「遵义新生婴儿疑因护士疏忽致夭折，家属维权陷困境（2025.10.22）」2025年10月22日，遵义医科大学附属医院发生一起医疗事故，一名仅出生六天的新生婴儿，因护士喂奶后玩忽职守，疑似导致窒息死亡。事发后，悲痛的家属在医院维权数日，婴儿母亲多次情绪崩溃试图跳楼。

事发经过：喂奶后护士离开玩手机，婴儿长时间无人照看

据家属透露，这名婴儿在孕期及生产过程中各项指标均正常，医生评分为“满分10分”，身体健康，仅因黄疸指数偏高，约为22，被医生强烈建议住院治疗。悲剧发生在22日凌晨： 监控显示， 凌晨2时许，一名值班男护士为婴儿喂奶，直接将奶瓶放置在婴儿口中后，便离开并开始玩手机，7分钟后才取下奶瓶。凌晨2点30分至5点17分的近3个小时内，婴儿曾持续哭闹、烦躁不安，但护士一直在玩手机，没有对婴儿进行过巡视检查。之前，家属曾缴纳了1000元的“特级护理费”，按规定，护士应该15分钟查看一次婴儿。直到凌晨5点17分换尿布时，护士才发现孩子已无心跳，随后医院才进行抢救。5点55分，医生才电话通知家属，称孩子“出现病情变化”。当家属于早上6点赶到病房时，孩子已被宣布死亡。家属强烈怀疑婴儿在吃奶时呛奶后发生严重窒息，但由于护士玩忽职守、延误抢救，最终酿成悲剧。家属指出，在婴儿持续大哭、烦躁不安的近3小时里，本应守护生命的心电监护仪也未发出任何预警，可能根本未正确连接。

医院应对：推诿、病历混乱与冷血言论

医院事后的处理态度，更进一步激化了矛盾：事发后数小时内，医院无人出面解释或处理。家属多次寻求沟通，却遭到推诿和敷衍。医院给出的死因是“肺出血导致窒息”。但家属发现封存的病历中竟夹杂着其他婴儿的危重记录，且一份需父亲签字的文件，签署时间早于家属接触材料的时间。当家属质疑护理流程时，涉事护士始终沉默，连一句“对不起”都没有。医务科人员甚至说出“死的是你家孩儿，又不是我家孩儿”的冷漠言语；有医生则回应：“死都死了，还能怎么办。”直到当天下午4点半，医院纪委书记才首次出面，称“将依法依规、公平公正处理”。

家属维权陷困境

孩子离世后，在医院维权的家属多次遭到警察驱赶，发布到网络的相关信息也很快便受到限流或屏蔽，并被一些来历不明的“水军”指责为“医闹”。家属希望将当天的监控视频拍摄下来并上传到网络，但被警察以“拍照录像涉嫌侵犯其他小孩隐私”为由阻止。目前，医院纪委已介入调查，但据家属透露，纪委人员称“同意调查，但不同意公布”。家属表示，发视频不是为了涨粉，只希望让公众看到事实真相，追究相关人员的责任。孩子舅舅在一份声明中写道：“我们只要事实真相，该追责追责。在此我吐槽一句，你们洗白的方式，还不如洁厕灵来得干净。”

“Newborn Baby in Zunyi Dies After Suspected Nurse Negligence; Family Faces Obstacles in Seeking Justice (Oct 22, 2025)”

On October 22, 2025, a tragic medical incident occurred at the Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University. A newborn baby, only six days old, allegedly died of suffocation after a nurse neglected her duty while feeding him. In the days following the incident, the heartbroken family stayed at the hospital demanding answers. The baby’s mother reportedly suffered repeated emotional breakdowns and attempted to jump from the building in despair.

Incident Details: Nurse Left the Baby Unattended to Use Her Phone After Feeding

According to the family, the baby’s prenatal and delivery indicators were all normal. Doctors rated his health as a “perfect 10,” and he was considered fully healthy. He was only admitted for treatment because of slightly elevated jaundice levels (around 22).

The tragedy took place in the early hours of October 22. Surveillance footage shows that at around 2 a.m., a male nurse on duty fed the baby by placing a milk bottle in his mouth and then walked away to use his phone. He didn’t remove the bottle until seven minutes later.

Between 2:30 a.m. and 5:17 a.m.—nearly three hours—the baby was visibly crying and restless, but the nurse remained on his phone and did not check on him even once. The family had paid an additional 1,000 yuan for “special care,” which, according to hospital policy, required nurses to check on infants every 15 minutes.

At 5:17 a.m., when changing the baby’s diaper, the nurse finally noticed that the child had no heartbeat. Resuscitation began only afterward. At 5:55 a.m., the doctor called the family, saying the baby’s “condition had changed.” When the parents arrived at 6 a.m., the child had already been pronounced dead.

The family strongly suspects that the baby choked on milk and suffered severe asphyxiation. They believe that the nurse’s negligence and delayed response directly caused the death. They also noted that the heart monitor, which should have issued an alert during distress, remained silent—possibly because it had not been properly connected in the first place.

Hospital Response: Evasion, Tampered Records, and Cold Remarks

The hospital’s handling of the aftermath only deepened tensions. For several hours after the incident, no hospital official came forward to explain or take responsibility. The family’s repeated attempts to seek answers were met with evasions and indifference.

The hospital claimed the cause of death was “pulmonary hemorrhage leading to suffocation.” However, the family discovered that the sealed medical records contained pages from another baby’s critical care file, and one document requiring the father’s signature was dated before the family had even seen it.

When questioned about the nursing process, the nurse involved stayed silent—without even offering an apology. A staff member from the hospital’s medical department reportedly told the family coldly, “It’s your baby who died, not mine.” Another doctor added, “What’s done is done. What can you do now?”

It wasn’t until 4:30 p.m. that the hospital’s discipline inspection secretary appeared, promising to handle the matter “lawfully and fairly.”

Family’s Struggle for Justice

Since the baby’s death, the grieving family’s attempts to seek accountability have faced continuous obstruction. Police repeatedly forced them out of the hospital, and posts about the incident were quickly restricted or removed online. Paid online commenters also accused the family of being “troublemakers.”

When the family tried to film the surveillance footage to preserve evidence, police stopped them, citing “privacy concerns for other infants.” The hospital’s internal discipline committee has since opened an investigation, but according to the family, they were told that “an investigation will be conducted, but the results won’t be made public.”

The baby’s relatives stated that their only goal is transparency and accountability. As the baby’s uncle wrote in a statement:

“We just want the truth and for those responsible to be held accountable. To be honest, your attempts to whitewash this are dirtier than a toilet cleaner.”

「广东东莞丹缇轩业主维权遭镇压多人被抓走（2025.10.25）」10月25日，广东东莞塘厦镇丹缇轩小区的业主在维权时遭警察镇压，多人被抓走。半年前，丹缇轩小区业主因塘厦镇林村村委强占小区广场用于道路扩建而发起维权行动，持续至今。25日，为强行施工，当地政府出动大量警察，将业主停放在广场上的车辆全部拖走，业主到现场抗议时，与警察发生了冲突。

“Dongguan Danti Xuan Residents Crackdown: Multiple Arrested During Protest (Oct 25, 2025)”
On October 25, residents of Danti Xuan community in Tangxia Town, Dongguan, Guangdong, were suppressed by police during a protest, with multiple people arrested.

Six months ago, the residents launched the protest after the Lin Village Committee of Tangxia Town forcibly occupied the community’s plaza for road expansion, and the action has continued since.

On the 25th, to push through construction, local authorities deployed a large number of police and towed all vehicles parked in the plaza. When residents went to protest, they clashed with the police.

「赔偿标准仅0.3N，数百超市员工连日抗议（2025.10.20-22）」数百名来自中国各地的人人乐超市员工，10月20日至22日连续三天聚集在位于陕西西安的人人乐总部，抗议公司长期拖欠工资与社保，要求合理赔偿。

据员工透露，人人乐的控股方曲江文投为“保壳”而进行资本腾挪，将人人乐名下 13家子公司以每家1元的价格转卖给空壳公司，转移债务后仅保障高管薪资，而普通员工却被长期拖欠工资、欠缴社保，并拒绝为离职员工提供补偿。过去一年，深圳、南宁、天津等多地的人人乐员工曾发起过多次维权行动，讨要工资及社保。

抗议现场，员工在现场高喊口号：“我们要吃饭！我们要赔偿！” 据现场员工透露，由于人人乐坚持只按远低于法定标准的“0.3N”方案赔偿员工，此次维权行动未取得任何进展。

公开资料显示，人人乐连锁商业集团股份有限公司（简称“人人乐”）成立于1996年，总部最初位于深圳，是中国最早的大型连锁超市品牌之一。2010年在深圳证券交易所上市，后因连年亏损，于2025年正式退市。
近年来，人人乐在全国范围内关闭大量门店，涉及员工数千人。控股方西安曲江文化产业投资（集团）有限公司为国企，2021年入主后曾宣称将“重组人人乐、保就业”，但随着人人乐持续亏损，员工维权事件频发。

“Compensation Set at Only 0.3N: Hundreds of Supermarket Employees Protest for Days (Oct 20–22, 2025)”

Hundreds of employees from Renrenle Supermarket branches across China gathered for three consecutive days, from October 20 to 22, outside the company’s headquarters in Xi’an, Shaanxi Province. They protested against long-term wage arrears and unpaid social insurance contributions, demanding fair compensation.

According to employees, Renrenle’s controlling shareholder, Qujiang Cultural Investment Group (Qujiang Wintop), in an effort to “maintain its listing status,” conducted a capital restructuring by transferring 13 Renrenle subsidiaries to shell companies for just 1 yuan each. After shifting the debts, the company continued to pay executive salaries while ordinary employees went unpaid, lacked social insurance coverage, and were denied severance compensation upon resignation. Over the past year, Renrenle employees in cities such as Shenzhen, Nanning, and Tianjin have repeatedly staged protests to demand unpaid wages and insurance.

At the protest site, employees chanted slogans such as “We need to eat!” and “We want compensation!” According to those present, the company insisted on compensating workers based on a “0.3N” formula—far below China’s legal standard—resulting in no progress in the negotiations.

Public records show that Renrenle Chain Commercial Group Co., Ltd. (Renrenle) was founded in 1996 and was one of China’s earliest large-scale supermarket chains. Initially headquartered in Shenzhen, it was listed on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange in 2010 but was delisted in 2025 after years of financial losses.

In recent years, Renrenle has closed a large number of stores nationwide, affecting thousands of employees. Its controlling shareholder, Xi’an Qujiang Cultural Industry Investment (Group) Co., Ltd.—a state-owned enterprise—took over in 2021, pledging to “restructure Renrenle and preserve jobs.” However, as losses continued to mount, labor protests have become increasingly frequent.

「四川凉山彝族学生罢课抗议周末补课（2025.10.17）」10月17日，四川凉山州喜德县民族中学初二学生集体罢课，聚集在教学楼前高喊口号，抗议学校周末补课。据学生透露，长假过后，学校已经连续上课八天，但学校领导仍然要求初二学生周末补课，引发学生不满。迫于学生压力，学校当天取消了周末补课计划。

“Yi Students in Sichuan’s Liangshan Protest Weekend Classes (Oct. 17, 2025)”

On October 17, students in Grade 8 at Xide County Ethnic Middle School in Liangshan Prefecture, Sichuan, went on strike and gathered in front of the school building, chanting slogans to protest against weekend make-up classes. According to students, the school had already held eight consecutive days of classes following the long holiday, yet administrators still demanded that Grade 8 students attend additional weekend lessons. Facing mounting student pressure, the school eventually canceled the planned weekend classes that same day.

「大连女孩徐园离奇身亡案再次开庭，数百网民庭外声援（2025.10.24）」10月24日下午，备受争议的“徐园案”在辽宁大连普兰店区人民法院再次开庭。数百名从中国各地赶到现场的网友聚集在法院外，声援受害者一家。当局出动大批警察和特警在现场戒备，庭外气氛紧张，人群高喊“杀人偿命”等口号。期间，网友与维稳警察一度发生冲突，至少一名网友被抓走。在法庭内，法官再次宣布徐园前男友、嫌疑人单某无罪。徐园的姐姐表示，本次庭审仅持续约两分钟，法官便直接宣布了判决结果。

案件的起点可追溯至2022年4月26日凌晨。23岁的徐园被发现死于男友单某家中，胸口插着一把水果刀，肋骨骨折，全身几十处伤。法医鉴定她死于“锐器刺切胸部致心脏、肺脏破裂”。然而，法院最终将案件定性为“自杀”，嫌疑人单某无罪释放。这一结论自公布以来便引起家属和公众的强烈质疑。

据悉，2022年2月12日，徐园经人介绍认识单某，两人不久确立恋爱关系，并在两个月后同居。一审判决认定，2022年4月25日晚，单某、徐园和几位朋友先后在当地的烧烤店和歌厅吃饭喝酒。次日凌晨，单某和徐园回到家中后发生争执，从屋内延续到楼外，单某对徐园进行了言语侮辱和殴打。随后，两人再次返回家中，徐园出事。

据单某供述，当晚，徐园先去洗澡，因徐园不同意他提出煮方便面的要求，两人发生言语冲突，单某摔门而出，徐园围了一条浴巾追了出去。两人在离家十余米的楼前发生了撕扯，单某用手打了徐园几下，后将其整个人拽倒在地。随后，单某劝说徐园先回两人的住所，两人一前一后回到了家。单某称，徐园进门后，找了一件白色衣服穿上，走到厨房水池边拿起一把水果刀，拔下刀鞘，转身说了一句“我徐园怎么对不起你了”，紧接着突然撩起衣服，将刀插进了自己的左胸口。但事发当晚，仅有单某和徐园两个人，无第三人证实究竟发生了什么。

经大连市普兰店区公安司法鉴定中心鉴定，徐园系锐器刺切胸部致左侧肺脏、心脏破裂大出血死亡，但上衣并无破口；徐园双眼、鼻部、左耳等及下唇粘膜破损出血等符合钝性外力作用形成，徒手击打可形成；额部、左上臂、双下肢等符合受外力作用形成，双手掌侧血迹分布呈空心状，右手指关节有划伤。这份报告中存在两个引发争议的细节：一，衣服无破口： 徐园胸口的致命刀伤深达心脏，但她所穿的上衣却没有破口。二，身体多处外伤： 尸检还显示，徐园的头部、面部、四肢均有不同程度的外伤，与“争执后被殴打”的情节吻合。

这两点让家属坚信徐园不是自杀，而是他杀。据悉，单某曾有斗殴、故意伤害等暴力前科。2014年，单某因为故意伤害罪被判一年，缓刑两年，在缓刑期间，单某又因为犯聚众斗殴罪被撤销缓刑，判四年零两个月刑期。2021年，单某再次因为殴打他人被刑拘十五日，罚款五百元。

案发前几天，两人争吵频繁。4月20日晚，徐园在单某父母经营的殡葬店找到醉酒的单某，被对方殴打。单父在证词中也提到，当晚徐园曾打电话称自己被打，后来他赶到现场调解，二人又和好。4月23日晚9点左右，二人再次发生争吵，单某对徐园说“你去死吧”。

尽管存在多处疑点，2023年9月，普兰店区法院一审判决认为徐园系因情绪激动自行持刀刺胸自杀，单某虽有轻微殴打行为，但证据不足以证明与死亡存在直接因果关系，遂判无罪释放。之后，检方提起抗诉，但历经数次庭审，法院仍维持原判。

近三年来，徐园的家人从未接受“自杀”这一结论，坚持认为：徐园并无明显自杀倾向；衣服无破口、刀具血迹异常、现场勘查疏漏、调查过程缺乏透明性等一系列问题均指向他杀。徐母在采访中坚定表示：“我女儿绝不会自己拿刀刺心脏，她才23岁，有工作、有朋友、有计划。”

10月24日的庭审结束后，许多专程赶到现场声援的网友对庭审的结果表示极度失望和愤怒，认为法庭判决结果是对公平正义、以及受害者家属的严重伤害。徐园的家属则表示将继续抗争，永不放弃。

“Case of Dalian Girl Xu Yuan’s Mysterious Death Reopens; Hundreds Gather Outside Court in Support (Oct 24, 2025)”

On the afternoon of October 24, the highly controversial “Xu Yuan case” was once again heard at the People’s Court of Pulandian District, Dalian, Liaoning Province. Hundreds of netizens from across China gathered outside the courthouse to support the victim’s family. A large number of police officers and SWAT forces were deployed to maintain order, and the atmosphere outside the court was tense. The crowd chanted slogans such as “A murderer must pay with his life.” During the confrontation, clashes broke out between supporters and police, and at least one person was detained. Inside the courtroom, the judge once again declared Xu Yuan’s ex-boyfriend, the suspect Shan Mou, not guilty. Xu Yuan’s sister said the hearing lasted only about two minutes before the judge directly announced the verdict.

The case dates back to the early morning of April 26, 2022. Xu Yuan, a 23-year-old woman, was found dead in the home of her boyfriend, Shan Mou, with a fruit knife lodged in her chest, fractured ribs, and dozens of bruises across her body. A forensic autopsy determined that she died from “stab and cut injuries to the chest causing rupture of the heart and lungs.” However, the court later ruled her death a suicide, and Shan was acquitted—an outcome that immediately triggered outrage and disbelief among Xu’s family and the public.

According to records, Xu Yuan met Shan through an introduction on February 12, 2022. They soon began dating and moved in together two months later. The first trial found that on the night of April 25, Shan, Xu, and several friends had dinner and drinks at a local barbecue restaurant and karaoke bar. In the early hours of the next day, after returning home, the couple argued—first inside, then outside the building—during which Shan verbally insulted and assaulted Xu. They then went back home, where the fatal incident occurred.

Shan claimed that Xu went to shower, and when she refused his request to cook instant noodles, an argument broke out. He slammed the door and left the apartment, with Xu following him outside wearing only a towel. They scuffled about ten meters from the building entrance; Shan admitted to hitting Xu several times and pulling her to the ground. Later, he persuaded her to return home, and the two went back together. Shan said Xu put on a white shirt, walked to the kitchen sink, picked up a fruit knife, removed its sheath, said “What have I, Xu Yuan, ever done to you?” and suddenly lifted her shirt and stabbed herself in the chest. No third person was present that night to verify what really happened.

A forensic report from the Pulandian District Public Security Bureau determined that Xu died from massive bleeding due to stab wounds that pierced her left lung and heart. However, her clothing showed no tear marks. The report also noted blunt-force injuries to her eyes, nose, left ear, and lips consistent with assault, and additional bruises on her forehead, arms, and legs. Bloodstains on her palms were hollow-patterned, and her right fingers were cut. Two details have been particularly controversial:

1. No tear in clothing – despite a fatal knife wound penetrating her heart.
2. Multiple external injuries –
   These findings led her family to firmly believe that Xu Yuan was murdered, not suicidal.

Records show that Shan had a history of violent offenses. In 2014, he was convicted of intentional injury and sentenced to one year in prison with a two-year suspension. During probation, he was convicted again for group assault and sentenced to four years and two months. In 2021, he was detained for 15 days and fined 500 yuan for assaulting another person.

In the days leading up to Xu’s death, the couple frequently quarreled. On April 20, Xu reportedly went to Shan’s family’s funeral shop to find him drunk and was beaten by him. Shan’s father testified that Xu called saying she had been hit; he went to mediate, and the two later reconciled. On the night of April 23, Shan told Xu, “Go die.”

Despite numerous inconsistencies, in September 2023 the Pulandian District Court ruled that Xu Yuan had stabbed herself in the chest during an emotional outburst. Although Shan admitted to minor assault, the court held there was insufficient evidence to link his actions directly to her death, and he was acquitted. Prosecutors appealed, but after multiple hearings, the court upheld the original verdict.

For nearly three years, Xu Yuan’s family has refused to accept the “suicide” conclusion. They insist that Xu had no suicidal tendencies and point to multiple irregularities—such as the intact clothing, questionable blood patterns, omissions in the crime scene investigation, and lack of transparency in the judicial process—as evidence of foul play. Xu’s mother said firmly in an interview: “My daughter would never stab herself in the heart. She was only 23, she had a job, friends, and plans for her future.”

After the October 24 hearing, many supporters who had traveled long distances expressed deep anger and disappointment at the verdict, calling it a betrayal of justice and the victim’s family. Xu Yuan’s relatives vowed to continue their fight for justice and “never give up.”

「贵阳摊贩：每日营收不足80，摊位费100（2025.10.22）」10月22日晚，贵州贵阳白云区，摊贩与城管在街头发生对峙。摊贩们表示，每个摊位每天的营业额甚至不足80元，而摊位费却高达100至200元。如果按照政府要求缴纳这笔费用“合法”经营，将入不敷出；但要是不交费，又会立刻被城管以“占道经营”的名义驱赶，甚至面临餐车被没收的风险。对峙中，一名摊贩情绪激动地表示，自己有四个小孩两个老人要养，还有20多万的贷款要还，”如果你们要逼着我去抢，你们给我出张证明“。

“Guiyang Vendors: Daily Revenue Under 80 Yuan, Stall Fee 100 (2025.10.22)”

On the evening of October 22, in Baiyun District, Guiyang City, Guizhou Province, street vendors confronted urban management officers (chengguan) on the street. The vendors said each stall’s daily revenue is often less than 80 yuan, while stall fees run as high as 100 to 200 yuan. If they pay the fees required by the government to operate “legally,” they would operate at a loss; but if they don’t pay, they are immediately driven off by the chengguan for “occupying public space” and even risk having their food carts confiscated.

During the standoff, one vendor, visibly emotional, said he has four children and two elderly dependents to support and more than 200,000 yuan in loans to repay, adding, “If you’re going to force me to steal, then give me a written certificate.”

「江西浙江三工厂相继跑路，工人连日维权讨薪（2025.10.20-22）」10月20日至22日，江西和浙江三家工厂的老板相继跑路，引发员工连日维权讨薪。

10月21日，江西乐平市锦宏印刷厂老板一家集体消失，欠下约200名工人四个月工资，总额达数百万元。工人连续两天在厂区及市政府门口维权，但至今未得到解决。据工人透露，锦宏印刷厂老板原本在温州开厂，2024年7月才搬迁至乐平。跑路前，他曾承诺在10月20日发放欠薪，并多次要求员工加班，但最终在发薪日携家人消失得无影无踪。

与此同时，浙江台州温岭市的婷琪鞋厂和嘉兴海宁市的霖浩服饰厂老板，也分别在10月20日和21日拖欠工资后跑路，导致员工连日维权讨薪。

“Three Factories in Jiangxi and Zhejiang Flee, Workers Protest for Unpaid Wages (Oct 20–22, 2025)”

From October 20 to 22, the owners of three factories in Jiangxi and Zhejiang fled, sparking days of worker protests for unpaid wages.

On October 21, the owner and his family of Jinhong Printing Factory in Leping, Jiangxi, disappeared, owing about 200 workers four months of wages—totaling several million yuan.

Workers protested for two straight days at the factory and in front of the city government, but the issue remains unresolved.

According to workers, the factory owner had originally run his business in Wenzhou and only relocated to Leping in July 2024.

Before fleeing, he had promised to pay the arrears on October 20 and repeatedly urged employees to work overtime—but on payday, he vanished with his entire family without a trace.

Meanwhile, the owners of Tingqi Shoe Factory in Wenling, Taizhou, and Linhao Garment Factory in Haining, Jiaxing, also fled on October 20 and 21 after failing to pay wages, leading to continuous protests by workers demanding their pay.

「广西浦北数百学生抗议学校禁用手机（2025.10.21）」10月21日晚，广西钦州浦北县第一职业学校，数百名学生因不满学校新近出台的“禁止学生使用手机”政策，相约在宿舍走廊上集体抗议。

多名学生表示，无论学校是否收回禁令，他们都不会上交手机。

据一名参与抗议的学生透露，由于学校在随后的22日派出多名教师进驻宿舍区“蹲守”，原计划于当晚继续进行的抗议活动被迫取消。

“Hundreds of Students in Pubei, Guangxi Protest School’s Ban on Mobile Phones (October 21, 2025)”

On the evening of October 21, at Pubei No. 1 Vocational School in Qinzhou, Guangxi, hundreds of students gathered in the dormitory corridors to protest the school’s newly implemented policy prohibiting students from using mobile phones.

Several students stated that they would not surrender their phones, regardless of whether the school revoked the ban.

According to a student who participated in the protest, the planned continuation of the protest that night was forced to be canceled because the school deployed multiple teachers to the dormitory area on the following day, October 22, to “monitor” the students.

「湖北被剥夺退休金老人维权与警冲突（2025.10.21）」10月21日，在湖北省人社厅门口维权的退休老人，与维稳警察发生冲突，一名老人倒地不起。据当事人透露，他们本是湖北省缴纳了养老金、已正常退休、并领取退休金多年的退休老人。然而，2019年3月，湖北省人社厅在未提前通知的情况下，以“曾有服刑历史”为由，单方面停发了他们的养老金。2020年5月，在众多受害者抗议之下，湖北省人社厅才出台了一份缺乏法律依据的文件，并根据该文件强制要求他们办理二次退休，要求他们将已领取的养老金退还给人社厅，否则将以“安葬费抵扣”、“子女承担”等方式强制执行。2025年，湖北省人社厅再次在未通知或告知受害者的情况下，篡改并克扣他们的实际工作年限，进行所谓的二次核算。过去六年里，这些被剥夺养老金的老人曾多次发起维权行动，并因此遭到武汉当局以跟踪、监控、限制出行等方式长期打压，至今仍未停止。

“Hubei Retirees Deprived of Pensions Clash with Police During Protest (October 21, 2025)”
On October 21, at the Hubei Provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security, retired elders protesting for their pensions clashed with stability-maintaining police, leaving one elderly person collapsed on the ground. According to the participants, these individuals had legally paid into Hubei’s pension system, retired normally, and received their pensions for many years. However, in March 2019, the Hubei Department of Human Resources and Social Security unilaterally suspended their pensions without prior notice, citing alleged “criminal records.”

In May 2020, following protests by many affected retirees, the department issued a legally questionable document, and based on it, forcibly required them to undergo a “second retirement,” demanding the return of pensions they had already received. The department threatened enforcement through measures such as “deducting from burial expenses” or holding their children financially responsible.

In 2025, without notifying the victims, the department again altered and deducted from their actual years of service in a so-called “second calculation.” Over the past six years, these pension-deprived retirees have repeatedly protested for their rights, facing long-term suppression by Wuhan authorities through surveillance, travel restrictions, and other measures, yet their struggle has not ceased.

「吉林长春警察要求被拦截访民“别影响正常秩序”（2025.10.21）」10月21日，吉林长春龙嘉国际机场安检处，多名截访人员试图绑架一位准备外出的女士，警察到场后反而告诫该女士“别影响正常秩序”。

“Changchun, Jilin Police Tell Intercepted Petitioners ‘Don’t Disturb Public Order’ (October 21, 2025)”

On October 21, at the security checkpoint of Longjia International Airport in Changchun, Jilin, multiple petition interceptors attempted to abduct a woman who was preparing to travel. When the police arrived at the scene, they instead warned the woman, saying, “Don’t disturb public order.”