The Chiayi District Court last week sentenced an Indonesian caregiver to six months in prison for abandoning a patient.
Cicih Nurhayati, who was employed as a live-in caregiver to a man surnamed Lin (林), left the residence in the middle of the night in September 2021, leaving Lin — whose chronic conditions make it impossible for him to survive on his own — alone in the home.
She was indicted for abandoning a helpless person in contravention of her contractual duties.
The incident should draw attention to a broader issue: Taiwan’s growing population of migrant workers, especially live-in caregivers, face a system rife with flaws that often push them to flee their posts.
Taiwan has more than 820,000 migrant workers, who play crucial roles in the industrial and care sectors. Yet the number of cases of migrant workers running away are increasing. As of November last year, more than 90,000 were unaccounted for — roughly 11 percent of the total migrant workforce.
The data represent not only a social and economic strain on families, employers and the broader labor system, but also the consequences of insufficient protections for migrant workers. The decision to run away is often driven by low wages, harsh conditions and limited avenues to seek help. This is exacerbated by those seeking to profit from the vulnerabilities.
The National Immigration Agency in October dismantled an illegal labor brokerage in Taichung that recruited absconded migrant workers and visa overstayers for odd jobs and skimmed their wages.
Illicit networks like the one in Taichung exploit systemic gaps, funneling migrant workers into illegal jobs, and trapping them in cycles of debt, fear and exploitation. Nowhere are these problems more acute than among migrant caregivers, whose circumstances tend to differ sharply from those in the industrial sector.
Domestic work is not covered in the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法), leaving caregivers without minimum-wage protections or standardized work conditions. Many caregivers, nearly all of them women, live with their employers and work an average of 10 hours a day without regular days off.
Abuse by family members of employers — whether physical, psychological or sexual — is not uncommon and is rarely reported. Caregivers are often pressured into quietly settling disputes.
Meanwhile, high recruitment fees and dependence on labor brokers restrict the mobility and bargaining power of workers, putting even more pressure on them not to report abuse, quit or return home early. For caregivers living and working under such conditions, running away might seem like the only avenue of escape.
However, employers of migrant caregivers do not have it easy, either. Families relying on live-in caregivers often operate on tight budgets and have few alternatives if their caregiver disappears. When caregivers take time off, family members usually have to provide the care themselves.
Additionally, employers are barred from immediately replacing runaway caregivers. Amendments to the Employment Service Act (就業服務法) in 2023 shortened the wait period to one month, but that is still a long time to provide full-time care, especially for family members with regular jobs.
While families are technically eligible to apply for temporary respite care when a caregiver disappears, the support is far from sufficient. Most local governments only offer short, single-day sessions, and the system is chronically understaffed and underfunded.
The exact details of Cicih Nurhayati’s working conditions and relationship with her employer are not fully known, but it was confirmed that she was denied leave prior to abandoning her post. It is fortunate that the incident did not result in immediate medical harm, but the government should nonetheless view her case as a warning — Taiwan’s domestic care system is in urgent need of reform.
Migrant caregivers deserve enforceable labor protections, standardized contracts and accessible, impartial complaint channels. Likewise, families who rely on live-in caregivers need reliable support systems to fall back on when their caregivers need time off.
Taiwan’s elderly population is growing rapidly, as is its dependence on migrant caregivers. The problem is not going away. The government cannot continue to ease hiring restrictions and expect the long list of systemic flaws to resolve itself. If legislative action is not taken soon, the already strained system would become even more untenable — and migrant caregivers and the families who rely on them would continue to bear the consequences.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS