Should Parents Face Prosecution for Their Children’s Crimes?

 by Ben C

In the first case of its kind, a mother in the US has been found guilty of involuntary manslaughter after she failed to stop her son from committing a school shooting. In 2021, 15 year old Ethan Crumbley killed 4 people and injured 7 more at his high school. It was the worst ever school shooting seen in the state of Michigan. His parents were accused of failing to recognise the deterioration in their son’s mental health, which undoubtedly contributed to him carrying out the shooting.  Had they intervened and sought professional help, the court deemed the shooting may well never have happened. Ethan’s mother, Jennifer Crumbley, has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter; Ethan’s father will go on trial separately in March 2024. This case could set a precedent for future, similar cases whereby more parents could face prosecution if they are deemed partly responsible for crimes committed by their children.

Is this justified? Is it reasonable? Will it serve as an incentive for parents to be much more vigilant about their children’s mental health and take action? Or is it unfair on parents; unreasonable to expect them to shoulder any of the blame?

The guilty verdict delivered to Mrs Crumbley was met with a mixture of responses, most of them in favour of this conviction. 

One of the main points in the prosecution that led to the guilty verdict was that Ethan’s parents failed to safely store the gun they had bought their son; he was easily able to gain access to the gun and its ammunition. This case will serve as a lesson to anyone with access to firearms to ensure that guns are kept safely locked away from children. However, some people have pointed out that future cases may not even be about guns; if a knife is used in a crime, then are the parents to blame if the knife was easy to access in the family kitchen? Parents may need to worry about anything that can be used as a weapon; even a baseball bat could be considered dangerous in the wrong hands. However, it is important to note that Mrs Crumbley was convicted for a number of other reasons; failure to safely lock away a weapon is not enough, in isolation, to result in a conviction of involuntary manslaughter.

Mrs Crumbley also failed to help her son, Ethan, when it was clear he was experiencing mental health issues. When he complained of hallucinations, his mother didn't get him treatment and his father told him to ‘suck it up.’ This lack of parental responsibility, when it was clear that their son Ethan needed help, was another factor in the prosecution’s case. On the same day that Ethan carried out the school shooting, his school had even phoned Mrs Crumbley to express their concerns about violent drawings Ethan had made; they even recommended she take him home and get him help, which she didn’t. Mrs Crumbley was found to have neglected her son’s mental health issues and it was revealed that she was selfishly more concerned about other aspects of her life, like her affair. This neglect was a crucial factor in the development and deterioration of Ethan’s mental health problems that led directly to the tragic shooting.

Mrs Crumbley’s guilty verdict was based on the court concluding that she had every opportunity to stop the shooting; she could have been more diligent about looking after her son’s mental health and about ensuring the gun and ammunition were locked away securely. Mrs Crumbley clearly ignored the obvious warnings that her son may do something bad, so she bears some of the responsibility for his actions.

However, some professionals say that the person who commits the crime is the one responsible. Stephen J Morse, professor of law at University of Pennsylvania, argues that Ethan Crumbley is the only one responsible for the shooting. The guilty verdict for Mrs Crumbley opens up more possibilities for parents to be held accountable for their children’s crimes. Could this extend then extend to other crimes; if a child commits theft, are their parents in some way responsible if there are clear signs they failed to take care of their children properly?

There is no doubt that there are many parents of young criminals who could do more to look after their children’s well-being, but to what extent should they share the criminal responsibility? In this particular case, it seems clear that the action and neglect of Mr and Mrs Crumbley directly contributed to their son’s shocking murder of 4 classmates. However, many parents will have children who go on to commit all sorts of crimes, despite doing their best to bring up their children. Will a court always be able to judge whether the parents definitely share the responsibility of the crime? It is a complex legal and moral issue.