IT IS true that private obstetricians contribute a lot to private healthcare ("Private obstetricians contribute a lot to healthcare" by Dr Wong Mun Tat; yesterday).
It is also true that the private sector delivers more babies than public institutions. This is because with increasing affluence since the 1980s, more and more people have gravitated towards private hospitals, where care is personalised for a procedure that is natural and usually uneventful.
But obstetrics, by definition, is not the study of abnormal pregnancies. Neither is it the only discipline in medicine where the practitioner profits lucratively from a benign and natural event - that honour is firmly in the hands of aesthetic medicine practitioners.
Those who have practised obstetrics have encountered sudden, unforeseen and serious problems that account for the litigation.
The actuaries have decided that "occurrence-based" policies for obstetricians are no longer viable; therefore, we must scramble to meet the challenge of dealing with reduced protection ("Obstetricians up in arms over new protection limits"; Feb 17).
Some obstetricians will stop practising, and others will look for alternatives, almost certainly by increasing their delivery fees and putting defensive measures in place.
The Government has a role in protecting doctors, but to look to them to provide blanket cover is not reasonable ("MOH to cover obstetricians in retirement"; Monday)
The future is uncertain, but neither Singapore nor obstetrics will remain the only victims of the litigation tsunami that will sweep the rest of the world in future ("SMA chief: Docs need protection against excessive patient claims"; yesterday).
Chew Shing Chai (Dr)
It is also true that the private sector delivers more babies than public institutions. This is because with increasing affluence since the 1980s, more and more people have gravitated towards private hospitals, where care is personalised for a procedure that is natural and usually uneventful.
But obstetrics, by definition, is not the study of abnormal pregnancies. Neither is it the only discipline in medicine where the practitioner profits lucratively from a benign and natural event - that honour is firmly in the hands of aesthetic medicine practitioners.
Those who have practised obstetrics have encountered sudden, unforeseen and serious problems that account for the litigation.
The actuaries have decided that "occurrence-based" policies for obstetricians are no longer viable; therefore, we must scramble to meet the challenge of dealing with reduced protection ("Obstetricians up in arms over new protection limits"; Feb 17).
Some obstetricians will stop practising, and others will look for alternatives, almost certainly by increasing their delivery fees and putting defensive measures in place.
The Government has a role in protecting doctors, but to look to them to provide blanket cover is not reasonable ("MOH to cover obstetricians in retirement"; Monday)
The future is uncertain, but neither Singapore nor obstetrics will remain the only victims of the litigation tsunami that will sweep the rest of the world in future ("SMA chief: Docs need protection against excessive patient claims"; yesterday).
Chew Shing Chai (Dr)
