My take on the Tans

I should really be doing something different on this lazy Sunday morning, my only time of real rest for the week. Anyway, I read in fascination the stories about Dr Patrick Tan's service in his National Service under a cushy environment, read the response from both Dr Tony Tan and the younger Tan and felt that both sides had either deliberately or unknowingly missed out the crux of the issue.

Question on Dr Tony Tan's integrity

First and foremost, I do not believe that Dr Tony Tan manipulated his son's NS deployment. He is not stupid and if there was any White Horse privileges given, it was done by those in the middle and upper management who decided to carry balls. So the doubt about the older Tan's integrity is just illogical, simply because someone who received/heard about such order would have blown the whistle and the older Tan is not stupid to leave such a mark in his file.

Issue with the longer than usual deferment of Patrick

Local medical course for undergraduates is extended over a period of 6 years, and a typical disruption/deferment would be that long for anyone who has been admitted to the course and wishes to seek deferment (of course I have friends who chose to serve out 2 or 2.5 yrs as a soldier on the field before embarking on their studies, they do not end up as MOs or DOs).

Seeing how the Harvard course is like, my sense is that it is fair for Patrick to request for a long deferment. So the devil lies with the approving authority, do they allow for an extension of 8 years following the initial 4 years of pre-medical? When the local batch takes 6 years, 4 years may seem a little short. But granting a 12 year deferment is also too much...

Perhaps the ones who approved could step out to explain the guiding principles, and why they felt a further 8 years on top of the initial 4 years was ok. This is not for the Tans to explain, but SAF and MINDEF.

Deployment to a research laboratory

From my first point, Dr Tony Tan would not have been stupid enough to pull his weight on this issue.

From my experience with the messy SAF, the attitude of the regulars, and the drive of returned scholars, I have pictured a more likely scenario: SAF deployed Patrick to enter Medical Officer Conversion Course (MOCC), the younger Tan appealed, citing his qualification and sought a deployment at the research centre, it was eventually granted. Or even before his return, Patrick informed the SAF and made the request and approval was made somewhere along the line to put him with DSO.

Either way, it was not legally wrong and I had seen friends making requests to be transferred and they are heard because they are returned scholars and because they are more aggressive in their appeals.

I believe a number of people do get a lucky break in the army: the regulars get proper pay during those 2 years; most drivers get a free driving license during the 2 years; some get to continue their music and sports development at MDC and SAFSA. So I can put Patrick's experience down to that.

When you have a lucky break and when you are from a political family, public sentiments cannot be ignored. It's not just about what is right or wrong but also in building the trust with the public.

And then, there are many facets to NS, the government used social cohesion to increase the value of NS: it's in NS where everyone is treated equally, that you meet with people of a different social class and experience. I certainly experienced that, and I wonder if Patrick's 3 months of BMT is enough to achieve this experience.

In my opinion, Patrick missed the point in his open letter. The public does not care if you received 2 years of NS pay while being a research scientist, everyone knows that your family is rich and a lot would not mind paying to get NS off their back if given a choice. And the defence with his own talent and ability, it's better off letting your Professors and fellow researchers step in for you.

I heard it from somewhere "Self praise is no honor", how true, how very true.