There have been more news in recent weeks published on Dr Susan Lim's case. Granted there have been more articles published on her case, we would like to invite students to discuss this issue and share their diverse opinions. Dr Susan Lim is a world-renowned surgeon who is a pioneer in adult stem cell research and has done Singapore proud, yet the allegations against her that she marked up her bills have tarnished her reputation and good work. There is an interplay of many factors in this case that we would like students to reflect on, analyse and discuss in the spirit of intellectual exchange and healthy debate.

Between March and June 2007, it was reported that Dr Lim sent to the Brunei government bills that totalled up to $24.8 million for her services over several years as well as that of third-party specialists engaged by Dr Lim. The Brunei Ministry of Health found this high and expressed concern over it. Later, Dr Lim discounted the bill to $12.1 million and presented this bill to the Brunei Ministry of Health, which continued to express concerns over the bill and wrote to the Ministry of Health (MOH) of Singapore, describing the bill as “unacceptable and extremely high”. Dr Lim later discounted her bill further to $3.25 million for third-party costs alone. Subsequently, the SMC decided to press charges against Dr Lim for allegedly overcharging her patient through marking up bills and double-billing. A first disciplinary committee (DC) recused itself after accusations that it had prejudged the case. The convening of a second DC has been suspended pending an appeal by Dr Lim to the Singapore Court of Appeal for judicial review. Dr Lim’s defence is that the bills are reasonable, do not reflect the entire value of services rendered and that the bills in question were taken out of context.
In an email sent to HCI, Dr Lim's lawyer alleged that the original wiki on this topic of discussion contained several factual inaccuracies. The details can be found in the documents attached. We encourage all students to read the attached letter and articles and re-consider your argument on this case.

The following are more articles from various sources that have been uploaded for your reference. To cultivate your Reading and Reasoning responses, students should move beyond this space to read from the press and do more research on the internet to supplement your thoughts. As members of a community of inquiry and as critical readers and thinkers, we challenge you to evaluate whether what have been said from these sources (and others) are valid and reliable.

Pedagogical magic occurs only when lfe-changing or life-affirming learning takes place; and this happens when students are empowered to share passionately their views to uphold social justice through student voices.

Click on the DISCUSSION TAB at the top of this page. It would take you to the Discussion Forum to share your thoughts. Credit Points will be awarded to the best entries with balanced and substantiated viewpoints. Students are advised against making personal attacks or passing judgement on this case as the verdict is still pending. Students should evaluate instead the medical ethics and focus on the validity of the professional fees instead. Thank you.

Motion: "Doctors have the obligation to put humanity and benevolence above professional fees."
With the above motion, please consider where we draw the line between commerce, compassion and professional ethics.