Following a random attack in Taipei that resulted in serious casualties, 27-year-old suspect Chang Wen fell to his death and later died. Prosecutors and police conducted an autopsy on his body on the 23rd at Taipei’s Huai Ai Funeral Hall.
After leaving the autopsy room, Chang’s parents spoke publicly for the first time. They bowed deeply, knelt, and apologised repeatedly to the public and to the families of the victims, saying “sorry” four times in an emotional plea.
The incident has reignited public debate over whether parents should be held responsible for crimes committed by their adult children.
Lawyer Wang Chih-Teh weighed in on the issue in a Facebook post, questioning the growing social expectation for parents of criminal suspects to publicly apologise. He noted that after major criminal cases, parents are often pressured to apologise, and if they do not, they may be subjected to online harassment and doxxing.
Wang questioned how long parents should be held responsible for their children’s actions, citing previous cases in Taiwan where parents apologised for crimes committed by adult children, including the 28-year-old suspect in the Chang Jung Christian University case and the 23-year-old suspect in the Taichung “Maserati” assault case.
From a legal standpoint, Wang said the practice is troubling. He explained that while parents may bear joint civil liability when minors commit crimes, adult children are legally responsible for their own actions, as parents no longer have legal authority or control over them.
“Once a child becomes an adult, parents no longer have any legal or factual right to discipline them. So why should parents still be required to apologise?” he asked.
Wang acknowledged that in some cases, criminal behaviour may stem from poor parenting. However, he stressed that many serious crimes are committed by individuals who were raised in loving and reasonable households, making it unfair to automatically blame parents.
He also criticised the inconsistency of public outrage, asking whether parents of public figures convicted of lesser offences — such as copyright or personal data violations — should also be forced to apologise.
Wang further questioned how members of the public could accuse parents of poor upbringing without any evidence of how the offender was raised, noting that even journalists rely on verified information before making such claims.
Emphasising that no parent intends to raise a criminal, Wang said that while he would feel ashamed if his own child committed a serious crime, he would not accept being forced to apologise for the actions of an adult child he could no longer control.
“People should only be responsible for what they can control,” he said, adding that holding parents accountable for adult children’s crimes resembles collective punishment practices of ancient times.
In a sarcastic remark, Wang suggested that if society truly believes parents should be held responsible for their children’s actions for life, then laws should be passed stating that parents — including adoptive parents — must bear responsibility for any crime committed by their children, regardless of age.
“If that were the case, parents might think twice about having children in the first place,” he said.
