Another NUTS case

We heard of Filip Lou, a Dutch national visiting Singapore, who had saved a woman from drowning in Singapore River the other night. When he was warded into Singapore General Hospital for his bruises afterwards, he was billed $90, as the hospital maintained they would not waived the fee for medical services rendered.

After news broke, many volunteered to pay on behalf of the Samaritan and he got his $90 back. Mr Lou was touched by the generosity of Singaporeans, and while he understood the hospital's policy on charging a fee for a service rendered, he added: "What there should be is a policy looking into treating someone who got hurt trying to save another. Mine was a small injury. What if it had been a broken leg or dislocated joint?" he asked.

I am sorry Mr Lou has seen the 'darker' side of our Singapore's by-the-book culture, what Mr Sim Wong Hoo of Creative would have considered as a case of NUTS (a term he coined), see my earlier post. To me, for a mere $90, the hospital's image has taken a serious beating, by simply not being sympathetic to the plight of its heroic patient. Probably they did not know the media would have reported and made such a hooha over this case. What was SGH thinking (or not thinking)? Who would dare save a drowning person next time?

I think SGH did not managed this case well. As a medical institution providing healthcare services to save people, it has done the exact opposite by being just like any callous profit-making organisation. If the staff was not empowered to make such decision (to waive or not), at least the case should be referred to a higher authority. Or at least 'buy time' and give the excuse "we will check and get back to you, sir". $90 is too high a price to pay for the hospital's reputation?

This incident has left a bad taste in my mouth. It's like asking me to pay for the used syringes after donating my blood at the Blood Bank. Duh. Buay paiseh.