A struggling single mother was sentenced to death for the murder of her children and attempted suicide on Wednesday last week.
The 30-year-old woman surnamed Wu (吳) had divorced her husband seven years ago, and was raising her two young children alone. She moved in with her brother and his wife last year after losing her job, the latest in a series of challenges she had holding down steady work.
On Feb. 13, after an argument with her brother and sister-in-law, she took her daughter and son to a motel in New Taipei City’s Wugu District (五股), where she tried to suffocate them with pillows, but failed. Two days later, she gave them sleeping pills before strangling them with a rope.
She texted her ex-husband that she was “going to be with the kids or they will feel lonely,” before taking a combination of sleeping pills, antidepressants and alcohol in an attempt to take her own life. Her ex-husband found her in time to rush her to a hospital, but the children were already dead.
Wu in court said that she had been “looked down on, left to face the pressure of public opinion and all sorts of dirty looks.”
“It has only been me caring for them 24 hours a day, without any kind of freedom for myself,” she said.
The New Taipei City District Court seemed not to consider any of these extenuating circumstances, instead calling Wu “cold-blooded” and “extremely arrogant, selfish and ignorant.” To justify the death penalty, it pointed to her apparent lack of remorse, and said that she would be “hard to rehabilitate.”
In a stroke of irony, it also cited the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, saying that it has a responsibility to uphold every child’s “inherent right to life,” seemingly disregarding that the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights condemns the death penalty “in light of the fundamental nature of the right to life.”
It is troubling to hear such dismissive language from the court in a case that clearly touches upon deeply ingrained social traumas.
As the Awakening Foundation said in a statement about the ruling, single mothers face intense social judgement, as well as discrimination in the rental and labor markets. Without support from family or friends, it is “not difficult to imagine the desperation borne of repeatedly hitting up against a wall,” it said.
Figures back up this trend. Research published in July on the Institute for Family Studies Web site found that single-mother families in Taiwan are the most likely of any family type to be impoverished, with about 17 percent living in poverty in 2018, compared with about 9 percent among families overall.
Instead of considering these extreme challenges, the court merely served as an extension of the same moralistic judgement that drove Wu to the ultimate act of desperation. It suggested that the ruling would help deter others, but considering the crime, it is highly unlikely that fear of legal punishment factored into Wu’s calculations. The ruling therefore acts only to diminish her plight and embolden her detractors, sending a dangerous message.
What would be a truly effective deterrent is not punishment, but ensuring that people do not sink to such a state in the first place. Welfare services are already stretched to the limit, with policymakers preferring to place the burden of care on families instead of providing sufficient and universal coverage.
If authorities continue to moralize in lieu of offering real solutions, this tragedy will not be the last.
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Keelung Mayor George Hsieh (謝國樑) of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) on Tuesday last week apologized over allegations that the former director of the city’s Civil Affairs Department had illegally accessed citizens’ data to assist the KMT in its campaign to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) councilors. Given the public discontent with opposition lawmakers’ disruptive behavior in the legislature, passage of unconstitutional legislation and slashing of the central government’s budget, civic groups have launched a massive campaign to recall KMT lawmakers. The KMT has tried to fight back by initiating campaigns to recall DPP lawmakers, but the petition documents they
RSS