新加坡以強制儲蓄的公積金制度來建構其福利體制，並避免財政問題的作法，引發經濟、福利與政治學者對新加坡體制的討論。在我國全民健保制度與國民年金制度的規劃與檢討過程中，亦一直有學者倡議新加坡之公積金體制，希望藉由公積金制度來強化個人的福利責任並避免福利擴張的財務危機。而這些引介新加坡制度的論著，其重心多在於強調新加坡福利體制的財務健全，從行政的觀點（administration perspective）來討論新加坡體制的效果，而未能從社會福利價值（value）性本質來進行思辨。 本文除清楚介紹新加坡的健康照護制度外，並從社會福利歷史發展之反省出發，藉由社會正義（social justice）、自由 (freedoms)、平等(equality)與安全（security）等社會福利之本質性價值，來探析新加坡的健康照護（health care）體制。 研究結果發現，新加坡在公積金架構下的健康照護體制，包括醫療儲金（Medisave）、重病醫療庇護保險（MediShield）及醫療救助（Medifund）三層體系，並未將公民權、平等、自由之價值納入這個體制中，且在安全保障上亦並非是高程度的安全保障。醫療帳戶具部分安全的性質，但不具平等之價值；重病醫療庇護保險相對具有較高的安全性，但亦不具平等的價值，而醫療救助具部分平等的價值，但因必須經由資產調查（means-test），安全保障程度最低。

　　　　　The providential fund has been regarded as the core of welfare system in Singapore. The notion of avoiding governmental financial crisis by compelled saving has drown discussions from both social and economical aspects. In introducing the Singapore system to Taiwan, the attention focused on the financial structure seems to advocate the Singapore welfare from an administrative perspective instead of the welfare values. From the reflection of social welfare history, this paper analyzed the Singapore Health Care System using the main welfare values-social justice, freedom, equality and security-as criteria. The main findings are that the three levels Singapore Health Care System including Medisave, MediShield and Medifund manifested the values of the civic rights, equality and freedom were scarcely considered, And even security value can be observed in the system, it is not a high-level one. The Medisave and the Medishield both show the security effect, with the latter one higher, but similarly lack of equality one. As for the Medifund, it holds the equality value but by means-test lost its security effect.