Will more barriers solve our chronic illness?
-
Install safety gates to prevent more MRT deaths
I AM dismayed to learn of yet another life lost on the MRT tracks ('Another death on the tracks - 4th in 2 months'; ST, Dec 6).
Despite calls to erect safety gates at above-ground stations, SMRT decided not to do so for reasons of high cost and the fact that the majority of incidents were intentional.
To reduce the number of incidents, SMRT resorted to making announcements in the four official languages, advising passengers to stand behind the yellow line painted on the platform, when a train is about to arrive at a station. But what results have this or other safety measures produced?
Could the efficaciousness of these announcements have worn off due to the frequency with which they are made?
Would commuters, bent on ending their lives on the tracks, change their minds?
Rather than produce the desired result, the announcements are a source of noise pollution.
There is no doubt that building the gates will be costly. However, with the recent fare hike and the large number of commuters taking the trains daily, it would only be a matter of time before SMRT recovers the cost, i.e., if unnecessary expenditure on non-urgent upgrades or installations at train stations is not incurred.
Granted, most incidents on the tracks are intentional. But what about deaths or injuries sustained by passengers falling onto the tracks accidentally? One life lost due to an accident is one too many. Even if only one in 10 lives is saved with the installation of the gates, it would still be worth the effort.
Safety is sacrosanct and every effort should be made to minimise the number of accidents on the platforms.
With the gates installed, not only will passengers enjoy a much safer ride but the number of suicides on the tracks could also be reduced drastically if the gates are of a sufficient height.
I therefore urge SMRT to seriously reconsider its decision and install safety gates at aboveground stations as soon as possible.
Patrick Teo Yu Yeow
ST FORUM -
how many cases are really accidents? the percentage is very very low considering the number of people taking train rides.
the building of barriers just to keep out the accidents is not justifiable. -
Mr Patrick Teo seems to have missed the point.
Erecting more and more barriers is seen as trying to impose more restrictions to 'prevent' future occurances, but what effort is being made to diagnose the root cause of these suicides?
What we're seeing is a spat of copycat suicides, content with painting SMRT trains bloody red. Why are our people resorting to such methods? Along with our cost of living, has our style of committing suicides been upgraded as well?
Are these people out to make a firm statement with their deaths? Or is this simply the latest version and surest way to get killed? If so, placing permanent barriers along the line will not solve the spat of suicides; people will just move on to the next best method.
The key issue is that people are committing wanton suicide. Placing barriers will merely solve the immediate issue and not the real problem.
Mr Patrick Teo's suggestion merely shows the extent of our people's mentality in tackling issues. -
zhi biao bu zhi ben.
isnt this what we are good at? -
If somebody jump from the 10th floor of a HDB..... Should we fence up all the HDB
If someone got kill by a car...... Should we ban all cars from the road
If somebody took the wrong medicine and die...... Should all medicine now be ban
When will Singaporean WAKE UP THEIR BLOODY IDEA that only they themselves could, should and must take care of themselves..... -
we should change party ...
-
many opt to change country liao
-
So silly. if a person wants to die,nothing can stop him. Best is to find the root of this actions. Personally I believe the widening income gap is one of the major reason.
-
Perhaps the root cause remains a sense of hopelessness? A feeling of abject failure in life, incapable for completing simple tasks and a cutting a forlorn figure in our society.
Or maybe the meritocracy concept can be tweaked further to achieve a more balanced equation?
Is meritocracy what it is made out to be?
I APPLAUD Dr Wong Chiang Yin for voicing his concerns about the state of our meritocracy system as a leader among our doctors ('Excellence must not be emptied of moral content'; ST, Dec 2).
The merits of a meritocracy system are many and undeniable in our pursuit of progress. But I concur with him wholeheartedly that, for it to be beneficial to society as a whole, the nub of the matter is, 'Is it fair that we reward such (successful) persons when everyone else grows disenchanted and disillusioned?'
I also think that the 'does it work?' mantra of our political leaders, be it an idea or a philosophy, should now be taken a step further.
That meritocracy is a working and effective system is now rather obvious. But 'does it work' for 'everyone else' must surely be the final arbiter of the system's viability.
Judging from both the voices of those who have fallen through the system, as conveyed by our MPs, as well as the many anecdotes that one often hears or reads about, we have valid reasons to be very concerned.
The most telling evidence must be found in our youths. This is because they have not yet had the self-made monetary success to flaunt. Theirs is a self-centred elitism, learnt mainly from those they live with at home or in educational institutions.
Witness the brashness with which young students assert that those who are unsuccessful in life have only themselves to blame.
That bright students, who possibly have not yet earned a single dollar, should pronounce such judgments on adults must surely point to some breaches and faults that are concealed in the shape and form of our meritocracy system.
Singapore is like a man going into his 40s. At this stage of life, it is no longer the obvious and superficial that will see a man through the latter part of his existence. The most visible parts, his 'looks' and 'clothes', are there for all to see; likewise, the good in the meritocracy system.
But what's the 'essence' of the man? Does the system really work? Or does it just appear to work - up to now?
Are we heading for a possible breakdown? Not the affective divide between the rulers and the ruled but among the ruled themselves - given the creeping elitism disguised as excellence but devoid of moral content, as Dr Wong puts it, that is already evident today.
It is necessary for the mainstream press to air the issue sufficiently and let all with an interest in Singapore participate in a robust debate.
Are we prepared to tackle it head-on, like we claim to want to do with national issues?
Law Kim Hwee
ST Forum -
Because the root causes are still hard to solve, thats why we solve the syntomns first...
But if the root cause is not solved, people will still continue to commit suicide. Without the train, there are still many ways to die.