I was witachng Brnaaic the oehtr ngiht and laenrt soemhtnig ientsernitg.

I msut say taht Brnaaic is boecnimg one of my fvauoirte shwos on TV. It is ifnroamtvie and sxey! Waht knid of cbmoainotin is taht? But I lkie it.

Icnidneatlly, it has been sohwn taht popele can raed bdaly msilept wrods as lnog as the fsirt and lsat ltteer are in the crrocet palce.

So if you hvae raed tihs psot it porves the treohy is crrocet.

Make no mistake! I am worth MORE dead than alive!

Some people don't fully understand it when I say that I am worth more dead than alive.

You see that statement is true. The reason why people don't realise that is because they don't know how much I am insured for. If they knew, well......

Of course in that statement I am referring to monetary worth. But during the SARS period, I decided to protect my family. I realized that my profession was actually high risk. Seeing colleagues dying on the job was not something we would have foreseen when we entered medical school. But today it is a reality. The bird flu epidemic looms over the horizon........

I took up several policies to protect my family. That way I can continue to work without fear. As a doctor I need to do my job which is to serve the patients to the best of my ability. But there can be risks.

I realize one thing I cannot stand in Singapore is all this talk about money money money. That seems to be all everyone talks about. Money. If you look at the NKF issue, it's about money. When you look at the Casino issue, again it's about money.

Thus when I start thinking of money, somehow it gets me down. Better to not think about it so much. But living in a society which is obsessed with money, it isn't going to be easy.

Down, out and depressed

Been feeling down over the festive season.

Somehow my plans for the future seem to have gone up in smoke for the moment.

Job wise I'm becoming increasingly angry and disgruntled.

Was looking at my retirement plans and realise it's much easier to plan for my children rather than me.

Realised that living longer means needing more money for retirement. So what's the point in living longer?

Met up with old classmates and everyone as just talking about making money.

I think it isn't such a bad idea to just drop dead from some arrythmia right now. Then my family can get some money from my life insurance policies as well as half my flat paid for by the home protection scheme.

I'm probably worth much more dead than I am alive.

We should be whistleblowers? Only on the football field!

I read with great disbelief that the government wants the "help" of its citizens in uncovering wrongdoing. They claim that they can't be everywhere and thus need the help of the man on the street to alert them to suspicious cases.

That's absolutely absurd. Any man on the street who is intelligent and of discerning mind would know it's empty talk.

The NKF saga (as always) is the best example of how "whistleblowing" would result in you being sued for defamation, have to sell your house to settle "out of court" and still see no justice! Just ask Tan Kiat Noi, Archie Ong and Piragasum Singavelu.

It is interesting that in the NKF revelations, it is clear that the reports proved that the allegations by those 3 were all true. However, neither the government or NKF has acknowledged that those 3 individuals had been dealt a great injustice, offered any apology or returned their out of court settlements.

What does this tell the man on the street which the government is asking to blow the whistle in future? Don't do it. Unless you want to be broke and forgotten subsequently.

I for one would stick to whistle blowing on the football fields. And if I encounter any "wrongdoings" in the great government or charities or what have you, I'd think of how to get in on the benefits rather than cause my family trauma and suffering. For the matter, it still appears that even if they do eventually find you out (by you making some stupid suicidal move), you will still get away inscathed. Something about "you didn't actually break any law".

This is the "Singapore Way".