Among the many things weighing on senior presidential secretary Woo Byung-woo is public criticism against his son and the benefits he seemingly enjoyed.

This, in fact, has nearly overshadowed other allegations that include a dubious real estate deal, connection with a scandal-ridden prosecutor, tax evasion and other possible irregularities.

There has been an outpouring of news reports on the junior Woo and his alleged privileges that suggest his father’s suspected influence-peddling.

But the latest development also raises questions on whether enough attention is being paid to the gravity of the alleged breaches of conduct and suspected violations of the law by Woo. It also raises the question of how much responsibility high-ranking officials should take for the morality of their children.

Is it inevitable -- or even necessary -- to examine high-profile officials’ children to judge their parents’ integrity? Or is the media often so tempted to abuse its right to report and overstep boundaries into private lives?

The answer is yes, to both questions.

In fact, the public has reason to believe that those in power exercise political leverage to give unfair advantages to their children, or the latter abuses their parents’ status to reap benefits.

Every once in a while, whether in state audits, personnel confirmation hearings or election campaign seasons, sons of high-profile figures draw flak for evading military service.

Earlier this year, the Education Ministry revealed dozens of cases in which law school freshmen were encouraged to mention their high-profile parents during the admission process.

Some of these “privileged children” would go so far as to abuse their connections and play a bridging role in massive monetary transactions and political lobbying.

The most representative case was Kim Hyun-chul, the second son of the late President Kim Young-sam, who was arrested in the last year of his father’s term for being associated in a multitrillion insolvent corporate loan.

It is these stories about “modern-day royal kids” that cause ordinary people despair over their own lack of high-profile family connections.

The inheritance of wealth and power has also widened social disparity over the years, creating self-deprecating terms such as “earth spoon” to refer to the opposite of “silver or gold spoon.”

But those who actually enjoy the privileges often seem to be unaware of what they have.

“It’s not like (my son) evaded his military service. I actually called him back from overseas so he could join the army as was his duty,” said Woo, while trying to clarify the allegations to Cheong Wa Dae correspondents last week.

But his contention of innocence only aggravated the public’s fury as his son later turned out to have taken an internship at a ruling party lawmaker’s office without following the due hiring procedure. The junior Woo also was said to have taken frequent leave from his alleviated military duty, an unusual practice for an ordinary junior soldier which further boosted suspicions that his father’s political fame was somehow involved.

So, yes, despite protests, the irregularity scandals involving the children of high-ranking officials need to be addressed, if only to get down to the root of their parents’ corruption allegations.

But on the other hand, there have been many past cases when the excessive competition among the media infringed upon privacy or created unfounded charges against the children due to the position of their parents.

In 2009, the daughter and son-in-law of former President Roh Moo-hyun were placed in the media spotlight for their $1.6 million purchase of a home in New York. Slews of detailed reports and even pictures of the house were reported, raising speculation over the source of their budget to buy the house. This was highlighted amid the prosecution’s full-fledged investigation into Roh’s alleged corruption.

The former president eventually ended his own life on May 23 amid escalating pressure, and the allegations against his son and daughter ended in an anticlimax, without proof that they were ever true.

South Korea’s aversion toward what are considered privileges of public officials as well as their children have also led to questionable regulations, such as those faced by diplomats.

In 2014, Cheong Wa Dae appointed four ambassadors on condition that their children with dual nationality “reinstate” their Korean nationality. After a year, as the required measures failed to take place, the presidential office summoned the senior diplomats back home before their due term ended.

With the number of diplomats’ children with dual or foreign nationality on an uptrend, standing at 152 as of last year, debate over the regulation is likely to escalate in the upcoming years, possibly leading to a constitutional petition.

So, yes, the media should firstly at all times ask itself the following questions when expanding the range of its reports: “Are we keeping our integrity? Are we not abusing our power?”

Because these are precisely the same questions that they pose to those in power.

By Bae Hyun-jung (tellme@heraldcorp.com