  Now one might think that there are obvious counterexamples to the slogan: parents are sometimes held responsible for the actions of their children, and accomplices are held responsible for the crimes committed by others. An easy reply, however, is that in each case the person being held responsible is actually responsible only for what he or she did. For example, the parent is being held  responsible, not for what his child did, but for his (in)action in  letting the child do what she did, say, or for his poor  parenting. And the accomplice is being held responsible, not for what  the criminal did, but for what the accomplice did in aiding the  criminal. So in both cases there is some properly specified action  for which it seems only the person identical to the actor may be held responsible.