On February 27, 2017 (February 2, 2017 in the lunar calendar), a tragedy occurred in Tianjin Joy City: two children fell to death after their parents failed to hug them. On the evening of February 27th, 2017, two children fell to death from the atrium of Tianjin Joy City Shopping Mall. A policeman told reporters that at the time of the incident, both young children were held by their parents. After one child fell, the parents wanted to pull the child, but the other child fell. However, the details of the case still need to be fully investigated and disclosed by the police. The tragedy of two young children's death in Tianjin caused a heated debate on the Internet: many netizens expressed sympathy for the parents of the crying children and mourned their misfortune. Some hot posts said that the father of the young children had held his children outside the guardrail, and some popular comments pointed out that the parents' ineffective supervision indirectly "killed" the children, and Kotaro Isaka was quoted as saying, "It's really terrible to think that being a parent doesn't have to pass the exam." The two voices even became confrontation and "tearing each other". Some people are eager to investigate the so-called "manslaughter" of parents, thinking that if such tragedies were in the United States, parents would be sentenced. Before, there have been many incidents in which minors were injured in China, but under normal circumstances, parents have not been investigated for the crime of "negligent injury causing death". Here comes the question: Should parents be "held accountable"? In the tragedy of two young children's death in Tianjin, when the children were killed or injured, they clamored for "arresting parents". After all, it was still a populist idea that ignored Chinese laws and social environment. It should be understood that civil "fault" and criminal "negligent crime" are not the same concept. In many casualties of minors, there will be problems that guardians fail to fully fulfill their guardianship responsibilities, or even serious faults; But does this kind of fault need to be raised to the level of criminal punishment? As far as the constitutive elements of crime are concerned, the subjective mentality of negligent crime is: "We should foresee the possible result that harms society, but we didn't foresee it because of negligence", or "we have foreseen it but believe it can be avoided". This "foreseeable" level is actually the compulsory norm of the society for the parties, and it is closely related to the social environment, the cognition level of the parties and their professional responsibilities. For example, a few years ago, a mother in Shanghai was extremely irresponsible. When she washed her child's face, she covered her child's head with a ball of wet clothes, causing her child to suffocate and die, and was investigated for criminal responsibility. Obviously, she "should foresee" this danger to the child, which is extremely irresponsible for the child's life. The tragedy of two young children falling to their deaths in Tianjin, but in more injury cases, parents' subjective fault is not so big: at a glance, children fall down, which is a common occurrence in the process of parenting. If criminal responsibility is often investigated, it will only lead to the result of harsh laws. In this fall in Joy City, the key depends on whether parents have made serious mistakes when holding their children, such as deliberately holding their children outside the railing. It should be understood that the "foreseeable" level of negligent crime is consistent with personal knowledge and the level of social care for minors. Some countries with developed automobile culture will think that children's lack of car seats is a malicious negligence, which is enough to constitute a crime, but this may not be the case in China. There is a saying in the law: "The law does not force others' difficulties". If we really want to copy some western child protection laws mechanically, then many parents of left-behind children in China should go to jail. For this incident, the normal legal person's thinking should be: Has Tianjin Joy City, as the operator, provided a safe consumption environment for consumers? Have parents fulfilled their guardianship responsibilities? Instead of rushing to "catch parents" before the case is fully investigated. If there is a work-related injury, the workers will only be accused of "improper operation", and the safety protection measures of machine tools will not be improved, and employers will be forced to strengthen safety education. The world will not get better in the past 300 years. Children should receive special protection from the society, and parents are the first responsible person; However, the government, businesses and schools should all have the obligation to promote the protection level of minors, and the level of parents' guardianship responsibility is in line with the rising social environment.