On June 1, 2016 (April 26, 2016 in the lunar calendar), the "Mom Stealing Chicken Leg" incident occurred. On June 1, 2016, Children's Day on June 1, many people's circles of friends were flooded by a news article titled "The most sad Children's Day gift: She stole a chicken leg for her sick daughter." The experience of the protagonist Liu Mouyan moved many netizens. Online donations exceeded 300,000 yuan within two hours. However, some netizens questioned that the spread of this "positive energy" was encouraging illegal activities and triggered a "moral debate" on this matter., causing the chicken drum-stealing mother to apologize under moral pressure. In fact, how to avoid the emergence of the next "Liu Mouyan" is the question that really needs to be considered. 1 "Stealing chicken legs" is Liu Mouyan's "desperate move" when she has no choice but to go. The level of moral judgment of the Chinese people on this matter needs to be further improved. 2 The "moral debate" is meaningless. It is more important to reflect on improving the social assistance system. In this case, it is necessary to improve the medical assistance system for poor children. Some people were moved, some people hated a little bit of miscellaneous grains, a chicken leg, and two children's books. These were all the items "stolen" by single mother Liu Mouyan, with a total value of only 70 yuan. The "least greedy" thief told the police a poignant reason: a pair of twin daughters suffered from severe kidney disease. In order to treat the disease, their daily lives were very embarrassed. They wanted to buy a Children's Day gift for their children, but they didn't have enough money, so they decided to take the risk of stealing. Photo: A similar situation occurred in France more than a hundred years ago when a police officer gently wiped away the tears of a girl. In Hugo's 1862 novel Les Miserables, the protagonist Jean Valjean stole bread in order to help her sister feed her seven children during the economic depression. It is hard to imagine that such a thing could happen in modern society. Everything Liu Mouyan stole, the police took the initiative to seek help for Liu Mouyan. After media reports, many netizens were moved by this. After the charity donation channel was opened, more than 300,000 donations were received in just two hours. The purpose of the donors is to "help others" and raise medical expenses for Liu Mouyan's children. Their sympathy for the tragic suffering of the weak demonstrates the goodwill of human nature. At the same time, there are also doubts on the Internet. Many people do not recognize Liu Mouyan's behavior. They believe that people should insist on "not doing evil based on the trivial". In any case,"sad stories" should not be a reason for breaking the law. The publicity of this incident is misleading the public and encouraging crime. The next day, a media report that Liu Mouyan was actually a "habitual thief" made more doubts. Soon Liu Mouyan and the clerk on duty stood up to clarify the facts. The reverse report was confirmed to be unfounded, but the "war of words" by netizens did not weaken, and Liu Mouyan was condemned for "stealing things and cheating donations." A typical argument is: "This middle-aged woman with able-bodied limbs and working ability actually stole to celebrate Children's Day for her daughter. Another man in his 90s cultivates 4 acres of land in his family alone for his mentally retarded son and never allows others to help each other. Help each other, why should people who steal be sympathized?" In fact, this issue is a typical "Heinz Paradox". The debate stems from moral judgments at different stages. The "Mom Stealing Chicken Leg" incident triggered controversy about morality because everyone has their own moral standards. Psychologist Kohlberg once used the story of "Heinz stealing drugs" to explain the development stage of moral judgment. The story goes like this: Heinz's wife was seriously ill and was on the verge of death. There was only one drug that could save her life, but the doctor who invented the drug insisted on selling it at a high price. Heinz couldn't muster enough money and had to steal the medicine to save his wife. By understanding the opinions of experimenters of different ages on "Heinz stealing drugs", Kohlberg concluded that the development of moral judgment has the following six stages: Kohlberg's theory of stages of moral development compared with the views that emerged in this incident. Those who are "morally clean" and emphasize that they should not do anything illegal at any time are actually at the first stage of moral judgment. They obey existing rules and insist that nothing can be a reason for breaking the law. Those who put themselves in the shoes of Liu Mouyan and sympathize with what happened to Liu Mouyan are in the second and third stages and understand the decisions made by others when they had no choice. Another group of quite rational people not only sympathize with Liu Mouyan, but also emphasize the importance of the law and believe that the parties concerned should bear the responsibility. In fact, they are in the fourth stage, which focuses on "not allowing emotions to corrode the law." That is to say, at present, in the moral judgment of Chinese people on things like "stealing chicken legs","indifferent condemnation" is the lowest stage,"mainly sympathy" has reached a higher level, and thinking that "the law is more important" is more rational. This is the result of this "moral debate" qualifying session. Looking back, not many people have entered the fifth and sixth stages of moral judgment. These two stages are the highest stages of moral judgment, thinking about "what people should do in an ideal society." For example, when some non-harmful illegal acts are to protect a person's "right to life", can the law exempt such "special violations" or even go outside the law and make judgments based on "universal moral principles." There have been cases in reality. The Italian Supreme Court ruled this year that it is not a crime for poor people to steal a little food,"because they have no choice but to steal food to meet the urgently needed necessary nutrition" and reminded the public that "in a civilized country, Even the worst people should not go hungry." The "moral debate" is meaningless. It is more important to reflect on the shortcomings of the social assistance system. The donation and assistance model after sympathy cannot last long, because there must be many people who have suffered more tragedy than Liu Mouyan, and they find that one rescue will not help. The "moral debate" is even more meaningless. Simply condemning it will not make the situation of more "Liu Mouyan" better. This "theft due to poverty" incident reflects the stubborn disease of "poverty caused by illness", and the existing assistance system is difficult to eliminate this stubborn disease. It is not that Liu Mouyan has not received assistance. According to Dazhong Daily, Liu Mouyan's difficulties are recognized in the village and even the township. The village party secretary and township cadres not only helped Liu Mouyan and her two daughters apply for subsistence allowance, but also They also applied for subsidies for children in need, which adds up to a monthly subsidy of 900 yuan for each family. At the same time, Liu Mouyan can also reimburse the New Rural Cooperative Medical System for treating her children. Reports said that since 2014, Liu Mouyan has reimbursed a total of 6 times, with a total of more than 22,000 yuan. However, these subsidies are still a drop in the bucket for a poor family. According to interviews with local media in Nanjing, Liu Mouyan's two children spend 3,000 yuan a month on imported drugs, which are not covered by national medical insurance reimbursement. Although many places already have children's serious illness assistance systems, the scope of assistance is limited and only targets serious illnesses such as leukemia, uremia, tumors, etc., while Liu Mouyan's child currently suffers from kidney diseases that do not meet the standard of serious illness. The U.S. public medical insurance system has a special medical assistance system for poor children. Therefore, the medical assistance system for poor children is still imperfect, which is a problem that we must face up to. We can learn from the experience of the United States to establish an independent and complete medical assistance system for poor children. The children's medical insurance system in the United States consists of Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). The former ensures that low-income people, including children, and their families receive the most basic medical services. The federal government and state governments adopt third-party payment methods to pay medical service providers, and eligible patients do not need to pay hospitals. The latter provides health insurance specifically for children from low-and middle-income families in various states in the United States. Families approved by the plan need to pay only a small or no fee for medical treatment. The story of "mother stealing chicken legs" will soon fade out of people's attention, but the stubborn disease of "poverty caused by illness" still exists. There are still many protagonists who do not have the opportunity to tell their stories, but society needs to provide them and those in need of help with a reasonable social mechanism and a sound social protection system for rapid feedback. (Written by/Li Min)