‘Karma’ or ‘A leopard never changes its spot’ are the phrases we easily throw around to justify the prevalent discrimination against the ex-convicts in Singapore. But how many times have we ourselves fall short and made horrible mistakes, yet we seemed to be the modern-day hypocritical Pharisees, judging and denying them a second chance to live a normal life, based on our assumed sense of superior sanctity, that we neglect the tremendous impact it has on them and our society. Hence, this blog post will be exploring why is it important to give the ex-convicts in Singapore a second chance.
Singapore is well-known for her emphasis on personal responsibilities and zero tolerance for crimes, hence, the society is inclined to treat ex-convicts …show more content…
Jabez Koh, an ex-convict that served 16 years in prison, shared that he is often exploited by his employers and received unfair treatment in his workplace despite his decent qualifications. Mr. Koh’s story is not an isolated case, ex-convicts are often stigmatized in their workplace, faced difficulties in securing a job or limited to only low-paying jobs. This is a problem for Singapore, as we faced a critically decreasing workforce size, with human resources as our greatest assets. Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say cited the ‘1+2=3’ formula to highlight that growth in our workforce and productivity is vital to attaining a sustainable economic growth. By denying ex-convicts a second chance, not just in employment, but also in opportunities to better-paying jobs that can empower them to pull themselves out of poverty, we are short-changing Singapore with a smaller pool of productive workers and increasing Her liabilities with more poor people. It does Singapore no good when the ex-convicts in our society are trapped in a vicious poverty cycle, due to lack of employment, as citizens are bound to bear this financial liability in a way or another. Hence, it is beneficial, in fact, essential that we give ex-convicts a chance to reintegrate back into the workforce, to be trained and enabled to attain higher-skilled jobs to boost our society’s economic growth and free ourselves from any unnecessary financial …show more content…
Often, the families of the ex-convicts are the neglected silent victims when they failed to reintegrate back into the society. The families suffer financially when there is one less person bringing income home, and even more so if the ex-convict is the sole breadwinner. By excluding them from the workforce, we are indirectly punishing the ex-convicts’ families by depriving them financial ability to lead a sustainable life and robbing the individual a chance to play their part in the family. The frequent recidivism of ex-convicts, that may have been resulted from society’s rejection, will have an adverse impact on the ex-convict’s children. The lack of one parent meant that the other must work doubly hard to provide care for their child, however, in the struggle to balance financial sufficiency and family stability, it is possible that the child might be neglected in some aspects. Furthermore, the child faces a lack of good role model and discrimination from an unaccepting society for having an ex-convicted parent. These may all lead to an undesirable development of the child, where at the worst, he may follow the footsteps of the convicted parent. So then, is it still justice served when we punish the ex-convicts’ families for the mistake of that sole
Singapore is well-known for her emphasis on personal responsibilities and zero tolerance for crimes, hence, the society is inclined to treat ex-convicts …show more content…
Jabez Koh, an ex-convict that served 16 years in prison, shared that he is often exploited by his employers and received unfair treatment in his workplace despite his decent qualifications. Mr. Koh’s story is not an isolated case, ex-convicts are often stigmatized in their workplace, faced difficulties in securing a job or limited to only low-paying jobs. This is a problem for Singapore, as we faced a critically decreasing workforce size, with human resources as our greatest assets. Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say cited the ‘1+2=3’ formula to highlight that growth in our workforce and productivity is vital to attaining a sustainable economic growth. By denying ex-convicts a second chance, not just in employment, but also in opportunities to better-paying jobs that can empower them to pull themselves out of poverty, we are short-changing Singapore with a smaller pool of productive workers and increasing Her liabilities with more poor people. It does Singapore no good when the ex-convicts in our society are trapped in a vicious poverty cycle, due to lack of employment, as citizens are bound to bear this financial liability in a way or another. Hence, it is beneficial, in fact, essential that we give ex-convicts a chance to reintegrate back into the workforce, to be trained and enabled to attain higher-skilled jobs to boost our society’s economic growth and free ourselves from any unnecessary financial …show more content…
Often, the families of the ex-convicts are the neglected silent victims when they failed to reintegrate back into the society. The families suffer financially when there is one less person bringing income home, and even more so if the ex-convict is the sole breadwinner. By excluding them from the workforce, we are indirectly punishing the ex-convicts’ families by depriving them financial ability to lead a sustainable life and robbing the individual a chance to play their part in the family. The frequent recidivism of ex-convicts, that may have been resulted from society’s rejection, will have an adverse impact on the ex-convict’s children. The lack of one parent meant that the other must work doubly hard to provide care for their child, however, in the struggle to balance financial sufficiency and family stability, it is possible that the child might be neglected in some aspects. Furthermore, the child faces a lack of good role model and discrimination from an unaccepting society for having an ex-convicted parent. These may all lead to an undesirable development of the child, where at the worst, he may follow the footsteps of the convicted parent. So then, is it still justice served when we punish the ex-convicts’ families for the mistake of that sole