Wed, Oct 22, 2025 page8

• EDITORIAL: Navigating the priority seat dilemma

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  The topic of increased intergenerational conflict has been making headlines in the past few months, showcasing a problem that would only grow as Taiwan approaches “super-aged society” status. A striking example of that tension erupted on the Taipei MRT late last month, when an apparently able-bodied passenger kicked a 73-year-old woman across the width of the carriage. The septuagenarian had berated and hit the young commuter with her bag for sitting in a priority seat, despite regular seats being available. A video of the incident went viral online.

  Altercations over the yielding of MRT seats are not common, but they are increasing. The debate over showing compassion for other passengers, the correct moral approach to priority seating and a person’s understanding of the right thing to do in social conflicts are certainly part of easing tensions. The issue needs clarity, and the people involved need to know how to communicate their needs and their perceptions effectively.

  The response to the MRT incident was concerning: Some commentators sided with the seated passenger, because the older woman had provoked her, and yet the older woman appeared to be kicked with significant force. The altercation calls for a moment of reflection, but also a clear-headed response backed by a public awareness campaign. Tempers might flare when faced with an apparent injustice or ignorant intransigence; what is needed is communication and understanding.

  Yielding a priority seat is not enforceable by law; it is left to the discretion of the individual. With an appropriate level of awareness on the part of the majority of commuters, there should be no need for designated seats at all: Caring passengers would willingly yield their seat to a person in need. Does the provision of priority seats being mandated by Article 53 of the People with Disabilities Rights Protection Act (身心障礙者權益保障法) suggest that Taiwanese as a whole lack compassion? Of course not.

  Riders on the MRT see examples every day of passengers offering up their seat to a person they think might need it more. While there is no guarantee that everyone has the civic awareness or basic humanity to look after the needs of others, there is a strong likelihood that several passengers on any given carriage will.

  Priority seating sounds simple, but it involves many levels of nuance. It is easy to understand the need for priority seating for an elderly person, a pregnant woman or people with disabilities. There is a feeling of indignation when seeing an apparently young and or able-bodied person sitting in a designated seat, while a more “deserving” person is left standing.

  However, consider a person who is well-meaning and considerate enough to ordinarily yield their seat, but on a certain occasion, for whatever reason, finds themselves in need. That is not always a simple determination to make. Natural humility would make them assume they are no more deserving than another, and uncertainty about the value of their need might give rise to feelings of guilt at taking up a priority seat. That sense of guilt and uncertainty, if the person is challenged by another passenger, might well lead to an angry reaction, especially when the person feels unwell and their thought processes are clouded. A defensive response would make effective communication difficult. Tempers would flare unnecessarily and the window of opportunity for a simple communication of someone’s reasonable need would close.

  The provision of designated seating should not be the priority: Clarity in what constitutes a person in need should be.
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Taipei to join Japan, US response to rare earth ban

  • 2

    Torrential rain expected this week, the CWA says

  • 3

    Flight attendants’ union to protest EVA marathon

  • 4

    Urban mining could evade China’s grip

  • 5

    China’s visa program just for show: MAC