\n<\/p>\n
MSF and the police said they are aware of Mdm Han’s Facebook livestream on Mar 11, which was posted on Facebook and YouTube.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The authorities said these posts contained false statements.<\/p>\n
This includes that the removal of the children from Mdm Han’s care was not done in accordance with the law, and that MSF takes away children from families despite knowing that there is no abuse, so as to be able to show a high reconciliation rate.<\/p>\n
She also claimed she had not signed any agreement with MSF regarding the placement of her children in protective care, and that MSF was seeking to withhold the truth about the children\u2019s physical condition by telling Mdm Han not to film or photograph the children.<\/p>\n
Mdm Han claimed MSF had threatened to deny her access to her children unless she deleted her social media posts that were not aligned with existing government policies, and that MSF was seeking to permanently deprive Mdm Han of access to her children.<\/p>\n
She also said the police had not concluded investigations that commenced in August 2025.<\/p>\n
Since August 2025, the Police have received multiple reports from Mdm Han and her husband, involving various allegations of violence against one another.\u00a0<\/p>\n
There were also allegations against Mdm Han and her husband, which raised concerns about the safety and welfare of their three children. A safety plan for the care of the children was put in place by a Child Protection Specialist Centre (operated by a social service agency) in October 2025, said MSF and SPF.<\/p>\n
Mdm Han and her husband had consented to this safety plan. Among others, it stipulated that a designated safe adult \u2013 the children\u2019s paternal grandmother \u2013 would move into the home to oversee the care of the children under Mdm Han.<\/p>\n
Between January and February, the police received fresh reports lodged by Mdm Han, her husband, and the paternal grandmother against each other.<\/p>\n
On Feb 15, Mdm Han called for the police\u2019s assistance for an alleged altercation between the paternal grandmother and the children. The police attended at Mdm Han\u2019s home and assessed that there were immediate concerns about the safety of the children.<\/p>\n
Having considered the history of family violence reports and that the safety plan involving the paternal grandmother as the safe adult was no longer feasible, the police decided to remove the three children from Mdm Han\u2019s household, in exercise of their powers under Section 11(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1993 (CYPA), for medical assessment and care.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The children were taken to KKH \u2013 a designated place of temporary care and protection under Section 31 of the CYPA. On the same day, the police also referred the matter to MSF for further social investigations.<\/p>\n
On Feb 19, Mdm Han and her husband signed a Voluntary Care Agreement, which recorded their consent for the children to remain in the hospital with separate weekly supervised access while further safe care arrangements were worked out with the family.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Mdm Han attended supervised access sessions with her children in the hospital on Feb 20 and Feb 26, as well as Mar 1, 3 and 6.<\/p>\n
On Mar 1, MSF\u2019s Protection Officer (PO) told Mdm Han during her supervised access session with her children that she could take photos and videos of her children for personal keepsake, but that she was not allowed to post them publicly, in order to safeguard their identity.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Despite the clear instructions, on Mar 7, Mdm Han posted videos of her children taken during the supervised access session on Mar 1. The videos were posted on her public social media profiles.<\/p>\n
On Mar 11, MSF\u2019s PO again reminded Mdm Han not to take any photos or videos of the children during the access session and explained it was to safeguard their children\u2019s identity.\u00a0<\/p>\n
However, Mdm Han proceeded to livestream her interaction with the PO. The PO sought her cooperation to stop recording their conversation and to proceed with the access.\u00a0<\/p>\n
As Mdm Han continued with her video-recording, the PO was unable to proceed with the access session. MSF has never threatened to deny Mdm Han access to her children unless she deleted her social media posts that are not aligned with existing government policies.<\/p>\n
MSF and SPF said removal of children is a measure of last resort, used only where: (a) it is assessed that there is immediate danger to the children’s safety and well-being; or (b) when the children cannot remain safe in the care of the parent or guardian, and alternative arrangements for safe care are not possible.\u00a0<\/p>\n
They added that even in such circumstances, MSF continues to work with the family to support the children\u2019s eventual return where possible. All actions taken are in accordance with the powers set out in the CYPA and other related legislation.<\/p>\n
“The ultimate goal remains safe reunification whenever possible. Even when the child is removed, MSF and community-based protection specialist agencies work intensively with the family, providing targeted interventions, counselling, and support services to address the underlying issues that led to the removal, in order to support a safe return to the family.”<\/p>\n
The police’s investigations into the reports lodged by Mdm Han and her husband between August and December 2025 concluded in February 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Following the completion of the investigations, the police issued a 24-month conditional warning to both Mdm Han and her husband on Feb 9 and Feb 11 respectively.<\/p>\n
Following the reports lodged between August and December 2025, Mdm Han, her husband and the children\u2019s paternal grandmother have since lodged more reports against each other, including allegations of violence by the children\u2019s paternal grandmother on Feb 15, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Police investigations into these more recent reports are ongoing.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n