Why would there be a need to a 'account for differences in behavior?

Here is a very hypothetical scenario, I am struggling with:

A parent shows a pattern of drinking an driving under influence. As luck had it -- nothing bad happened. Then the child, does the same (when already having a valid driver license) -- and a horrible accident happens.

Is there some moral responsible that the parent carries? Is there criminal responsibility?

Just as in my initial comment, I do not know if this line of thinking has any merit at all.

Perhaps it is a 'bunch of baloney' as you put it.

I also have no idea on how to detect, that there in what instances there is an implied accountability of a parent (or a treating phycologist/psychiatrist).

I am hoping that some folks reading this thread , have historical, or even literature prospective that explores this angle.

How far the accountability of a parent or a treating phycologist goes/overlaps with the accountability of the perpetrator of a heinous act.

I can see that out of all the feedback on my comment so far -- there is 0 overlap of accountability suggested.

Thank you for your feedback.

EDIT: My apologies for the angry tone but idea of reporting on every single deviation is not a good one. That's how you actually end up filling prison and creating dystopia.

> A parent shows a pattern of drinking an driving under influence. As luck had it -- nothing bad happened. Then the child, does the same (when already having a valid driver license) -- and a horrible accident happens.

Children definately imitate parents. But I think your argument was the opposite. Parents reporting on Children's behaviour if they fall out of line.

> How far the accountability of a parent or a treating phycologist goes/overlaps with the accountability of the perpetrator of a heinous act.

World is a messy and scary place but trying to control for every variable might make it unlivable.