|
Centre for Policy on Ageing | |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9363f/9363f578e2d59752b7ddb724e4162e6f3b760d4c" alt="" | |
|
Long-term care policy Singapore's experience | Author(s) | Chee Wei Winston Chin, Kai-Hong Phua |
Journal title | Journal of Aging and Social Policy, vol 28, no 2, April-June 2016 |
Publisher | Taylor and Francis, April-June 2016 |
Pages | pp 113-129 |
Source | http://www.tandfonline.com |
Keywords | Long-term care insurance ; Services ; Health services ; Long term ; Policy ; Singapore. |
Annotation | Like many developed countries, Singapore is facing the challenge of a rapidly ageing population and the increasing need to provide long-term care (LTC) services for older people in the community. The Singapore government's philosophy on care for older people is that the family should be the first line of support, and it has relied on voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) or charities for the bulk of LTC service provision. For LTC financing, it has emphasised the principles of co-payment and targeting of state support to the low-income population through means-tested government subsidies. It has also instituted ElderShield, a national severe disability insurance scheme. This paper discusses some of the challenges facing LTC policy in Singapore, particularly the presence of perverse financial incentives for hospitalisation, the pitfalls of over-reliance on VWOs, and the challenges facing informal family caregivers. It discusses the role of private LTC insurance in LTC financing, bearing in mind demand- and supply-side failures that have plagued the private LTC insurance market. It suggests the need for more standardised needs assessment and portable LTC benefits, with reference to the Japanese Long-Term Care Insurance program, and also discusses the need to provide more support to informal family caregivers. (RH). |
Accession Number | CPA-160520216 A |
Classmark | WPH: I: L: 4Q: QAD: 7XD |
Data © Centre for Policy on Ageing |
|
...from the Ageinfo database published by Centre for Policy on Ageing. |
| |
|