Keep physical contact minimal: SDU

I refer to Ms Soh Eng Phang's letter, 'Making friends or making out?', and Mr Brian
Selby's letter, 'Parent's four concerns about love courses in school' (Aug 23).

The Social Development Unit (SDU) works with institutes of learning to provide
opportunities for social interaction, equip singles with relevant social skills, and
encourage a positive mindset towards marriage. This helps young Singaporeans to lay
the foundation for successful relationships and families later in life.

SDU's survey of 2,000 polytechnic students and university undergraduates on their

attitudes towards dating and marriage indicated that the top three skills students
perceive they need are communication skills (71 per cent of respondents), building and
managing relationships (63 per cent) and balancing studies/work, family and social life
(62 per cent).

With these in mind, the SDU facilitated the introduction of relationship modules in the
curriculum in Ngee Ann Polytechnic and Singapore Polytechnic. These courses have
proved popular. We are thus extending this effort to junior colleges (JCs) and the
Institute of Technical Education (ITE).

These life skills programmes will be incorporated as part of the school curriculum and
adapted to suit JCs and the ITE. They will be taught by experienced and professional
individuals. They range from social etiquette and gender communication to skills in
managing relationship issues. They will supplement, not replace, the values imparted by
parents.

We will facilitate these programmes only in polytechnics, JCs and the ITE at present, as
students at these institutions are at a suitable age for such programmes.

On facilitating social interaction, the SDU supports student bodies in events that
promote interaction and develop social skills. These include student-organised
orientation camps which are endorsed by the student affairs office.

However, SDU does not approve of the games Ms Soh's nephews and nieces
described. In fact, SDU informs student leaders who seek its support, that physical
contact in games and activities must be kept minimal. It is also made known to them
that games which may outrage participants' modesty or cause them discomfort will risk
having their funding retracted. SDU conducts random checks on the events it funds, and
seeks feedback from participants.
SDU will continue to ensure that funded programmes are purposeful and proper to
enable interaction and develop social skills. Students who are forced to participate in
activities they feel uncomfortable with, can give feedback to their student bodies, or to
SDU via mcys_projectnetwork@mcys.gov.sg if the event is supported by SDU.

We thank Ms Soh and Mr Selby for their feedback.

Wong Kuan Ying (Ms)

Deputy Director
Social Development Unit
Making friends or making out?

I understand the Government worries about the reluctance among the young to marry
and have children. But, certain organisations are taking the message too far.

Several of my nephews and nieces in their first year at two of our local universities told
me that their orientation camp organised lewd and improper activities. These games, I
was told, were backed by the Social Development Unit (SDU).

In one game, female students were made to exchange sweets with male students using
their mouths as they sat in a circle.

Another required a female student to lie on the floor as a male student did push-ups on
top of her, obviously mimicking copulation.

There were also games where girls were asked to pick boys they wished to pair up with
for a segment of the camp. Less 'attractive looking girls' were subjected to the taunts of
boys who groaned and lamented to their friends when they were picked by these 'ugly
girls'.

Such activities concern me. Are our youth being taught that physical attraction and
touching are more important than appreciating another person's character?

Yes, physical attraction has some importance in forging relationships. But it should not
be overtly emphasised. Moreover, if youth are taught to focus on the heat and sexual
attraction of young love, their relationships will never be healthy, wholesome and
enriching.

Do our universities and the SDU want our youth to end up sleeping together and waking
up the next day only to discover that they cannot stand the character of the person
whom they have just spent the night with, but still having had the best time in bed
anyway?

I question the rationale in allowing such games. Without proper guidance, orientation
organisers, who are inexperienced and hormone-charged youth, will lead their younger
fellow students astray.

We want more of our youth to get married, but such activities demean both sexes and
the idea of marriage.
If I'm not wrong, most undergraduates attend the orientation camp to make friends with
people they will be studying with. My nieces and nephews say that they've made very
few friends.

If they feel uncomfortable participating in such games, they are labelled 'square' and
lacking in sportsmanship.

Such camps are teaching our youth to drop their moral values and religious beliefs for
sexual gratification.

I don't think we want a nation of youth engaged in relationships that are lacking in moral
values and religious beliefs just to halt the falling birthrate.

I urge the authorities to regulate such programmes.

I wouldn't want my child dating a schoolmate who did push-ups on top of her.

Soh Eng Phang (Ms)

Parent's four concerns about love courses in school

As a parent of children attending Singapore primary and secondary schools and junior
colleges, I read the article 'JC students to learn all about love' (Aug 8) with interest. I
would like to ask the relevant authorities to clarify some points on the purpose and cost
of the programme.

First, why does the Ministry of Education believe its role in educating children in the
public school system now extends into an area that has been traditionally viewed as the
responsibility and prerogative of parents?

Second, as mentioned in the article, is this programme linked to the Government's

policies to increase the birth rate of Singaporean citizens and, if so, what data or
experience has the Social Development Unit (SDU) or the ministry relied on to show it
will be successfully achieved by this specific programme?

Third, with secondary school students just as active in relationships, why has the SDU
or the ministry limited the programme reach only to JCs or are there plans to include
secondary schools at some point in the future?

Finally, what is the expected cost to the taxpayer not just for the pilot project, but the
entire programme implementation including indirect costs to the junior colleges for
provision of additional facilities, teacher support and related materials?

Given the substantial time, cost and societal pressures facing students these days, I
trust the ministry will actively seek the feedback of all affected parents before
proceeding with this project.

Brian Selby