Last week, my mother, who is 98 years old and frail, was admitted to the high-dependency ward in Singapore General Hospital (SGH) as a Class C patient. Unfortunately, her experience there was far from conducive to her recovery. The ward, accommodating five patients, was consistently noisy, with frequent disturbances from phone usage, visitor traffic, and monitor alarms. As a result, my mother found it difficult to rest and became increasingly stressed.

One week later, SGH transferred her to a general ward. In a general ward, there are A1 (one patient to a room), B1 (six to a room) and C (eight to a room) classes available. My family believed that a quieter environment would greatly benefit her well-being and recovery, and so opted for A1.

But we were told that if she were to be moved to a single-occupancy room, the bill for her earlier stay as a Class C patient would be retroactively changed to reflect her new Class A1 status, effectively doubling the amount payable. While we understand the need for different charges for different classes of patients, based on amenities and services provided, we find retroactive charging illogical and unfair.

A patient should be charged Class C rates for the period she stayed in a Class C ward, not Class A1 rates for services and amenities she did not consume. All the more so for patients who had no choice but to opt for a quieter ward to rest and recover faster.

Retro-charging places an unnecessary financial burden on families already grappling with the emotional and physical challenges of caring for their loved ones. I hope that SGH or the Ministry of Health will review its policy regarding retroactive payment for ward transfers and consider removing this anomaly.

That would alleviate financial strain on families and ensure that patients can access the appropriate level of care without undue financial penalty.

David Kong