'Where can I sleep if I have no home?': Netizens share being homeless in Singapore
Unlike in many other global cities, homelessness in Singapore rarely involves large visible encampments or tents. It often wears an invisible face, someone dozing in an airport terminal, washing up at a public pool, or spending the night in a parked car. These people become the 'hidden homeless', citizens and residents who don't have a stable, safe place to sleep, yet remain outside the traditional social safety net.
One user shared their survival strategy during a difficult period:
'I was homeless for a few months. Showered at public pools — cost a dollar at the time. Slept at Changi Airport or moved every few hours from place to place. I hope no one faces this situation, especially a female like myself.'
Another recounted how they lived out of a rented car for six months, parking near parks or work to get some rest. Public swimming pools and even the showers at their workplace helped maintain basic hygiene, but the struggle was constant. 'It's hot, uncomfortable, and sometimes impossible to sleep. Then you still have to show up for work the next day.' Singapore's high cost of shelter
At the root of many of these stories lies the harsh economic reality of rising rents and limited access to affordable housing.
In Singapore, single citizens under the age of 35 are often left without enough housing support unless they co-purchase with someone else, typically a partner. Rental options in the private market are often far out of reach, particularly for those who are facing underemployment, unemployment or without family support.
And while social services exist, navigating them can be difficult. Some users shared that they were hesitant to approach governmental agencies, either due to extended waiting times, stigma, or because they assumed they weren't eligible for 'help'. Others pointed out that social service organisations are often overwhelmed, stretched thin by growing demand as rents rise faster than wages.
Amid these DIY survival strategies, one comment stood out — offering a concrete resource that even some of the formerly homeless weren't aware of:
'Please Google any S3P (Safe Sound Sleeping Places) near your area. They are shelters for rough sleepers — safe, with showers, sometimes even meals. Some are run by religious groups, but you don't have to follow the faith to stay there.'
S3Ps are low-barrier shelter spaces coordinated through MSF's Partners Engaging and Empowering Rough Sleepers (PEERS) network. They provide immediate, temporary nighttime accommodation, typically between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m., with access to basic hygiene and a safe sleeping environment.
For those who qualify, some social service offices may also provide case management, food vouchers, and transitional housing support. A system under pressure
Singapore prides itself on planning, safety, and efficiency. But these stories reveal a pressure point in the system, particularly for those who don't fit the traditional mould: young, single, unemployed individuals with no family safety net. The most striking part of the Reddit thread wasn't just the vulnerability of the original question but how many responded with their own stories of quiet determination that is often invisible.
If you are or know anyone in need of help:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
6 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: Hoarding threatens public safety, but let's not forget it's a mental disorder
SINGAPORE: In late July, a fire broke out at a flat in Toa Payoh Lorong 1, claiming two lives. Neighbours reported that one of the victims was a hoarder who collected discarded items such as dolls, furniture and shoes, placing them along the corridor. This is not an isolated incident. In January, three lives were lost after a fire broke out in a Hougang flat that firefighters had difficulty entering due to excessive items in the unit. From 2021 to 2024, there were 23 hoarding-related fires. With lives at stake and public safety in peril, it's understandable that online reactions to the Toa Payoh Lorong 1 fire have been critical. Some have called for harsher measures against hoarding, such as forced clean-ups and fines. But such responses miss the crucial fact that hoarding is not a lifestyle choice. It is a psychiatric disorder. This is a scenario where there are only victims. These incidents underscore the real-world consequences of untreated hoarding disorder, and the limits of intervention when unaccompanied by mental health support. A MENTAL HEALTH CONDITION Hoarding disorder is characterised by persistent difficulty discarding possessions, regardless of their actual value, due to perceived emotional significance or fear of needing them in the future. This results in accumulation that compromises the usability of living spaces and poses risks to hygiene and safety. Hoarding is not the same as collecting. While some individuals may accumulate out of material desire or habit, hoarding disorder typically reflects deeper psychological vulnerabilities, including past trauma, depression, social isolation or cognitive decline. Shame is common, and many sufferers go to great lengths to hide their condition, often delaying help-seeking until external intervention becomes inevitable. International studies estimate the prevalence of hoarding disorder at 2 to 6 per cent of the population, making it more common than many realise. Yet awareness remains low, and misconceptions persist. Hoarders are often portrayed as inconsiderate or defiant, rather than as individuals grappling with a mental health condition. FORCED CLEAN-UPS CAN BACKFIRE In Singapore, authorities have powers to enforce decluttering orders when public disamenities arise. These measures may be necessary when lives are at risk, but they do not treat the underlying illness. Forced clean-ups are traumatic for sufferers of hoarding disorder. Possessions, even if objectively worthless, often serve as psychological anchors. Their sudden removal can provoke intense anxiety, grief or anger. In my work in community psychiatry, I've witnessed how forced clean-ups can backfire. One patient's family emptied her apartment during her hospital stay. She experienced it as a betrayal, severed all contact with them, and quickly returned to hoarding after discharge. The intervention addressed the clutter, but not the illness. Without concurrent treatment, individuals with hoarding disorder are likely to resume hoarding. The standard of care involves cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) adapted for hoarding, often alongside medication. Therapy focuses on building rapport and insight, gradually reducing anxiety around discarding, and developing new routines. But it takes time. Successful outcomes often require years of consistent support. QUESTIONS ABOUT CULPABILITY Individuals with hoarding disorder often do not recognise that they have a problem. Cognitive impairments, depression or age-related decline may complicate matters further. Trust must be established before behavioural change can begin, a process that can take years. When treatment stalls and setbacks pile up, families and clinicians alike feel increasingly helpless. That helplessness often turns into blame, directed at the very person who's already suffering the most. Hoarding also intersects with legal domains. When hoarding leads to a fire or public nuisance, questions about culpability arise. Courts may need to assess whether the individual was capable of understanding the risks posed by their actions or omissions. In some cases, mental illness may serve as a mitigating factor, though not necessarily as an excuse. Best practices internationally suggest that legal interventions are most effective when paired with mental health mandates. For example, court orders requiring clean-ups may be more sustainable if they also mandate psychiatric assessment, structured therapy or case management. The goal is not just compliance but rehabilitation. SINGAPORE'S 'WHOLE-OF-SOCIETY' APPROACH Recognising the complexity of hoarding, Singapore has adopted a more integrated strategy through the New Environment Action Team (NEAT). Comprising agencies such as the National Environment Agency, Singapore Civil Defence Force, Agency for Integrated Care and community groups, NEAT coordinates efforts to manage severe hoarding cases in a sustainable and humane manner. As then Minister for National Development Desmond Lee noted, addressing hoarding must go beyond 'decluttering and refreshing homes' to include behavioural change and long-term support. This is where Singapore's community mental health services play a vital role. The Community Outreach Teams (CREST) conduct early identification and public education. Community Intervention Teams (COMIT) provide counselling and psychiatric services closer to home. Together, these services form a continuum of care that can support hoarders throughout their recovery journey. Still, there are limits. Even with multiple touchpoints, help cannot be imposed on someone who is unwilling or unable to engage. In such cases, enforcement, including court orders or, in extreme situations, eviction, may still be necessary. Nevertheless, it should remain a last resort, not a default strategy. A CALL FOR COMPASSION AND COORDINATION The tragic flat fires should not be seen as confirmation that hoarders are beyond help or sympathy. Rather, it should prompt us to strengthen the links between enforcement and mental healthcare, to improve early detection, and to educate the public on hoarding disorder. Neighbours and family members can play a key role by flagging early warning signs to social services, rather than shaming sufferers of hoarding disorder. Social agencies must be empowered with the resources to stay engaged with complex cases over the long term. Hoarders are not merely 'messy people'. They are often vulnerable individuals living with an untreated and poorly understood illness. If we want to prevent future tragedies, we must respond not only with firmness, but with empathy, coordination, and above all, persistence.
Independent Singapore
12 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
Singaporeans bag massive python spotted at Teck Whye coffeeshop but ACRES urges public to avoid handling wildlife
SINGAPORE: Diners at a coffee shop in Block 145, Teck Whye Road, were left stunned Wednesday afternoon (Aug 13) when a giant python appeared on the premises. According to footage circulating on social media, the snake was first spotted on the roof of the coffee shop before tumbling to the ground, sparking shouts and commotion among patrons. The reptile slithered into a corner as several residents scrambled to intervene. One man was seen using a broom to try to nudge the python away, pressing it down at one point. The animal, however, broke free and another man stepped in, using a chair to pin the python before pulling a small white sack over its head. With the help of three other men, he managed to carry the writhing snake out of the coffee shop and secure it in a larger sack. Throughout the dramatic scene, onlookers gathered around, some shouting advice, others filming the incident on their phones. The Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (ACRES) later confirmed that its wildlife rescue team had received a call about the reticulated python but said the animal was captured by members of the public before help arrived. ACRES expressed concern over the incident, saying the methods used could have injured the python, which is a protected species in Singapore, and posed serious risks to the people involved. 'We regret that some members of the public took matters into their own hands before our team reached the scene,' an ACRES spokesperson told the press, 'The approach used was inappropriate and may have caused harm to the animal. Such actions also put individuals at risk of severe injury.' The spokesperson reminded the public to contact ACRES' 24-hour wildlife rescue hotline at 9783 7782 if they encounter wild animals in distress. 'Our professionally trained team is equipped to handle such situations in a safe and humane manner,' the spokesperson added. () => { const trigger = if ('IntersectionObserver' in window && trigger) { const observer = new IntersectionObserver((entries, observer) => { => { if ( { lazyLoader(); // You should define lazyLoader() elsewhere or inline here // Run once } }); }, { rootMargin: '800px', threshold: 0.1 }); } else { // Fallback setTimeout(lazyLoader, 3000); } });
Independent Singapore
16 hours ago
- Independent Singapore
‘She uses it while cooking': Employer says her helper refuses to follow instructions regarding phone use
SINGAPORE: Frustrated that her helper refuses to follow her instructions regarding phone use, a local employer took to social media to ask netizens for advice. In a post in the 'MDW in Singapore' Facebook group, the employer said, 'My helper has been using her phone as and when, chatting. I've told her to use it only during night rest time, [but] she has plenty of reasons.' 'She starts [using her phone] from 7:15 a.m., the minute my kids leave for school, and also uses it while cooking [or doing other chores], etc.' Unsure of what boundaries are reasonable, the employer asked the community whether the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has any guidelines on phone use for domestic helpers. 'She's a human, not a programmable robot.' Unfortunately, instead of getting the advice she was looking for, the employer was met with plenty of criticism. Many netizens questioned why she was being so strict about her helper's phone use. 'This might not be what you want to hear, but why are you asking about MOM's guideline on phone usage? She's a human, not a programmable robot,' one comment read. 'As long as it doesn't interfere with her work or cause harm to the family or surroundings, maybe you can practice a bit of empathy.' Another said, 'If your company restricted you from using your phone to check on your family, friends, or your husband while you're at work, how would you feel?' Several domestic helpers also chimed in, sharing stories from their own experiences. 'I used to have that kind of employer who only lets me use my hand phone after work,' one helper wrote. 'I couldn't even talk to my son because he was already asleep by the time I finished. It really affected my mental health.' Another commented, 'I've experienced this kind of employer. I could only use my mobile during break time and bedtime. I did my job well, and I took care [of] her children well, but I felt lonely and unhappy.' They added, 'We want some freedom too. Keeping away the hand phone just makes us more triggered to use it! Better let us use and carry it. So that when [we] have an emergency, we can respond immediately.' Still, amid all the backlash, there were a handful of commenters who took the employer's side. One told her, 'Do set boundaries for phone usage. More phone usage means more unnecessary things you will eventually be faced with. You tell her off, or else you terminate her service and let her enjoy talking face-to-face in their home country.' Talk to your helper about phone use If your helper uses her phone while doing chores, Ms K Jayaprema, President of the Association of Employment Agencies (Singapore), recommends calmly explaining why some tasks need her full attention. For example, when she is cooking, a distraction could cause burns or fires. When caring for children or elderly family members, even a brief lapse in focus could lead to accidents. And when giving medication, a small mistake in dosage or timing could have serious consequences. By focusing the discussion on safety rather than control, you can help her understand that your concerns come from care for her well-being and the safety of the household. Read also: 'Female HENRYs, would you date down?' — Woman in her 30s wonders if other high-earning women would lower financial expectations for love
