MDW Caregivers: Recognising Rights Over "Family" Bonds
In Singapore’s ageing population, migrant domestic workers (MDWs) provide physical and mental support to many households, assisting family caregivers to manage the complexities of caring for their elderly loved ones.
MDWs have become a crucial part of Singapore’s caregiving infrastructure. Many MDWs who have eldercare responsibilities perform almost round-the-clock work which is emotionally and physically draining; for example, helping their care recipient with toileting needs and adhering to medication schedules in the middle of the night. Many such MDWs also take on other household chores such as cooking and cleaning, in addition to their caregiving duties. Such responsibilities are relentless and can be extremely draining.
In December 2024, a commentary depicted the relationship between the author’s mother and his MDW, Ms M, who took on additional caregiving responsibilities after the author’s mother suffered a stroke. From initially performing just household chores, Ms M became a full-time caregiver to tend to the mother’s needs.
The author describes how it is important for employers to show appreciation to MDWs to strengthen the relationship with the family, and to ensure quality care for their loved ones, such as in the form of short overseas trips or “nice meals out”. The premise of this, the author says, is that MDWs “aren’t just workers — they are live-in members of our home”.
We do not disagree. The live-in nature of domestic work can develop a bond that goes beyond the usual employment relationship: live-in MDWs share living space with their employers, which creates a more personal, continuous interaction that creates closer emotional ties. Thus, treating MDWs with kindness and generosity and giving them rewards for jobs well done go a long way in making them feel appreciated and recognised for work that is labour-intensive and emotionally draining.
At the same time, over the years, HOME has witnessed how MDW caregivers can be subject to the blurring of boundaries between professional labor and personal relationships which may inadvertently lead to exploitation. We often hear from employers that their MDWs are considered “family”. While this sentiment is rooted in good intention, the dynamic of treating MDWs — particularly long-term caregivers — as “family” may manipulate the emotional bond between the MDW and the family, making it more difficult for the MDW to assert their rights or address mistreatment. Their labour may be undervalued or taken for granted, and their personal needs and boundaries may be ignored or dismissed. This can result in longer working hours, insufficient compensation, and a lack of proper rest. MDWs too may feel obligated to continue working out of loyalty or affection. In such situations, the blurred line between familial care and labor exploitation creates an environment where the MDW's well-being is compromised.
Physical and mental fatigue and lack of support can lead to disastrous results. As we have stated before, while no act of violence can be condoned, there have been cases of MDW caregivers inflicting injury to their employers, which can be borne out of burn-out, or even as a result of prolonged exploitation or abuse at the hands of employers. In Nov 2022, an MDW caregiver was sentenced to 16 years’ jail for causing the death of her employer. The judge made reference to the fact that she had been ill-treated (she was scolded, slapped and spat at), faced social isolation as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (which disallowed her from seeking help), and that she could not change employers. A medical report highlighted that she was suffering from adjustment disorder as a result of chronic stress due to difficulty coping with her duties, communication barriers and being socially isolated.
In another case concluded before the courts in Feb 2025, a male MDW caregiver was jailed for abusing his care recipient, an elderly man with dementia who was wheelchair-bound. His lawyer argued that his client’s actions were “a negative manifestation of caregiver burden”, and that he had “lost his patience caring for an individual that is difficult to take care of”, and had to wear a back brace as a result of his caregiving tasks, which included transferring the elderly patient. The court also heard that the MDW caregiver could not communicate with the elderly man due to a language barrier. Going by public accounts of the case, the MDW caregiver had supportive employers, giving him birthday treats and bonuses during festive periods. Caregiver burden can thus still affect individuals who have, for all intents and purposes, benevolent employers.
What can we do better? It is vital to recognise that MDWs are, first and foremost, workers. Correspondingly, they should be given labour rights that protect their physical and mental well-being. Doing so will minimise the adverse effects that prolonged caregiving work may bring.
HOME advocates for MDWs to be included in the Employment Act, which sets limits on working hours, and entrenches the right to overtime pay and annual leave. Weekly rest days should be mandatory and should be defined as 24 continuous hours. A decent minimum wage will reflect the value that we put on caregiving work and caregivers. MDWs should also have the right to change employers when their current employment situation becomes untenable by giving clear notice periods that are adhered to by both parties.
It is also important for MDWs caregivers to receive comprehensive training to cope with their responsibilities. In this regard, having a separate work pass category for live-in caregivers, distinguishing the roles of caregiving and domestic work, will ensure clarity of roles, reduce overwork, and give MDWs who have to provide specialised care access to mandatory training (with uniform curriculum) and so they can fulfil their crucial roles effectively.
This concept has been implemented in Taiwan, where caregivers’ job scopes are strictly defined, and only a small proportion are allowed to do childcare or household tasks, based on strict criteria.
Lastly, Singapore should ratify ILO’s Domestic Workers’ Convention to ensure better rights and protections for the more than 300,000 MDWs in Singapore.
The well-being of MDW caregivers should not be contingent on individual employers’ acts of kindness. Rather, there must be systemic protections put in place to ensure that they have decent working conditions. This International Domestic Workers’ Day, let’s put more thought into how we can better care for those who care for our loved ones.
=====
A MDW caregiver, Gina speaks about her 31-year tenure as a domestic worker and caregiver:
“I am a caregiver to an elderly lady in her 90s with dementia. My work is strenuous as I have to take care of her at almost all times of the day and night. My work requires skill, labour and concentration. Some of the tasks are feeding, keeping to medication schedules, bringing her to the toilet and back to bed, bathing her and changing her diapers and bedding regularly. I also carry on conversations with her to keep her memory alive. Apart from that, I also take care of my employer’s adult child who has autism.
The work that I do is not easy. It’s important that I am paid a fair wage that reflects the work that I do, and get sufficient rest.
My employers treat me well. I am given paid home leave every two years and from time to time, they pay me a little extra on top of my salary. I appreciate these gestures very much as it makes me feel appreciated and recognises the efforts I put in taking care of their mother and child. However, they are careful to not let this extra compensation replace my rest. Every week, I am entitled to my rest day, where I am not expected to do any work. This allows me to rest and recharge from my day to day work, and do activities with my friends and fellow domestic workers. On my rest day, which is every Sunday, my employers take turns to look after their mother.
My employers recognise that I am an employee. Many domestic workers work hard as caregivers, and we deserve equal rights as all employees. The reason I have stayed for so long with my employers (31 years) is because I am happy and content with the way they have treated me, despite the challenges of the job.”