So what good are restraining orders if they fail to protect women or, as the Wang case suggests, may lead to violence?
Yu and Lai Fang-jue (賴芳玉), also an attorney and women's rights activist, believe restraining orders deter abusers and deliver an important message to the public.
"When the abuser learns that he will be punished by the law if he violates the order, then violence could be prevented." Lai said.
In addition, Lai said, restraining orders heighten awareness of domestic violence beyond a "household affair."
Ke said that while restraining orders may not be effective as a deterrent, they do serve the function of educating the public about domestic violence issues.
"The order could be a mere piece of white paper as well as an announcement addressing not only the offender but also the society about the idea of gender equality," Ke said.
But when it comes to protecting a victim, "Restraining orders are most effective on people least likely to be violent anyway," said de Becker, the US scholar.
In his book, de Becker wrote that a fatal flaw of restraining orders is that they lull women into feeling safe. Consequently, a woman may fail to take other safety measures.
But in the Wang's case, according Ting Yen-chi (丁雁琪), director of the center for the prevention and control of domestic violence and sexual abuse of Taipei County Government, she and her parents and siblings were very aware that Lee was dangerous.
Actually, a few days before the Aug. 4 murder, Lee had been arrested for violating the restraining order but was later released on the court's ruling.
"Would have the murder been prevented had the court detained him? Now no one knows," Ting said.
"The restraining order is not to blame. What the murderer eventually did precisely shows how great the risk the victim and her child had been exposed to."
In tomorrow's edition, the Taipei Times will examine other proposed methods of addressing domestic violence.
RSS