I THANK Ms Wong Kuan Ying of the Social Development Unit (SDU) for her reply on Tuesday, 'Keep physical contact minimal', to my letter about the SDU's life skills programme for JC and ITE students ('Parent's four concerns about love courses in school', Aug 23). However, two questions were not answered and several more are raised by her response.

First, my earlier questions on whether this programme is linked to the Government's policy to increase the birth rate in Singapore and the costs for such programmes (direct and indirect) to the taxpayer remain unanswered.

Second, on what basis did the SDU extrapolate its survey of 2,000 poly and university students to reach its conclusion that JCs and the ITE should now be included in this programme?

Similarly, what additional data or analysis was used by the Ministry of Education (MOE) and SDU to conclude that JC and ITE students 'are at a suitable age for such programmes' and to specifically exclude secondary students?

Third, I ask MOE to clarify when the SDU was authorised to facilitate the introduction of 'life skills' programmes in JC and ITE curricula and whether parent feedback was sought in this decision.

Finally, with regard to supplementing my parental responsibilities in providing 'opportunities for social interaction, equip singles with relevant social skills, and encourage a positive mindset towards marriage', I believe I speak for most parents in saying that, when I need the Government's help imparting these skills to my kids, I will ask for it.

Brian Selby

This article was first published in The Straits Times on Sept 4, 2008.